SSSAJ Grow Your Career with SSSA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 16 May 2007
Published in Soil Sci Soc Am J 71:993-1002 (2007)
DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2006.0282
© 2007 Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bandaranayake, W. M.
Right arrow Articles by Holeton, J. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bandaranayake, W. M.
Right arrow Articles by Holeton, J. D.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Bandaranayake, W. M.
Right arrow Articles by Holeton, J. D.
Related Collections
Right arrow Water Management
Right arrow Water Content
Right arrow Irrigation

SOIL & WATER MANAGEMENT & CONSERVATION

Performance of a Capacitance-Type Soil Water Probe in a Well-Drained Sandy Soil

W. M. Bandaranayakea,*, L. R. Parsonsa, M. S. Borhanb and J. D. Holetona

a Univ. of Florida, IFAS, Citrus Research and Education Center, 700 Experiment Station Rd., Lake Alfred, FL 33850
b Greenhouse and Processing Crop Res. Center, Agriculture and Agrifood Canada, Harrow, ON N0R 1G0, Canada

* Corresponding author (Wijeb{at}ufl.edu).

Most soils in the Central Florida Ridge (CFR) area are Entisols that contain >95% sand, <3% clay, and <2% organic matter. Field capacity ({theta}fc) is commonly ~0.08 m3 m–3. Therefore, accurate estimation of soil water content ({theta}v) is important in these soils. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of ECH2O probes when estimating {theta}v for scheduling irrigation in CFR soils. Probes were tested for (i) probe-to-probe output variability, (ii) soil volume sampled, (iii) sensitivity to salinity, temperature, and air pockets close to the sensor surface, (iv) pockets of very dry soil close to the sensor surface, and (v) performance after installation in the field. According to the calibration, a 1% change in water content corresponds to a probe output of 17 mV. Laboratory testing suggested that output variability from probe to probe can be a problem in these soils. The sampling volume of the probe was within 1.5 cm from either side of the sensor surface. Salinity induced during fertigation increased the output by about 200 mV, and for each 1°C drop in temperature, the sensor output dropped by 2.3 mV. When the bulk density was changed from 1.56 to 0.94 Mg m–3, the output decreased by 3.5 MV for each 1% drop in air-filled porosity. When very dry soil lenses with <0.01 m3 m–3 {theta}v were associated with the probe surface, the probe failed to sense the wet soil even 1 cm away from the sensor surface. Sensor failure was common due to water leaking into the circuit when sealing material deteriorated or casing material was damaged by insects. These issues need to be addressed before the probes can be considered reliable to estimate {theta}v or used in automated irrigation.

Abbreviations: CFR, Central Florida Ridge







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2007 by the Soil Science Society of America.