Translator Disclaimer
12 October 2016 Precision and accuracy of time-domain reflectometry and capacitive probes to determine soil electrical conductivity in cranberry production — Technical note
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

A recent study suggests a sensitivity of cranberry to saline stress. Consequently, monitoring of soil electrical conductivity may help growers to identify areas where plants could be under stress due to salt deposits. We used two different types of probes, a time-domain reflectometry (TDR; model CS645 probe) and a capacitive approach (model GS3 probe) to estimate electrical conductivity (EC) or conductance (G). The estimates were compared with measurements of EC in soil pore water using suction lysimeters in a sandy soil exposed to two different irrigation methods and a wide range of salt concentrations in a greenhouse. Linear regression analysis of TDR conductance versus measured EC in pore water gave coefficients of determination (R 2) between 0.24 and 0.98 and required specific calibration to accurately reproduce the suction lysimeter EC values. The GS3 probes had higher R 2 values, between 0.54 and 0.98, and were generally easier to work, gave a better accuracy, and had a regression slope not significantly different from 1, result better than with the TDR probes. For both probes, data averaging increased the accuracy in estimates of soil solution EC, as did specific calibration of the probes for the EC values value within the range of 0–5 dS m-1.

Copyright remains with the author(s) or their institution(s). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
M.-E. Samson, J. Caron, S. Pepin, B. Parys, and J. Fortin "Precision and accuracy of time-domain reflectometry and capacitive probes to determine soil electrical conductivity in cranberry production — Technical note," Canadian Journal of Soil Science 97(1), 31-37, (12 October 2016). https://doi.org/10.1139/cjss-2016-0019
Received: 12 February 2016; Accepted: 1 September 2016; Published: 12 October 2016
JOURNAL ARTICLE
7 PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top