2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2004.11.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mapping clay content variation using electromagnetic induction techniques

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

7
110
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 178 publications
(120 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
7
110
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This suggests that the dipole EM38 signal explains between 63 and 75% of the apparent gravel, sand, silt, and clay variability in the field. These correlations are comparable to other research where R 2 estimates were reported to be 0.761 and 0.741 for clay and sand models, respectively , and 0.73 for clay content (Robinson et al 2008), slightly less than the R 2 estimates of 0.82 for clay content (Triantafilis and Lesch 2005) and higher than other research reporting R 2 estimates of 0.15-0.62 for the silt fraction and 0.37-0.63 for clays (Sadduth et al 2005), and R 2 values of 0.548 and 0.406 for clay and sand content, respectively (Lukas et al 2009). Correlation coefficients were slightly lower and ranged from a high of 73.2 and low of 48.8% when ECa measurements determined using VERIS were correlated with gravel, sand, silt, and clay content (Table 2; Fig.…”
Section: Em38 and Veris Comparisonssupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This suggests that the dipole EM38 signal explains between 63 and 75% of the apparent gravel, sand, silt, and clay variability in the field. These correlations are comparable to other research where R 2 estimates were reported to be 0.761 and 0.741 for clay and sand models, respectively , and 0.73 for clay content (Robinson et al 2008), slightly less than the R 2 estimates of 0.82 for clay content (Triantafilis and Lesch 2005) and higher than other research reporting R 2 estimates of 0.15-0.62 for the silt fraction and 0.37-0.63 for clays (Sadduth et al 2005), and R 2 values of 0.548 and 0.406 for clay and sand content, respectively (Lukas et al 2009). Correlation coefficients were slightly lower and ranged from a high of 73.2 and low of 48.8% when ECa measurements determined using VERIS were correlated with gravel, sand, silt, and clay content (Table 2; Fig.…”
Section: Em38 and Veris Comparisonssupporting
confidence: 86%
“…ECa mapping can be used to accurately detect temporal changes in soil water content, when calibrated for salinity (Sheets and Hendrickx 1995;Andreu et al 1997;Hanson et al 2000). Since 1987, at least fourteen studies have evaluated soil ECa as indicator of soil texture with most focusing on clay soils and clay content under annual cropping systems (Sudduth et al 2005;Triantafilis and Lesch 2005). Studies have also used ECa mapping to improve upon the understanding of soil properties in relation to landscape position and annual crop production (Jones et al 1989).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ECa correlates with various soil properties such as salinity (Rhoades et al, 1999), clay content (Triantafilis &Lesch, 2005 andWuddivira et al, 2012), water content (Haimelin, 2008) and carbon content (Martinez et al, 2009). The ECa can be used as an indirect indicator for identifying some important soil properties including soil salinity, clay content, cation exchange capacity, soil moisture content, and temperature (McNeill, 1992 andRhoades et al, 1999).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Apparent soil electrical conductivity correlates with va rious physicochemical soil properties such as salinity (Rhoades et al, 1999), clay content (Triantafilis and Lesch, 2005;Wuddivira et al, 2012), water content (Haimelin, 2008) and carbon content (Martinez et al, 2009). Recently, Atwell et al (2013) and BrĂ©chet et al (2012) showed that under humid tropical conditions, variation in ECa was influenced by temporal changes in soil moisture content, spatial variation of claysilt mineral content, soil solution electrical conductivity (ECe) and soil water repellency.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%