search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
PHOTO: RUUD PLOEG


PHOTO: RUUD PLOEG


SOIL SCANNERS ▶▶▶


Soil scans are reliable, but no miracle solution


According to Dutch research, soil scans give a reliable picture of soil conditions, but it is unclear which type of scan provides the best results on a specific soil type.


S BY LEO THOLHUIJSEN


ylvan Nysten, a lecturer/researcher in Sustainable Soil Management at the Aeres University of Applied Sciences in the Dutch city of Dronten, reviewed


5 types of soil scans for the Dutch Experimen- tal Ground for Precision Farming (NPPL). “I was rather sceptical about some of the maps that these scans provide. So few data that yield so much information? I certainly had my doubts, but they work, are reliable enough and do not fail. The results actually are not bad.” But he does think that viewing the scans’ ability to map all characteristics at once as some miracle cure is somewhat exaggerated.


Possibilities for soil scans The possibilities that soil scans and the corre- sponding maps offer for precision farming are quite diverse, Mr Nysten writes in his report ‘Usage of soil scans for Smart Farming’. “Exam- ples are variable fertilising, compost, lime spreading, planting distance etc. It is impor- tant that the farmer knows what he wants


know where those spots are and how big they are if you use a scan. This means that you can add meaning to the scans, together with the information the grower already has. A scan pre- cisely shows the spots the grower already roughly has in his mind. They add precision to what the grower already knows.”


Measuring the soil’s conductivity (EC) be- tween the discs. Right after the harvest it was too dry for results, so the measurement was repeated later.


beforehand, and which soil scan fits this pur- pose. An EC-map for example, shows the differ- ences in electric conductivity and that the soil differs from place to place. In theory, this can have different causes, but you can be sure that the blue spots on one scan map equal the blue spots on a different part of the plot as far as the soil’s characteristics go. If you asked a farmer to draw a map of his plot and the soil differences by heart, he will produce something like the scan map. The difference is that you exactly


Refining your own observations


Sylvan Nysten is a lecturer and researcher in Sustainable Soil Management at the Aeres Hogeschool in the Dutch city of Dronten and reviewed 5 types of soil scans for the Dutch Experimental Ground for Precision Farming (NPPL). “As a soil specialist, I do think that you should get out in the field yourself to see if there is anything meaningful to say about the soil. Scans are indeed useful if you check out the field after making them, because


they do not show everything. The added val- ue of using these scans is visualising varia- tion, after which you specifically check out the field. I also see the scans as instruments to refine your own observations, to make them more accurate. You always need to know what you see and whether that matches with what you already know. In other words, you need to know what you are looking for, otherwise a scan is pointless.”


5 scans listed But how reliable are the scans and the maps they produce? And is every scan suitable for every type of soil? Several NPPL participants and many other farmers asked these ques- tions. The following soil scans were compared to get answers to these questions: • Bioscope aerial images • CNH SoilXplorer • Dualem-21S (LoonwerkGPS) • Loonstra Passive gamma soil scanner • Veris MSP3 (Vantage Agrometius) To test the soil scans’ reliability, they were de- ployed on a 14-hectare summer barley plot with clay type soils. Only the results of the Loonstra Passive gamma soil scanner, the Du- alem-21S and the Veris MSP3 were reviewed, because they were the only scanners that pro- duced concrete organic material and lutum values. Vantage Agrometius did not supply a pH-map from the Veris MSP3, because it is not relevant for clay soil. For the Loonstra and


Nysten: “I was rather sceptical about some of the maps these scans provide. The re- sults actually are not bad.”


▶ FUTURE FARMING | 24 May 2019 25


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52