Detecting Soil Water Content of Red Soil and Younger Alluvial Soil Using a Spectrometer

Article Preview

Abstract:

To provide a simple and fast alternative in measuring soil water content (SWC), a spectrometer was used to detect SWC because of different soil water contents, leading to different reflectance spectrums. Two commonly seen soil types in Taiwan are red soil and younger alluvial soil, which were used as test materials in this study. Fifty red soil samples and 50 younger alluvial soil samples were used as testing samples for comparative study. The root mean square error of SWC estimation of red soil and younger alluvial soil is 3.65 and 7.26, respectively. The results show that the estimation accuracy of red soil is higher than that of younger alluvial soil. The estimation error is random for red soil, and decreases exponentially for younger alluvial soil. Spectrometers have the potential to detect soil water content, especially in red soil. After full development of this technology, remote sensing will be applied to detect soil water content or even water-induced landslides.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Pages:

287-290

Citation:

Online since:

January 2013

Keywords:

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2013 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

[1] A. M. Mouazen, R. Karoui, J. D. Baerdemaeker and H. Ramon, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 70: (2006), p.1295.

DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2005.0297

Google Scholar

[2] F. Antonucci; F. Pallottino; C. Costa, Sensors, 11(11) (2011), p.10114.

Google Scholar

[3] M. Bittelli, Horttechnology, 21(3): (2011), p.293.

Google Scholar

[4] X. Guo; C. F. Drury; X. Yang; Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 76(2): (2012), p.485.

Google Scholar

[5] S. Grashey-Jansen and S. Timpf, Adv. Sci. Lett. 3, (2010), p.259.

Google Scholar

[6] X. Li, T. Wang, and X. Song, Adv. Sci. Lett. 4, (2011), p.3161.

Google Scholar

[7] G. Y. Chi, X. Chen, and Y. Shi, Adv. Sci. Lett. 4, (2011), p.156.

Google Scholar

[8] R. C. Dalal and R.J. Henry, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50 (1986), p.120.

Google Scholar

[9] W. R Whalley and J.V. Stafford, Comput. Electron. Agric. 7 (1992), p.269.

Google Scholar

[10] E. Ben-Dor and A. Banin, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 59 (1995), p.364.

Google Scholar

[11] A.P. Leone and S. Sommer, Remote Sens. Environ, 72 (2000), p.346.

Google Scholar

[12] D.C. Slaughter, M.G. Pelletier, and S.K. Upadhyaya, Appl. Eng. Agric. 17: (2001), p.241.

Google Scholar

[13] C. –W. Chang, D.A. Laird, M.J. Mausbach, and C.R. Hurburgh, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 65(2001), p.480.

Google Scholar

[14] D.B. Lobell and G. Asner, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 66 (2002), p.722.

Google Scholar

[15] I. Bogrekci andW.S. Lee,. Biosyst. Eng. 91 (2005), p.305.

Google Scholar

[16] H. A. Bahrami, H. G. Vaghei, P. Alizadeh, F. Nasiri, and Z. Mahallati, Sensor Lett. 8 (2010), p.75.

Google Scholar

[17] X. Huang, Y. Zhang, L. Mao, and H. Liu, Sensor Lett. 8, (2010), p.40.

Google Scholar

[18] F. Antonucci; F. Pallottino; C. Costa, Sensors, 11(11) (2011), p.10114.

Google Scholar

[19] R. Zhong, J. Huang, H. Gong, W. Su, Q. Li, and M. Qin, Sensor Lett. 9, (2011), p.990.

Google Scholar