Field Performance Evaluation of Low-Cost Soil Moisture Sensors in Irrigated Orchard

Monika Marković, Maja Matoša Kočar, Željko Barač, Alka Turalija, Atılgan Atılgan, Danijel Jug and Marija Ravlić ()
Additional contact information
Monika Marković: Faculty of Agrobiotechnical Sciences Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31000 Osijek, Croatia
Maja Matoša Kočar: Agricultural Institute Osijek, 31000 Osijek, Croatia
Željko Barač: Faculty of Agrobiotechnical Sciences Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31000 Osijek, Croatia
Alka Turalija: Faculty of Agrobiotechnical Sciences Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31000 Osijek, Croatia
Atılgan Atılgan: Department of Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, 07450 Antalya, Turkey
Danijel Jug: Faculty of Agrobiotechnical Sciences Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31000 Osijek, Croatia
Marija Ravlić: Faculty of Agrobiotechnical Sciences Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31000 Osijek, Croatia

Agriculture, 2024, vol. 14, issue 8, 1-19

Abstract: Measuring the soil water content (SWC) is a fundamental component of the sustainable management of water resources, soil preservation, and high irrigation efficiency. Non-destructive SWC measurements using soil moisture sensors (SMSs) enables timely irrigation and reduces overirrigation and water stress. Within this context, the performance of four commercial single-point soil moisture sensors (Watermark and tensiometer (Irrometer Company, Inc., Riverside, CA, USA), SM150 (Delta-T Devices, Cambridge, UK)), FieldScout TDR300 (Spectrum Technologies, Aurora, IL, USA) and one soil profile PR2 probe (Delta-T Devices, Cambridge, UK) were tested under anthropogenic eutric cambisol with a silty clay loamy texture (20, 30, and 40 cm) to evaluate accuracy and sensitivity to changes in the SWC in an irrigated apple orchard. The Watermark and tensiometer were additionally tested in the laboratory to convert soil water tension (kPa) to the volumetric soil water content (%vol.). In general, all tested SMSs responded to changes in the SWC, with sensor-to-sensor differences. The Watermark and tensiometer underestimated the SWC, while the TDR overestimated the SWC. The SM150 and PR2 showed high accuracy, i.e., SM150—RMSE-2.24 (20 cm), 2.18 (30 cm) and 2.34 (40 cm), MSE—5.02 (20 cm), 2.93 (30 cm) and 1.89 (40 cm), and PR2—RMSE-1.8 (20 cm), 1.3 (30 cm) and 1.55 (40 cm), MSE-3.23 (20 cm), 1.7 (30 cm) and 2.39 (40 cm) at all observed soil depths.

Keywords: soil moisture sensor; volumetric water content; irrigation scheduling (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/8/1239/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/8/1239/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:8:p:1239-:d:1444085

Access Statistics for this article

Agriculture is currently edited by Ms. Leda Xuan

More articles in Agriculture from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().