Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of a Geonics EM31-3RT probe to delineate hydrologic regimes in a tile-drained field

  • Published:
Precision Agriculture Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A world-wide need to use water resources efficiently necessitates more effective approaches to study water and contaminant transport in soil. This study examined the effectiveness of a multi-receiver electromagnetic induction probe (Geonics EM31-3RT) and modeling software (EMIGMA) to delineate hydrological regimes at field scale. The site consisted of 20 (15 m × 15 m) tile-drained plots in Southern Ontario, Canada. Measurements of apparent soil electrical conductivity (ECa) and magnetic susceptibility were obtained using the EM31-3RT in each plot at four distances (0, 2.25, 4.5 and 7.5 m) from the tile drain, and on three occasions (August 22, 26 and 29) in 2003. The EMIGMA was used to simulate a depth profile of electrical conductivity (ECs) from EM31-3RT readings. The near-surface soil showed significantly (p < 0.01) smaller ECa values than at greater depth. The ECa measurements made directly over the tile drains were smaller than those observed further away due to the presence of the drains. Cluster analysis indicated that the largest ECa values were at the lower elevations of the site related to the redistribution of moisture from higher elevations. The effect of tile drains and rainfall events on ECa was simulated well by EMIGMA, with smaller ECs values above the drains compared to further away, and showing an increase in ECs in the near-surface soil after rain. This study suggests that EM31-3RT measurements combined with EMIGMA simulation of electrical conductivity can provide valuable information on depth profiles of ECa and water dynamics in soil.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akay, O., & Fox, G. A. (2007). Experimental investigation of direct connectivity between macropores and subsurface drains during infiltration. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 71, 1600–1606.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brevik, E. C., & Fenton, T. E. (2002). The relative influence of soil water content, clay, temperature, and carbonate minerals on soil electrical conductivity readings taken with an EM-38 along a Mollisol Catena in Central Iowa. Soil Survey Horizons, 43, 9–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brevik, E. C., Fenton, T. E., & Lazari, A. (2006). Soil electrical conductivity as a function of soil water content and implications for soil mapping. Precision Agriculture, 7, 393–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callegary, J. B., Ferre, T. P. A., & Groom, R. W. (2007). Spatial sensitivity of low induction-number frequency-domain electromagnetic induction instruments. Vadose Zone Journal, 6, 158–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clay, D. E., Chang, J., Malo, D. D., Carlson, C. G., Reese, C., Clay, S. A., et al. (2001). Factors influencing spatial variability of soil apparent electrical conductivity. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 32, 2993–3008.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Corwin, D. L., & Lesch, S. M. (2005a). Apparent soil electrical conductivity measurements in agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 46, 1–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corwin, D. L., & Lesch, S. M. (2005b). Characterizing soil spatial variability with apparent soil electrical conductivity: I. Survey protocols. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 46, 103–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crittenden, S. J. (2005). Effect of manure management practice on E. coli, phosphorus, and nitrogen loss in agricultural water. M.Sc. Thesis. Department of Land Resource Science, University of Guelph.

  • Dharmakeerthi, R. S., Kay, B. D., & Beauchamp, E. G. (2006). Spatial variability of in-season nitrogen uptake by corn across a variable landscape as affected by management. Agronomy Journal, 98, 255–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geonics Ltd. (2002). EM31–3-1 three coil separation conductivity meter. Operational notes. Mississauga, Ontario, Canada: Geonics Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helwig, T. G., Madramootoo, C. A., & Dodds, G. T. (2002). Modelling nitrate losses in drainage water using DRAINMOD 5.0. Agricultural Water Management, 56, 153–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamieson, R. C., Gordon, R. J., Sharples, K. E., Stratton, G. W., & Madani, A. (2002). Movement and persistence of fecal bacteria in agricultural soils and subsurface drainage water: A review. Canadian Biosystems Engineering, 44, 1.1–1.9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kachanoski, R. G., Gregorich, E. G., & van Wesenbeeck, I. J. (1988). Estimating spatial variations of soil water content using noncontacting electromagnetic inductive methods. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 68, 715–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kladivko, E. J., Brown, L. C., & Baker, J. L. (2001). Pesticide transport to subsurface tile drains in humid regions of North America. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 31, 1–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lesch, S. M., Corwin, D. L., & Robinson, D. A. (2005). Applications of apparent soil electrical conductivity in precision agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 46, 351–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lukas, V., Neudert, L., & Kren, J. (2009). Mapping of soil conditions in precision agriculture. Acta Agrophysica, 13, 393–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCutcheon, M. C., Farahani, H. J., Stednick, J. D., Buchleiter, G. W., & Green, T. R. (2006). Effect of soil water on apparent soil electrical conductivity and texture relationships in a dryland field. Biosystems Engineering, 94, 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, J. D. (1980). Electromagnetic terrain conductivity measurement at low induction numbers. Technical note TN-6. Ontario, Canada: Geonics Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, J. D. (1992). Rapid, accurate mapping of soil salinity by electromagnetic ground conductivity meters. In G. C. Topp & W. D. Reynolds (Eds.), Advances in measurement of soil physical properties: Bringing theory into practice (pp. 209–229). Madison WI: Soil Science Society of America Special Publication No. 30.

    Google Scholar 

  • PetRos EiKon, Inc. (2003). EMIGMA (V7.5). Concord, Ontario, Canada: PetRos EiKon, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades, J. D., & Oster, J. D. (1986). Solute content. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis part 1—Physical and mineralogical methods (2nd ed., pp. 985–1006). Madison, WI: ASA-SSSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. A., Campbell, C. S., Hopmans, J. W., Hornbuckle, B. K., Jones, S. B., Knight, R., et al. (2008). Soil moisture measurement for ecological and hydrological watershed-scale observatories: A review. Vadose Zone Journal, 7, 358–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheets, K. R., & Hendrickx, J. M. H. (1995). Noninvasive soil water content measurement using electromagnetic induction. Water Resources Research, 31, 2401–2409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shipitalo, M. J., Nuutinen, V., & Butt, K. R. (2004). Interaction of earthworm burrows and cracks in a clayey, subsurface-drained, soil. Applied Soil Ecology, 26, 209–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, J. T., Simard, R. R., & Joern, B. C. (1998). Phosphorus loss in agricultural drainage: Historical perspective and current research. Journal of Environmental Quality, 27, 277–293.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soil Classification Working Group. (1998). The canadian system of soil classification (3rd ed., p. 187). Ottawa, Ontario: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Publication 1646.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soil Survey Staff. (2006). Keys to soil taxonomy (10th ed.). Washington, DC: USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • StatSoft, Inc. (2000). Statistica for windows. Tulsa, OK.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the great contributions of Peter von Bertoldi, Paul Bacchus, Kerry-Anne Pumphrey, Andrew Olinski, Don Irvine and Steve Crittenden to the project. As well, field personnel at Elora Research Station are thanked for excellent assistance in crop management. Funding for this work was provided by Canada Foundation for Innovation and Canadian Water Network.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada

    H. Dadfar, R. J. Heck & G. W. Parkin

  2. CH2M HILL Canada Limited, Kitchener, ON, O2G 4Y9, Canada

    K. Barfoot-Kinsie

Authors
  1. H. Dadfar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. J. Heck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. W. Parkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. Barfoot-Kinsie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. J. Heck.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dadfar, H., Heck, R.J., Parkin, G.W. et al. Evaluation of a Geonics EM31-3RT probe to delineate hydrologic regimes in a tile-drained field. Precision Agric 12, 623–638 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-010-9203-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-010-9203-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation