Advertisement

Precision Agriculture

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 19–39 | Cite as

Assessment of the position accuracy of a single-frequency GPS receiver designed for electromagnetic induction surveys

  • Sebastian RudolphEmail author
  • Ben Paul Marchant
  • Lutz Weihermüller
  • Harry Vereecken
Article
  • 157 Downloads

Abstract

In precision agriculture (PA), compact and lightweight electromagnetic induction (EMI) sensors have extensively been used to investigate the spatial variability of soil, to evaluate crop performance, and to identify management zones by mapping soil apparent electrical conductivity (ECa), a surrogate for primary and functional soil properties. As reported in the literature, differential global positioning systems (DGPS) with sub-metre to centimetre accuracy have been almost exclusively used to geo-reference these measurements. However, with the ongoing improvements in Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) technology, a single state-of-the-art DGPS receiver is likely to be more expensive than the geophysical sensor itself. In addition, survey costs quickly multiply if advanced real time kinematic correction or a base and rover configuration is used. However, the need for centimetre accuracy for surveys supporting PA is questionable as most PA applications are concerned with soil properties at scales above 1 m. The motivation for this study was to assess the position accuracy of a GNSS receiver especially designed for EMI surveys supporting PA applications. Results show that a robust, low-cost and single-frequency receiver is sufficient to geo-reference ECa measurements at the within-field scale. However, ECa data from a field characterized by a high spatial variability of subsurface properties compared to repeated ECa survey maps and remotely sensed leaf area index indicate that a lack of positioning accuracy can constrain the interpretability of such measurements. It is therefore demonstrated how relative and absolute positioning errors can be quantified and corrected. Finally, a summary of practical implications and considerations for the geo-referencing of ECa data using GNSS sensors are presented.

Keywords

Single-frequency GPS receiver GNSS position accuracy Electromagnetic induction (EMI) survey ECa 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Competence network for phenotyping science-CROP.SENSe.net). The contributions of B.P. Marchant are published with the permission of the Executive Director of the British Geological Survey (NERC).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bogena, H., Borg, E., Brauer, A., Dietrich, P., Hajnsek, I., Heinrich, I., et al. (2016). TERENO: German network of terrestrial environmental observatories. Journal of large-scale research facilities, 2, A52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bramley, R. G. V. (2009). Lessons from nearly 20 years of Precision Agriculture research, development, and adoption as a guide to its appropriate application. Crop & Pasture Science, 60(3), 197–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brevik, E. C. (2001). Evaluation of selected factors that may infl ue nce the application of electromagnetic induction technology to soil science investigations in Iowa. Retrospective Theses and Dissertations, 416. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/416.
  4. Corwin, D. L. (2008). Past, present, and future trends of soil electrical conductivity measurements using geophysical methods. In B. Allred, J. J. Daniels, & M. R. Ehsani (Eds.), Handbook of agricultural geophysics (pp. 17–44). Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cressie, N., & Kornak, J. (2003). Spatial statistics in the presence of location error with an application to remote sensing of the environment. Statistical Science, 18(4), 436–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Delefortrie, S., De Smedt, P., Saey, T., Van De Vijver, E., & Van Meirvenne, M. (2014). An efficient calibration procedure for correction of drift in EMI survey data. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 110, 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ehrl, M., Stempfhuber, W., Auernhammer, H., & Demmel, M. (2003). Quality assessment of agricultural positioning and communication systems. In J. V. Stafford & A. Werner (Eds.), Precision agriculture: Proceedings of the 4th European conference on precision agriculture (pp. 205–210). Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. El-Rabbany, A. (2006). Introduction to GPS: The global positioning system (Vol. 2). Norwood, MA, USA: Artech House.Google Scholar
  9. Francés, A. P., & Lubczynski, M. W. (2011). Topsoil thickness prediction at the catchment scale by integration of invasive sampling, surface geophysics, remote sensing and statistical modeling. Journal of Hydrology, 405, 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gottfried, T., Auerswald, K., & Ostler, U. (2012). Kinematic correction for a spatial offset between sensor and position data in on-the-go sensor applications. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 84, 76–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Huang, J., Nhan, T., Wong, V. N. L., Johnston, S. G., Lark, R. M., & Triantafilis, J. (2014). Digital soil mapping of a coastal acid sulfate soil landscape. Soil Research, 52(4), 327–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kachanoski, R. G., Gregorisch, E. G., & van Wesenbeeck, I. J. (1988). Estimating spatial variations of soil water content using noncontacting electromagnetic inductive methods. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 68, 715–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaplan, E. D., & Hegarty, C. J. (2006). Understanding GPS—Principles and applications (2nd ed.). Norwood, MA, USA: Artech House.Google Scholar
  14. Kobayashi, M., Ingels, F., & Bennett, G. (1992). Determination of the probability density function of GPS (Global Positioning Systems) positioning error. In Proceedings of the 48th annual meeting of the institute of navigation (pp. 219–232). Dayton, OH.Google Scholar
  15. Lark, R. M., Stafford, J. V., & Bolam, H. C. (1997). Limitations on the spatial resolution of yield mapping for combinable crops. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 66(3), 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leick, A., Rapoport, L., & Tatarnikov, D. (2015). GPS satellite surveying (4th ed.). New York, NJ, USA: Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. López-Lozano, R., Casterad, M. A., & Herrero, J. (2010). Site-specific management units in a commercial maize plot delineated using very high resolution remote sensing and soil properties mapping. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 73, 219–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Matérn, B. (1986). Spatial variation (Vol. 36)., Lecture Notes in Statistics New York, USA: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Matias, B., Oliveira, H., Almeida, J., Dias, A., Ferreira, H., Martins, A., et al. (2015). High-accuracy low-cost RTK-GPS for an unmannned surface vehicle. In OCEANS15 MTS (pp. 1–4). Genova: IEEE.Google Scholar
  20. McBratney, A. B., & Pringle, M. J. (1999). Estimating average and proportional variograms of soil properties and their potential use in Precision Agriculture. Precision Agriculture, 1(2), 125–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McBratney, A. B., Santos, M. L. M., & Minasny, B. (2003). On digital soil mapping. Geoderma, 117(1–2), 3–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McLoud, P. R., Gronwald, R., & Kuykendall, H. (2007). Precision agriculture: NRCS support for emerging technologies., Agronomy Technical Note No.1 Washington, DC, USA: USDA-NRCS.Google Scholar
  23. Mertens, F. M., Pätzold, S., & Welp, G. (2008). Spatial heterogeneity of soil properties and its mapping with apparent electrical conductivity. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 171, 146–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Minasny, B., & McBratney, A. B. (2005). The Matern function as a general model for soil variograms. Geoderma, 128(3–4), 192–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. National Marine Electronics Association. (2012). NMEA 0183, The Standard for Interfacing Marine Electronics. Retrieved May 01, 2017, from https://www.nmea.org/content/nmea_standards/nmea_2000_ed3_10.asp.
  26. NovAtel Inc. (2003). GPS position accuracy measures. Calgary, Canada: NovAtel Inc.Google Scholar
  27. O’Leary, G. (2006). Standards for electromagnetic induction mapping in the grains industry. In J. Peters (Ed.), GRDC precision agriculture manual Barton. Barton, Australia: Grains Research and Development Corporation.Google Scholar
  28. Odolinski, R., & Teunissen, P. J. G. (2016). Single-frequency, dual-GNSS versus dual-frequency, single-GNSS: A low-cost and high-grade receivers GPS-BDS RTK analysis. Journal of Geodesy, 90(11), 1255–1278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pesyna, K. M. J., Heath, R. W. J., & Humphreys, T. E. (2014). Centimeter positioning with a smartphone-quality GNSS Antenna. In 27th international technical meeting of the satellite division of the Institute of Navigation (pp. 1568–1577). Tampa, FL: ION Publications.Google Scholar
  30. Rudolph, S., van der Kruk, J., von Hebel, C., Ali, M., Herbst, M., Montzka, C., et al. (2015). Linking satellite derived LAI patterns with subsoil heterogeneity using large-scale ground-based electromagnetic induction measurements. Geoderma, 241–242, 262–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sudduth, K. A., Drummond, S. T., & Kitchen, N. R. (2001). Accuracy issues in electromagnetic induction sensing of soil electrical conductivity for precision agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 31(3), 239–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Takasu, T., & Yasuda, A. (2008). Evaluation of RTK-GPS performance with low-cost single-frequency GPS receivers. In International symposium on GPS/GNSS, Tokyo, Japan (pp. 852–861). Tweed Heads, Australia: IGNSS.Google Scholar
  33. Takasu, T., & Yasuda, A. (2009). Development of the low-cost RTK-GPS receiver with an open source program package RTKLIB. In International symposium on GPS/GNSS, Jeju, Korea (pp. 4–6). Tweed Heads, Australia: IGNSS.Google Scholar
  34. Taylor, R. K., Schrock, M. D., Bloomfield, J., Bora, G., Brockmeier, G., Burton, W., et al. (2004). Dynamic testing of GPS receivers. Transactions of the ASAE, 47(4), 1017–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Triantafilis, J., & Lesch, S. M. (2005). Mapping clay content variation using electromagnetic induction techniques. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 46(1–3), 203–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ublox. (2010). LEA-6 u-blox 6 GPS modules data sheet. Thalwil, Switzerland: Ublox.Google Scholar
  37. Ublox. (2016). U-center: GNSS evaluation software for Windows. Thalwil, Switzerland: Ublox.Google Scholar
  38. Vitharana, U. W. A., van Meirvenne, M., Simpson, D., Cockx, L., & de Baerdemaeker, J. (2008). Key soil and topographic properties to delineate potential management classes for precision agriculture in the European loess area. Geoderma, 143, 206–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. von Hebel, C., Rudolph, S., Mester, A., Huisman, J. A., Kumbhar, P., Vereecken, H., et al. (2014). Three-dimensional imaging of subsurface structural patterns using quantitative large-scale multiconfiguration electromagnetic induction data. Water Resources Research, 50(3), 2732–2748.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2013wr014864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Webster, R., & Oliver, M. A. (2007). Geostatistics for environmental scientists. Chichester, UK: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Weltzien, C., Noack, P. O., & Persdson, K. (2003). GPS receiver accuracy test—dynamic and static for best comparison of results. In J. Stafford & A. Werner (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th European conference on precision agriculture (pp. 717–722). Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbHAgrosphere Institute (IBG-3)JülichGermany
  2. 2.Thünen Institute of Rural StudiesBrunswickGermany
  3. 3.British Geological SurveyEnvironmental Science CentreKeyworthUK

Personalised recommendations