An Electromagnetic Induction Survey of a Riparian Area in Southwest Montana

Doolittle, Jim; Noble, Christopher; Leinard, B.

doi:10.2136/sh2000.2.0027

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In hydropedological studies, EMI has been used to indirectly measure and characterize soil water content, subsurface flow, depth to water table, and soil drainage classes (Allred et al, 2005;Doolittle et al, 2000;Kachanoski et al, 1990;Khakural et al, 1998;Kravchenko et al, 2002;Robinson et al, 2008;Scanlon et al, 1999;Schumann and Zaman, 2003;Sheets and Hendrickx, 1995;Williams et al, 2006;Zhu et al, 2010aZhu et al, , 2010b. Studies have revealed that the relative difference in soil EC a across most landscapes remained relatively stable over time (Brevik et al, 2006;Zhu et al, 2010a).…”

Section: A Tool For Soil-hydrologic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of electromagnetic induction techniques in soils studies

Doolittle¹,

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: A Tool For Soil-hydrologic Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of electromagnetic induction techniques in soils studies

Doolittle¹,

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several factors influence ECa measurements, including soil salinity, water content, porosity, structure, temperature, clay content, mineralogy, cation exchange capacity and bulk density (e.g. McNeill 1980, Malicki et al 1989, Persson and Berndtsson 1998, Rhoades et al 1999, Doolittle et al 2000, Brevik and Fenton 2002, 2004, Friedman 2005, Brevik et al 2006, Corwin et al 2006, Weller et al 2007, Saey et al 2009, Hossain et al 2010, Zhu et al 2010. Measurement by EM38 for soil salinity appraisal should be calibrated against the standard electrical conductivity of a saturated soil extract (ECe), which is used in salt-tolerance plant studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The relationship between ECa and ECe is soil-specific, and for an accurate calibration, measurements of ECa are preferably made at field capacity (Kachanoski et al 1988, McKenzie et al 1989, Lesch et al 1992, Rhoades et al 1999, Herrero et al 2003, Brevik et al 2006. The water table is assumed to be at a depth that does not interfere with the electromagnetic induction (EM) measurements (Weller et al 2007), and soil temperature should be recorded for ECa correction (Slavich and Petterson 1990, Doolittle et al 2000. By taking the initial experimental conditions into account, many models were proposed to calibrate the EM38 measurement with ECe (Slavich and Petterson 1990, Lesch et al 1992, including simple linear regression (SLR, Slavich andPetterson 1990, Aragüés et al 2004), multiple linear regression (MLR) done with and without consideration of the theoretical EM depth response function (Corwin and Rhoades 1984, Slavich 1990, Rongjiang and Jingsong 2010, and logistic profile models, which involve a mix of empirical and physicallyderived coefficients to model the salinity profile (Triantafilis et al 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some studies have shown the possibility to use the EM38 for monitoring the depth (Dgw) and salinity (ECgw) of shallow groundwaters. A study by Doolittle et al (2000) related ECa to the depth to the water table and changes in soil moisture; the relationships were different in riparian and upland areas. In a humid climate, Sherlock and McDonnell (2003) found a significant correlation between EMv and Dgw (0.5 < R 2 < 0.9).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Electromagnetic induction prediction of soil salinity and groundwater properties in a Tunisian Saharan oasis

Bouksila

Persson

Bahri³

et al. 2012

Hydrological Sciences Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electromagnetic induction measurements (EM) were taken in a saline gypsiferous soil of the Saharanclimate Fatnassa oasis (Tunisia) to predict the electrical conductivity of saturated soil extract (ECe) and shallow groundwater properties (depth, Dgw, and electrical conductivity, ECgw) using various models. The soil profile was sampled at 0.2 m depth intervals to 1.2 m for physical and chemical analysis. The best input to predict the log-transformed soil salinity (lnECe) in surface (0-0.2 m) soil was the EMh/EMv ratio. For the 0-0.6 m soil depth interval, the performance of multiple linear regression (MLR) models to predict lnECe was weaker using data collected over various seasons and years (R a 2 = 0.66 and MSE = 0.083 dS m-1) as compared to those collected during the same period (R a 2 = 0.97, MSE = 0.007 dS m-1). For similar seasonal conditions, for the Dgw-EMv relationship, R 2 was 0.88 and the MSE was 0.02 m for Dgw prediction. For a validation subset, the R 2 was 0.85 and the MSE was 0.03 m. Soil salinity was predicted more accurately when groundwater properties were used instead of soil moisture with EM variables as input in the MLR.

show abstract

Review of soil salinity assessment for agriculture across multiple scales using proximal and/or remote sensors

Corwin

Scudiero

2019

Advances in Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mapping and monitoring soil spatial variability is particularly problematic for temporally and spatially dynamic properties such as soil salinity. The tools necessary to address this classic problem only reached maturity within the past 2 decades to enable field-to regional-scale salinity assessment of the root zone, including GPS, GIS, geophysical techniques involving proximal and remote sensors, and a greater understanding of apparent soil electrical conductivity (EC a ) and multi-and hyperspectral imagery. The concurrent development and application of these tools have made it possible to map soil salinity across multiple scales, which back in the 1980s was prohibitively expensive and impractical even at field scale. The combination of EC a -directed soil sampling and remote imagery has played a key role in mapping and monitoring soil salinity at large spatial extents with accuracy sufficient for applications ranging from field-scale site-specific management to statewide water allocation management to control salinity within irrigation districts. The objective of this paper is: (i) to present a review of the geophysical and remote imagery techniques used to assess soil salinity variability within the root zone from field to regional scales; (ii) to elucidate gaps in our knowledge and understanding of mapping soil salinity; and (iii) to synthesize existing knowledge to give new insight into the direction soil salinity mapping is heading to benefit policy makers, land resource managers, producers, agriculture consultants, extension specialists, and resource conservation field staff. The review covers the need and justification for mapping and monitoring salinity, basic concepts of soil salinity and its measurement, past geophysical and remote imagery research critical to salinity assessment, current approaches for mapping salinity at different scales, milestones in multi-scale salinity assessment, and future direction of field-to regional-scale salinity assessment. Highlights• A review of multi-scale soil salinity assessment using proximal and remote sensors is presented.

show abstract

An Electromagnetic Induction Survey of a Riparian Area in Southwest Montana

Cited by 4 publications

References 12 publications

The use of electromagnetic induction techniques in soils studies

The use of electromagnetic induction techniques in soils studies

Electromagnetic induction prediction of soil salinity and groundwater properties in a Tunisian Saharan oasis

Review of soil salinity assessment for agriculture across multiple scales using proximal and/or remote sensors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About