Search

Proper irrigation practice consists of applying the optimum amount of water to the soil at the right time. The porous characteristics of the soil determine the capacity of the soil to absorb, infiltrate, and store water. In irrigation, it is not sufficient to only determine the water content of the soil; it is also necessary to determine the availability of water for plants: water potential. In this paper, a comprehensive laboratory evaluation—accuracy and variability—of the world's leading commercial water potential sensors is carried out. No such comprehensive and exhaustive comparative evaluation of these devices has been carried out to date. Ten pairs of representative commercial sensors from four different families were selected according to their principle of operation (tensiometers, capacitive sensors, heat dissipation sensors, and resistance blocks). The accuracy of the readings (0 kPa–200 kPa) was determined in two soils of contrasting textures. The variability in the recordings—repeatability and reproducibility—was carried out in a homogeneous and inert material (sand) in the same suction range. The response in terms of accuracy and value dispersion of the different sensor families was different according to the suction range considered. In the suction range of agronomic interest (0–100 kPa), the heat dissipation sensor and the capacitive sensors were the most accurate. In both families, registrations could be extended up to 150–200 kPa. The scatter in the readings across the different sensors was due to approximately 80% of the repeatability or intrinsic variability in the sensor unit and 20% of the reproducibility. Some sensors would significantly improve their performance with ad hoc calibrations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Soil moisture (SM) is a key variable in agriculture and its monitoring is essential. SM determines the amount of water available to plants, having a direct impact on the development of crops, on the forecasting of crop yields and on the surveillance of food security. Microwave remote sensing offers a great potential for estimating SM because it is sensitive to the dielectric characteristics of observed surface that depend on surface soil moisture. The objective of this study is the evaluation of three change detection methodologies for SM estimation over wheat at the agricultural field scale based on Sentinel-1 time series: Short Term Change Detection (STCD), TU Wien Change Detection (TUWCD) and Multitemporal Bayesian Change Detection (MTBCD). Different methodological alternatives were proposed for the implementation of these techniques at the agricultural field scale. Soil moisture measurements from eight experimental wheat fields were used for validating the methodologies. All available Sentinel-1 acquisitions were processed and the eventual benefit of correcting for vegetation effects in backscatter time series was evaluated. The results were rather variable, with some experimental fields achieving successful performance metrics (ubRMSE ∼ 0.05 m3/m3) and some others rather poor ones (ubRMSE > 0.12 m3/m3). Evaluating median performance metrics, it was observed that both TUWCD and MTBCD methods obtained better results when run with vegetation corrected backscatter time series (ubRMSE ∼0.07 m3/m3) whereas STCD produced similar results with and without vegetation correction (ubRMSE ∼0.08 m3/m3). The soil moisture content had an influence on the accuracy of the different methodologies, with higher errors observed for drier conditions and rain-fed fields, in comparison to wetter conditions and irrigated fields. Taking into account the spatial scale of this case study, results were considered promising for the future application of these techniques in irrigation management. [Display omitted] • Soil moisture was estimated in rain-fed and irrigated wheat fields using Sentinel-1 data. • Three change detection methods were evaluated. • Different methodological alternatives were proposed for applying change detection methods at the field scale. • The results of two methods improved when correcting for the vegetation influence on backscatter. • Soil moisture was generally overestimated for dry conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]