Airborne soil conductivity assessment using frequency domain electromagnetic induction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Barrowes ◽  
D. Glaser ◽  
M. Prishvin ◽  
M. Coleman ◽  
F. Shubitidze
2002 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 673 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. H. Hendrickx ◽  
B. Borchers ◽  
D. L. Corwin ◽  
S. M. Lesch ◽  
A. C. Hilgendorf ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 100 ◽  
pp. 14-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuël Delefortrie ◽  
Timothy Saey ◽  
Ellen Van De Vijver ◽  
Philippe De Smedt ◽  
Tine Missiaen ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 469-478 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Simpson ◽  
M. Van Meirvenne ◽  
E. Lück ◽  
J. Rühlmann ◽  
T. Saey ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sailaja V. Chilaka ◽  
Daniel L. Faircloth ◽  
Lloyd S. Riggs ◽  
Michael E. Baginski

Soil Systems ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Fernando Visconti ◽  
José Miguel de Paz

By using different physical foundations and technologies, many probes have been developed for on-site soil salinity appraisal in the last forty years. In order to better understand their respective technical and practical advantages and constraints, comparisons among probes are needed. In this study, three different probes, based on electrical resistance (ER), electromagnetic induction (EMI), and frequency domain reflectometry (FDR), were compared during a field survey carried out in a large salt-threatened agricultural area. Information about the soil bulk electrical conductivity (σb) at different depths was obtained with each of the probes and, additionally, other soil properties were also measured depending on the specifications of each instrument and, moreover, determined in samples. On average, the EMI and FDR techniques could be regarded as equivalent for σb measurement, whereas ER gave higher σb values. Whatever the case, EMI, and also ER, had to be supplemented with information about soil clay, organic matter, and water mass fractions to attain, despite this effort, poor soil salinity estimations by means of multiple linear regression models (R2 < 0.5). On the contrary, FDR needed only probe data to achieve R2 of 0.7, though root mean standard error (RMSE) was still 1.5 dS m−1. The extra measurements and calculations that modern electrical conductivity contact probes integrate, specifically, those based on FDR, remarkably increase their ability for soil salinity appraisal, although there is still room for improvement.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document