• Treffer 2 von 4
Zurück zur Trefferliste

Comparison of instruments for geoelectrical soil mapping at the field scale

  • In precision agriculture geoelectrical methods have shown their capability to detect spatial variation of important physico-chemical soil parameters in an efficient way. Nevertheless, relationships between the electrical parameters (electrical conductivity or resistivity) and other soil properties are not always consistent over different fields. This can, to some extent, be due to the characteristics of instruments used for soil mapping. However, a limited amount of research has addressed this issue. In this study, seven instruments for mobile mapping (continuous geoelectrical measurements) available on the market were tested (ARP 03, CM-138, EM38, EM38-DD, EM38-MK2, OhmMapper and Veris 3100). Instruments were employed on a sandy site in north-east Germany. Measurements were compared to a profile, which has been investigated with a high accuracy reference. Additional investigations were conducted concerning the influences of temperature drift, seasonal variations and soil properties on soil EC. Marked differences between theIn precision agriculture geoelectrical methods have shown their capability to detect spatial variation of important physico-chemical soil parameters in an efficient way. Nevertheless, relationships between the electrical parameters (electrical conductivity or resistivity) and other soil properties are not always consistent over different fields. This can, to some extent, be due to the characteristics of instruments used for soil mapping. However, a limited amount of research has addressed this issue. In this study, seven instruments for mobile mapping (continuous geoelectrical measurements) available on the market were tested (ARP 03, CM-138, EM38, EM38-DD, EM38-MK2, OhmMapper and Veris 3100). Instruments were employed on a sandy site in north-east Germany. Measurements were compared to a profile, which has been investigated with a high accuracy reference. Additional investigations were conducted concerning the influences of temperature drift, seasonal variations and soil properties on soil EC. Marked differences between the instruments were found with respect to depth of investigation, accuracy and handling that have to be taken into account when geoelectrical surveys are planned or interpreted. Regarding depth of investigation and robustness of the measurements, ARP 03 and Veris 3100 seem to be the most suitable instruments for precision agriculture.zeige mehrzeige weniger

Metadaten exportieren

Weitere Dienste

Suche bei Google Scholar Statistik - Anzahl der Zugriffe auf das Dokument
Metadaten
Verfasserangaben:Robin Gebbers, Erika Lueck, Michel Dabas, Horst Domsch
URL:http://nsg.eage.org/
DOI:https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2009011
ISSN:1569-4445
Publikationstyp:Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
Sprache:Englisch
Jahr der Erstveröffentlichung:2009
Erscheinungsjahr:2009
Datum der Freischaltung:25.03.2017
Quelle:Near surface geophysics. - ISSN 1569-4445. - 7 (2009), 3, S. 179 - 190
Organisationseinheiten:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Geowissenschaften
Peer Review:Referiert
Name der Einrichtung zum Zeitpunkt der Publikation:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Erd- und Umweltwissenschaften
Verstanden ✔
Diese Webseite verwendet technisch erforderliche Session-Cookies. Durch die weitere Nutzung der Webseite stimmen Sie diesem zu. Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier.