Soil & Water Res., 2011, 6(2):102-110 | DOI: 10.17221/6/2011-SWR

Comparison of two sensors ECH2O EC-5 and SM200 for measuring soil water contentOriginal Paper

Radka Kodešová1, Vít Kodeš1,2, Arnošt Mráz3
1 Department of Soil Science and Soil Protection, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic;
2 Department of Water Quality, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, Prague, Czech Republic
3 Ekotechnika, Ltd., Černošice, Czech Republic$2

The goal of this study was calibration of the ECH20 soil moisture sensor EC-5 and the sensor SM200 for selected soils of the Czech Republic. Based on the soil maps of the Czech Republic and various climatic conditions, five humic horizons of different soil types were selected: Stagnic Chernozem Siltic, Haplic Chernozem, Chernozem Arenic, Haplic Luvisol, and Haplic Cambisol. Soil properties (pHKCl, pHH2O, exchangeable acidity, cation exchange capacity, hydrolytic acidity, basic cation saturation, sorption complex saturation, oxidable organic carbon content, CaCO3 content, salinity, sand, silt, and clay content, soil particle density, bulk density) were determined using the standard laboratory techniques. Six ECH20 EC-5 sensors permanently installed in six 606 cm3 repacked soil samples of each soil were calibrated. Four calibrated SM200 sensors were inserted into the same soil samples only when measuring sensor signal. Soil water contents were determined gravimetrically. Linear equation was used to find parameters of the calibration equations relating sensor signals or evaluated dielectric constants and soil water contents. The multiple linear analyses showed that the parameters of the calibration equations for the EC-5 depended on the bulk density, fraction of sand particles, and salinity. Parameters a and b of the SM200 depended on the initial soil salinity, sand fraction and CaCO3 content, and on the sand fraction, respectively. The impact of KBr solute (concentrations of 0.01, 0.05 and 0.1M Br) on calibration equations was studied as well. It was found that ECH20 EC-5 sensor measurements were more influenced by KBr solution than SM200 measurements. In the case of the ECH20 EC-5 sensor, impact of KBr was lower in soils of higher initial salinity. SM200 measurements were noticeably influenced only when 0.1M Br solution was applied.

Keywords: bulk density; CaCO3; ECH20 soil moisture sensor EC-5; fraction of sand particles; SM200 sensor; soil and soil water salinity; soils of the Czech Republic; soil water content

Published: June 30, 2011  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Kodešová R, Kodeš V, Mráz A. Comparison of two sensors ECH2O EC-5 and SM200 for measuring soil water content. Soil & Water Res. 2011;6(2):102-110. doi: 10.17221/6/2011-SWR.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Anonymous (2006): User Manual for the SM200 Soil Moisture Sensor. Delta-T Devices, Ltd., Cambridge. Available at http://www.delta-t.co.uk/support-article.html?article=faq2006053017066
    2. Anonymous (2010a): EC-20, EC-10, EC-5 Soil Moisture Sensors Operator's Manual. Decagon Devices, Inc., Pullman. Available at http://www.decagon.com/assets/Manuals/EC-20-EC-10-EC-5-Soil-Moisture-SensorUser-Manual.pdf
    3. Anonymous (2010b): 10HS Soil Moisture Sensor Operator's Manual. Decagon Devices, Inc., Pullman. Available at http://www.decagon.com/assets/Manuals/10HS-Manual.pdf
    4. Anonymous (2010c): 5TE Water Content, EC and Temperature Sensors Operator's Manual. Decagon Devices, Inc., Pullman. Available at http://www.decagon.com/assets/Manuals/5TE-Manual.pdf
    5. Anonymous (2010c): 5TM Water Content and Temperature Sensors Operator's Manual. Decagon Devices, Inc., Pullman. Available at http://www.decagon.com/assets/Manuals/Manual-5TM.pdf
    6. Anonymous (2010e): User Manual for the SM300 Soil Moisture Sensor. Delta-T Devices, Ltd., Cambridge. Available at http://www.delta-t.co.uk/support-article.html?article=faq2010060316700
    7. Blanc L., Dick J.M. (2003): Errors in repeated measurements of soil water content in pots using a ThetaProbe. Soil Use and Management, 19: 87-88. Go to original source...
    8. Bower C.A., Hatcher J.T. (1966): Simultaneous determination of surface area and cation-exchange capacity. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings, 30: 525-527. Go to original source...
    9. Dane H., Topp G.C. (2002): Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 4 - Physical Methods, Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison. Go to original source...
    10. Doležal F., Litschmann T., Kučera J., Peterková J., Zavadil J., Vacek J., Pražák P., Pilná E., Bayer T., Nechvátal M. (2008): Field and laboratory ad hoc calibrations of Virrib and ThetaProbe dielectric sensors for soil moisture measurements. Soil and Water Research, 3: 199-214. Go to original source...
    11. Everet S.R., Tolk J.A, Howell T.A. (2006): Soil profile water content determination: Sensor accuracy, axial response, calibration, temperature dependence and precision. Vadose Zone Journal, 5: 894-907. Go to original source...
    12. Flint A.L., Flint L.E. (2002): Particle density. In: Dane J.H., Topp G.C. (eds): Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4 - Physical Methods. Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, 229-240. Go to original source...
    13. Francesca V., Osvaldo F., Stefano P., Paolo R.P. (2010): Soil moisture measurements: Comparison of instrumentation performance. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 136: 81-89. Go to original source...
    14. Friedman S.P. (2005): Soil properties influencing apparent electrical conductivity: a review. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 46: 45-70. Go to original source...
    15. Gee G.W., Or D. (2002): Particle-size analysis. in: Dane J.H., Topp G.C. (eds): Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4 - Physical Methods. Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, 255-294.
    16. Hendershot W.H., Lalande H., Duquette M. (1993): Soil Reaction and Exchangeable acidity, in Soil Sampling and Method of Analysis. Canadian Society of Soil Science. Lewis Publisher, Boca Raton, 141-185.
    17. ISO 10390 (1994): Determination of pH. International Organization of Standardization, Standard of Soil quality, Geneve.
    18. Kizito F., Campbell C.S., Campbell G.S., Cobos D.R., Teare B.L., Carter B., Hopmans J.W. (2008): Frequency, electrical conductivity and temperature analysis of a low-cost capacitance soil moisture sensors. Journal of Hydrology, 352: 367-378. Go to original source...
    19. Klute A. (1996): Methods of Soil Analysis. Agronomy Monograph 9. American Society of Agronomy, Madison.
    20. Kodešová R., Kočárek M., Kodeš V., Drábek O., Kozák J., Hejtmánková K. (2011): Pesticide adsorption in relation to soil properties and soil type distribution in regional scale. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 186: 540-550. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    21. Kozák J., Němeček J., Jetmar M. (1996): The database of soil information system - PUGIS. Rostlinná výroba, 42: 529-534.
    22. Looppert H.R., Suarez L.D. (1996): Carbonate and Gypsum. In: Sparks D.L., Page A.L., Helmke P.A., Loeppert R.H., Soltanpour P.N., Tabatabai M.A., Johnston C.T., Sumner M.E. (eds): Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3 - Chemical Methods. Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, 437-474.
    23. Mwale S.S., Azam-Ali S.N., Sparkers D.L. (2005): Can the PR1 capacitance probe replace the neutron probe for routine soil-water measurement. Soil Use and Management, 21: 340-347. Go to original source...
    24. Němeček J. et al. (2001): Soil Map of the Czech Republic 1:250 000. CULS, Prague.
    25. Noborio K. (2001): Measurement of soil water content and electrical conductivity by time domain reflectometry: a review. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 31: 213-237. Go to original source...
    26. Parsons L.R., Bandaranayake W.M. (2009): Performance of a new capacitance soil moisture probe in sandy soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 74: 1378-1385. Go to original source...
    27. Qi Y., Helmers M.J. (2010): The conversion of permittivity as measured by a PR2 capacitance probe into soil moisture values for Des Moines Lobe soils in Iowa. Soil Use and Management, 26: 82-92. Go to original source...
    28. Regalado C.M., Ritter A., Rodriguez-Gonzales R.M. (2007): Performance of the commercial WET capacitance sensor as compared with time domain reflectometry in volcanic soil. Vadose Zone Journal, 6: 244-254. Go to original source...
    29. Rhoades J.D. (1996): Salinity: Electrical Conductivity and Total Dissolved Solids. In: Sparks D.L., Page A.L., Helmke P.A., Loeppert R.H., Soltanpour P.N., Tabatabai M.A., Johnston C.T., Sumner M.E. (eds): Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3 - Chemical Methods. Soil Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, 417-435. Go to original source...
    30. Rosenbaum U., Huisman J.A., Weuthen A., Vereecken H., Bogena H.R. (2010): Sensor-to-sensor variability of the ECH2O EC-5, TE, and 5TE sensors in dielectric liquids. Vadose Zone Journal, 9: 181-186. Go to original source...
    31. Saito T., Fujimaki H., Yasuda H., Inoue M. (2009): Empirical temperature calibration of capacitance probes to measure soil water. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 73: 1931-1937. Go to original source...
    32. Sakaki T., Limsuwat, A., Smits K.M., Illangasekare T.H. (2008): Empirical two-point alpha-mixing model for calibrating the ECH2O EC-5 soil moisture sensor in sands. Water Resources Research, 44: W00D08. Go to original source...
    33. Skjemstad J.O., Baldock J.A. (2008): Total and organic carbon. In: Carter M.R., Gregorich E.G. (eds): Soil Sampling and Method of Analysis. Canadian Society of Soil Science, Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton, 225-237. Go to original source...
    34. Wraith J.A., Robinson D.A., Jones S.B., Long D.S. (2005): Spatially characterizing apparent electrical conductivity and water content of surface soils with time domain reflectometry. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 46: 239-261. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content