Nitrogen-based proximal sensing and data fusion for management zone delineation

IF 1.3 Q3 AGRONOMY
Md Tawhid Hossain, Marco Donat, Ines Astrid Tougma, Sonoko D. Bellingrath-Kimura, Kathrin Grahmann
{"title":"Nitrogen-based proximal sensing and data fusion for management zone delineation","authors":"Md Tawhid Hossain,&nbsp;Marco Donat,&nbsp;Ines Astrid Tougma,&nbsp;Sonoko D. Bellingrath-Kimura,&nbsp;Kathrin Grahmann","doi":"10.1002/agg2.70051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Delineation of management zones (MZ) based on soil mineral nitrogen (SMN) dynamics can enhance site-specific management, reduce nitrate leaching, and improve nutrient efficiency. We tested proximal sensing as an alternative to standard laboratory methods to capture the spatial variability of SMN, nitrate (NO<sub>3</sub><sup>−</sup>), and soil moisture (SM) and combined these data with topographic and remote sensing inputs to delineate MZ using data fusion and <i>k</i>-means clustering. Two conventionally managed fields with winter oilseed rape (<i>Brassica napus</i> L.) and winter barley (<i>Hordeum vulgare</i> L.) were chosen for Field-A and Field-B. Fresh soil samples were analyzed in the laboratory using KCl extraction, while global positioning system-labeled data from a proximal soil sensor (FarmLab) were accessed via cloud storage. FarmLab estimated NO<sub>3</sub><sup>−</sup> and SMN were higher than laboratory results (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), whereas SM showed no significant difference between the two methods. Bland–Altman analysis, which assesses the limit of agreement between methods to ensure consistency, revealed significant discrepancies in NO₃⁻ estimated by both methods, particularly in Field-B, with limits of agreement ranging from −17.40 to 29.66 mg kg<sup>−1</sup>. Results of <i>k</i>-means clustering, a method for grouping data into similar categories, were evaluated using 11 feature sets, which combine data from multiple sources (laboratory and FarmLab data, satellites, and topographic data) to create a comprehensive dataset for analysis at different time points in autumn and spring. The results showed that the optimal clustering result varied depending on the field and date. Feature sets with topographic variables performed well in Field-A, while feature sets with remote sensing, topography, and FarmLab data improved MZ in Field-B. This study demonstrates how the FarmLab device can capture within-field SMN variability and examines the similarities and differences between both methods (laboratory and FarmLab). Despite discrepancies between methods, FarmLab showed the potential of integrating in-season NO<sub>3</sub><sup>−</sup> and SMN data with topographic and remote sensing data to delineate MZ. This approach can be scaled up to farm and landscape scale, allowing farmers to leverage proximal and remote sensing data for in-season SMN monitoring, which enables efficient nutrient management and promotes sustainable farming practices with economic and environmental benefits.</p>","PeriodicalId":7567,"journal":{"name":"Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/agg2.70051","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/agg2.70051","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Delineation of management zones (MZ) based on soil mineral nitrogen (SMN) dynamics can enhance site-specific management, reduce nitrate leaching, and improve nutrient efficiency. We tested proximal sensing as an alternative to standard laboratory methods to capture the spatial variability of SMN, nitrate (NO3), and soil moisture (SM) and combined these data with topographic and remote sensing inputs to delineate MZ using data fusion and k-means clustering. Two conventionally managed fields with winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) and winter barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) were chosen for Field-A and Field-B. Fresh soil samples were analyzed in the laboratory using KCl extraction, while global positioning system-labeled data from a proximal soil sensor (FarmLab) were accessed via cloud storage. FarmLab estimated NO3 and SMN were higher than laboratory results (p < 0.05), whereas SM showed no significant difference between the two methods. Bland–Altman analysis, which assesses the limit of agreement between methods to ensure consistency, revealed significant discrepancies in NO₃⁻ estimated by both methods, particularly in Field-B, with limits of agreement ranging from −17.40 to 29.66 mg kg−1. Results of k-means clustering, a method for grouping data into similar categories, were evaluated using 11 feature sets, which combine data from multiple sources (laboratory and FarmLab data, satellites, and topographic data) to create a comprehensive dataset for analysis at different time points in autumn and spring. The results showed that the optimal clustering result varied depending on the field and date. Feature sets with topographic variables performed well in Field-A, while feature sets with remote sensing, topography, and FarmLab data improved MZ in Field-B. This study demonstrates how the FarmLab device can capture within-field SMN variability and examines the similarities and differences between both methods (laboratory and FarmLab). Despite discrepancies between methods, FarmLab showed the potential of integrating in-season NO3 and SMN data with topographic and remote sensing data to delineate MZ. This approach can be scaled up to farm and landscape scale, allowing farmers to leverage proximal and remote sensing data for in-season SMN monitoring, which enables efficient nutrient management and promotes sustainable farming practices with economic and environmental benefits.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment
Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信