Skip to main content
ARS Home » Northeast Area » Beltsville, Maryland (BARC) » Beltsville Agricultural Research Center » Environmental Microbial & Food Safety Laboratory » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #272203
Title: Is it enough to have one ECa map for the site-specific management delineation?

Author
item MARTINEZ, GONZALO - University Of Sevilla
item Pachepsky, Yakov
item VANDERLINDEN, KARL - Venta Del Llano Ifapa Center
item GIRALDEZ, JUAN - Universidad De Cordoba

Submitted to: ASA-CSSA-SSSA Proceedings
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 5/13/2011
Publication Date: 10/14/2011
Citation: Martinez, G., Pachepsky, Y.A., Vanderlinden, K., Giraldez, J. 2011. Is it enough to have one ECa map for the site-specific management delineation?. ASA-CSSA-SSSA Proceedings. Paper No. 67335.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: The soil apparent electrical conductivity (ECa) has been used to map soil spatial variability and to relate it to the variability of various soil properties thus delineating zones of site-specific management. Most often, a single ECa survey is done and the generated ECa map is considered to infer the patterns of soil spatial variability. The objective of this work was to evaluate this assumption by comparing results of several time-lapse surveys at two fields with clay soils. The study site is located in SW Spain; clay content is high (>50 %) across the fields. Field I encompasses a 3-ha tillage experiment with 15 m by 180 m plots where the conventional tillage, the direct drilling and the minimum tillage are replicated. Field II is a direct-drilled 30 ha field. Three EM38DD surveys were done on 10/6/06, on 11/10/08, and on 11/20/08 using sensor coil orientations that yielded ECa values of both shallow and deep layers. Correlation coefficients between the data of different surveys varied from 0.22 to 0.96 for field I and from 0.79 to 0.99 for field II. These differences could be attributed to the scale difference between the fields, to differences in data ranges that were much wider at field II than at field I, to higher variability in soil properties caused by different tillage in field I as compared to field II, and to topography variation which was more pronounced in field II. Map comparison methods have been used to characterize the observed EC patterns and compare them. Whereas time-lapse ECa patterns were similar at field II, so that any of the surveys could be used to guide site specific management, time-lapse ECa patterns at field I were substantially different, and several ECa surveys were needed to ascertain the general pattern of the field variability.