Mapping Soil Test Phosphorus and Potassium for Variable-Rate Fertilizer Application

Abstract

Variable‐rate fertilizer (VRF) application requires knowledge of the spatial variability of soil test P and K within a field. The objectives of the study were to: (i) evaluate cell (area) vs. point soil sampling, both on a grid basis, and (ii) compare methods for mapping location specific soil test data. Soils in two central Wisconsin fields were sampled with two methods; study site soils included two alfisols and one entisol. The grid‐cell method involved dividing fields into 318‐ft square cells and compositing soil cores to give one sample per cell. The grid‐point method involved soil sampling at grid intersection points spaced on a 106‐ft square grid. Soil test P and K maps were constructed with nine mapping methods, including: field average, field median, CELL A (five soil cores), CELL B (72 soil cores), Delaunay triangulation, polynomial trend surface, inverse distance squared gridding, point kriging, and block kriging. Mapping accuracy was determined with map overlay comparisons where the Delaunay triangulation contour maps (106‐ft data) served as the control maps. On average, the CELL A and CELL B methods improved mapping accuracy by 14 and 33 percentage points over the field average. Even with the CELL B method, on average, 38% of the two fields would receive an incorrect application of fertilizer, indicating that cell mapping methods are not acceptable for making VRF management maps. Grid‐point sampling improved soil test P mapping accuracy by 20 percentage points over the CELL A method, even with point sampling in a 318‐ft grid. Mathematical procedures used to create a 53‐ft grid of data, from field sample data, did not improve map accuracy. Soil samples should be collected on a triangular or unaligned systematic grid. Sample spacing will depend on field variability, but probably should not exceed 300 ft. Research Question Traditionally, farm fields are soil sampled to determine the field average soil test P and K. One rate of fertilizer is recommended and applied, a rate that generally results in over‐ or under‐fertilization of portions of the field. Computer‐controlled fertilizer application equipment allows fertilizer rates or blends to be changed over short distances. Variable‐rate fertilizer (VRF) application requires accurate maps of the spatial variability of soil fertility levels. The objectives of this study were to: (i) evaluate cell (area) vs. point soil sampling, both on a grid basis, and (ii) compare methods for mapping location specific soil test data. The comparisons are limited to soil test P and K data. Literature Summary The profitability of VRF practices depends on the accuracy of soil test maps used to make fertilizer rate maps. Various techniques and sources of data are being used to create nutrient management maps, including soil surveys, infrared photographs, satellite imagery, and a variety of grid‐ and cell‐sampling schemes. Results from two studies show that sampling by soil type is not acceptable for mapping soil test levels. Another study reports that a 200‐ft soil sampling g...

Surface modelling of soil pH

“…Some of them found that kriging method outperformed IDW or splines because of a careful choice of the optimal number of neighboring points, variogram model and the variogram parameters (Laslett et al, 1987;Leenaers et al, 1990;Hosseini et al, 1994;Kravchenko and Bullock, 1999;Panagopoulos et al, 2006); however, the others showed that kriging was not better than the other two methods (Weber and Englund, 1992;Wollenhaupt et al, 1994;Gotway et al, 1996).…”

Variabilidade espacial de variáveis geobiofísicas nas nascentes da bacia hidrográfica do Ribeirão Santa Cruz

“…Em alguns estudos se constatou maior acurácia da interpolação por IPD que a krigagem (Musa et al, 2002), enquanto em outros se verificou melhor desempenho da krigagem (Kravchenko & Bullock, 1999;Zimmerman et al, 1999) ou estimativas muito próximas entre os dois métodos, apesar da superioridade da krigagem (Conde & Yamamoto, 1996;Kravchenko, 2003). Wollenhaupt et al (1994) compararam o IPD com a krigagem no mapeamento de níveis de P e K em solos e verificaram maior acurá-cia do método IPD; entretanto, Kravchenko & Bullock (1999), estudando a interpolação por krigagem ordinária e IPD no mapeamento de propriedades de solo constataram, na maioria das situações, melhor desempenho da krigagem. Kravchenko (2003) também verificou melhor desempenho da krigagem com relação ao IPD no mapeamento de propriedades de solo; porém, quando não foi possível obter parâme-tros confiáveis nos semivariogramas, a krigagem apresentou menor acurácia.…”

Understanding of morphometric features for adequate water resource management in arid environments

“…Gotway et al (1996) found that the IDW method generated more accurate results for mapping soil organic matter and soil NO 3 levels. Wollenhaupt et al (1994) compared these two interpolation techniques and concluded that IDW was more accurate for mapping P and K levels soil. Mueller et al (2004) observed that for the optimal parameters of the method, the accuracy of IDW interpolation generally equaled or exceeded the accuracy of Kriging at each scale of measurement.…”