TY - JOUR
T1 - Field assessment of interreplicate variability from eight electromagnetic soil moisture sensors
AU - Lo, Tsz Him
AU - Rudnick, Daran R.
AU - Singh, Jasreman
AU - Nakabuye, Hope Njuki
AU - Katimbo, Abia
AU - Heeren, Derek M.
AU - Ge, Yufeng
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was jointly supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture , U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA-NIFA) , under award number 2016-68007-25066, “Sustaining agriculture through adaptive management to preserve the Ogallala aquifer under a changing climate”; by USDA-NIFA under award number 2017-68007-26584, “Securing water for and from agriculture through effective community and stakeholder engagement”; by USDA-NIFA under Hatch Project #1015698, “Integrating hydrological modeling and characterization approaches across scales to understand the effects of efficient irrigation management on groundwater/surface water systems”; by Nebraska Extension ; and by the Daugherty Water for Food Global Institute . The authors are grateful to METER Group for donating Teros12 sensors; to AquaSpy, Inc., and Frenchman Valley Cooperative for lending out Vector Probes; and to Nebraska State Climate Office for providing weather data from its Nebraska Mesonet. The authors thank Turner Dorr, Jacob Nickel, Deepti Upadhyaya, and Italo Pinho de Faria for assisting this study.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/3/31
Y1 - 2020/3/31
N2 - Interreplicate variability—the spread in output values among units of the same sensor subjected to essentially the same condition—can be a major source of uncertainty in sensor data. To investigate the interreplicate variability among eight electromagnetic soil moisture sensors through a field study, eight units of TDR315, CS616, CS655, HydraProbe2, EC5, 5TE, and Teros12 were installed at a depth of 0.30 m within 3 m of each other, whereas three units of AquaSpy Vector Probe were installed within 3 m of each other. The magnitude of interreplicate variability in volumetric water content (θv) was generally similar between a static period near field capacity and a dynamic period of 85 consecutive days in the growing season. However, a wider range of variability was observed during the dynamic period primarily because interreplicate variability in θv increased sharply whenever infiltrated rainfall reached the sensor depth. Interreplicate variability for most sensors was thus smaller if comparing θv changes over several days that excluded this phenomenon than if comparing θv directly. Among the sensors that also reported temperature and/or apparent electrical conductivity, the sensors exhibiting the largest interreplicate variability in these outputs were characterized by units with consistently above or below average readings. Although manufacturers may continue to improve the technology in and the quality control of soil moisture sensors, users would still benefit from paying greater attention to interreplicate variability and adopting strategies to mitigate the consequences of interreplicate variability.
AB - Interreplicate variability—the spread in output values among units of the same sensor subjected to essentially the same condition—can be a major source of uncertainty in sensor data. To investigate the interreplicate variability among eight electromagnetic soil moisture sensors through a field study, eight units of TDR315, CS616, CS655, HydraProbe2, EC5, 5TE, and Teros12 were installed at a depth of 0.30 m within 3 m of each other, whereas three units of AquaSpy Vector Probe were installed within 3 m of each other. The magnitude of interreplicate variability in volumetric water content (θv) was generally similar between a static period near field capacity and a dynamic period of 85 consecutive days in the growing season. However, a wider range of variability was observed during the dynamic period primarily because interreplicate variability in θv increased sharply whenever infiltrated rainfall reached the sensor depth. Interreplicate variability for most sensors was thus smaller if comparing θv changes over several days that excluded this phenomenon than if comparing θv directly. Among the sensors that also reported temperature and/or apparent electrical conductivity, the sensors exhibiting the largest interreplicate variability in these outputs were characterized by units with consistently above or below average readings. Although manufacturers may continue to improve the technology in and the quality control of soil moisture sensors, users would still benefit from paying greater attention to interreplicate variability and adopting strategies to mitigate the consequences of interreplicate variability.
KW - Apparent electrical conductivity
KW - Precision
KW - Soil water content
KW - Standard deviation
KW - Temperature
KW - Uncertainty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85077509444&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85077509444&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105984
DO - 10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105984
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85077509444
SN - 0378-3774
VL - 231
JO - Agricultural Water Management
JF - Agricultural Water Management
M1 - 105984
ER -