2009Soil Science Society of America JournalRequires access

Extracting Topsoil Information from EM38DD Sensor Data using a Neural Network Approach

Liesbet Cockx, Marc Van Meirvenne, U.W.A. Vitharana, Lieven P. C. Verbeke, David Simpson, Timothy Saey, Frieke M.B. Van Coillie

Open publisher page 35 citations

Abstract

Electromagnetic induction soil sensors are an increasingly important source of secondary information to predict soil texture. In a 10.5‐ha polder field, an EM38DD survey was performed with a resolution of 2 by 2 m and 78 soil samples were analyzed for sub‐ and topsoil texture. Due to the presence of former water channels in the subsoil, the coefficient of variation of the subsoil clay content (45%) was much larger compared with the topsoil (13%). The horizontal (EC a –H) and vertical (EC a –V) electrical conductivity measurements displayed a similar pattern, indicating a dominant influence of the subsoil features on both signals. To extract topsoil textural information from the depth‐weighted EM38DD signals we turned to artificial neural networks (ANNs). We evaluated the effect of different input layers on the ability to predict the topsoil clay content. To identify the response of the topsoil, both EM38DD orientations were used. To examine the influence of the local neighborhood, contextual EC a information by means of a window around each soil sample was added to the input. The best ANN model used both EC a –H and EC a –V data but no contextual information: a mean squared estimation error of 2.83% 2 was achieved, explaining 65.5% of the topsoil clay variability with a variance of 0.052% 2 So, with the help of ANNs, the prediction of the topsoil clay content was optimized through an integrated use of the two EM38DD signals.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Electromagnetic induction soil sensors are an increasingly important source of secondary information to predict soil texture. In a 10.5‐ha polder field, an EM38DD survey was performed with a resolution of 2 by 2 m and 78 soil samples were analyzed for sub‐ and topsoil texture. Due to the presence of former water channels in the subsoil, the coefficient of variation of the subsoil clay content (45%) was much larger compared with the topsoil (13%). The horizontal (EC a –H) and vertical (EC a –V) electrical conductivity measurements displayed a similar pattern, indicating a dominant influence of the subsoil features on both signals. To extract topsoil textural information from the depth‐weighted EM38DD signals we turned to artificial neural networks (ANNs). We evaluated the effect of different input layers on the ability to predict the topsoil clay content. To identify the response of the topsoil, both EM38DD orientations were used. To examine the influence of the local neighborhood, contextual EC a information by means of a window around each soil sample was added to the input. The best ANN model used both EC a –H and EC a –V data but no contextual information: a mean squared estimation error of 2.83% 2 was achieved, explaining 65.5% of the topsoil clay variability with a variance of 0.052% 2 So, with the help of ANNs, the prediction of the topsoil clay content was optimized through an integrated use of the two EM38DD signals.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 35 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Electromagnetic induction soil sensors are an increasingly important source of secondary information to predict soil texture. In a 10.5‐ha polder field, an EM38DD survey was performed with a resolution of 2 by 2 m and 78 soil samples were analyzed for sub‐ and topsoil texture. Due to the presence of former water channels in the subsoil, the coefficient of variation of the subsoil clay content (45%) was much larger compared with the topsoil (13%). The horizontal (EC a –H) and vertical (EC a –V) electrical conductivity measurements displayed a similar pattern, indicating a dominant influence of the subsoil features on both signals. To extract topsoil textural information from the depth‐weighted EM38DD signals we turned to artificial neural networks (ANNs). We evaluated the effect of different input layers on the ability to predict the topsoil clay content. To identify the response of the topsoil, both EM38DD orientations were used. To examine the influence of the local neighborhood, contextual EC a information by means of a window around each soil sample was added to the input. The best ANN model used both EC a –H and EC a –V data but no contextual information: a mean squared estimation error of 2.83% 2 was achieved, explaining 65.5% of the topsoil clay variability with a variance of 0.052% 2 So, with the help of ANNs, the prediction of the topsoil clay content was optimized through an integrated use of the two EM38DD signals.

Key concepts: Topsoil, Subsoil, Soil science, Soil texture, Environmental science, Geology, Soil water

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Extracting Topsoil Information from EM38DD Sensor Data using a Neural Network Approach — Research Paper | ScholarLens