Real-time monitoring of water requirement in protected farms by using polynomial neural networks and image processing

  • Amaresh SarkarEmail author
  • Mrinmoy Majumder


The monitoring of water requirement in irrigation areas is mostly performed by on-farm methods like utilization of soil probes, tensiometers, or neutron probes. The probes are placed into the soil collected from different depths of the root zone of the crop. But such procedures are found to be time-consuming. As a result, non-portable capacitance-based probes were nowadays utilized for monitoring of soil moisture. However, the sensor-based non-portable system is expensive and out of reach of ordinary farmers. But an absence of on-time monitoring of soil moisture in the root zone of the soil often results in crop failure and incurs a substantial loss on the cultivators. In the present investigation, a real-time inexpensive water monitoring system was proposed to monitor soil moisture in the root zone of a crop such that both time and expenditure can be reduced. The present study is an attempt to develop a real-time monitoring process for crop water requirement (CWR) in protected farm irrigation systems as a function of the significant parameters such as soil porosity (SP), water availability, crop biomass equivalent (CBE), frequency of nutrient application, frequency of irrigation, and CWR. A systematic literature review was performed to identify parameters for CWR, which were then selected by a relevant group of experts on the field. A two-step methodology was followed to develop a function that can automatically estimate water requirement in the root zone of the crop. In the first step, a new probability optimization technique (POT) was proposed for the identification of the priority value of the selected parameters to generate an ideal scenario. In the second step, the index, developed from the parameters and respective priorities selected in the first step, was predicted recurring to polynomial neural network models. The implementation of the nonlinear transfer function in the development of the neural network framework ensures generation of a platform-independent model, which can be embedded to monitor watering requirement for crops cultivated in a protected farm concept. The data of SP and CBE were retrieved from two separate indices (index of soil porosity and biomass index) calculated from images captured from the root and surface areas of the crops. Here, the POT method was used followed by the z score of priority function of the selected parameters estimated by polynomial networks and was fed for the calculation of the water requirement index (WRI). The normalized relative difference of the WRI of two consecutive days provides the information about the necessity of watering and accordingly, the crops in the system are irrigated. The results from the decision-making method indicated that the most significant parameter among the compared factors is CWR. The peak pixel value of each column of the image, for retrieving information from captured images and to identify soil porosity and biomass, was found to be the most contributing factor. The polynomial neural network (PNN) model trained with the information from POT method was found to be the best predictive variant among all the considered configuration of the model having a mean absolute accuracy of 99.08% during the testing phase of the PNN model. This real-time system, when implemented in a real-life scenario, can conserve both water and energy expended in running the watering networks of protected farms.


Automatic irrigation system Crop yield optimization High-tech irrigation system Multi-story protected farms 


  1. Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D., & Smith, M. (1998a). Crop evapotranspiration-guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. FAO, Rome, 300(9), D05109.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, Richard G., Pereira, Luis S., Raes, Dirk, & Smith, Martin. (1998b). Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. FAO, Rome, 300(9), D05109.Google Scholar
  3. Anonymous. (2013a). Renewable energy resources. 63 Southshire Drive, Bennington, United States. Accessed November 20, 2016.
  4. Anonymous (2013b). What is a CCD? Overview. Spectral Instruments, Inc, 420 N. Bonita Ave. Tucson, AZ 85745 USA. Accessed November 20, 2016.
  5. Barron, R. L., Cellucci, R. L., Jordan, P. R., Beam, N. E., Hess, P., & Barron, A. R. (1990). Applications of polynomial neural networks to FDIE and reconfigurable flight control. In Proceedings of the IEEE national on aerospace and electronics conference, 1990. NAECON 1990 (pp. 507–519). IEEE.Google Scholar
  6. Brouwer, C., &Heibloem, M. (1986). Irrigation water management: Irrigation water needs. Training Manual, 3. FAO. Accessed November 20, 2016.
  7. David P. K. (2014). Different soils and how they help plants grow, ecosystem restoration, analytical methods, tech guide, physical properties: porosity, Montana State University Bozeman. Accessed November 20, 2016.
  8. De, P., & Majumder, M. (2017). Monitoring water input quality: Early screening and system support through the application of an adapted multiple criteria decision-making method. Desalination and Water Treatment, 82, 44–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dursun, M., & Ozden, S. (2011). A wireless application of drip irrigation automation supported by soil moisture sensors. Scientific Research and Essays, 6(7), 1573–1582.Google Scholar
  10. Easterling, D. R., Evans, J. L., Groisman, P. Y., Karl, T. R., Kunkel, K. E., & Ambenje, P. (2000). Observed variability and trends in extreme climate events: a brief review. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 81(3), 417–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Garel, E. (2017).Collection and dissemination of data from environmental monitoring systems in estuaries. In Experiment@ International Conference (exp. at’17) (4th ed., pp. 61–64). IEEE.Google Scholar
  12. Gebre, S. L., & Getahun, Y. S. (2016). Analysis of climate variability and drought frequency events on Limpopo River Basin, South Africa. Hydrology Current Research, 7, 249. Scholar
  13. Ghazali, R., Hussain, A., & El-Deredy, W. (2006). Application of ridge polynomial neural networks to financial time series prediction. In International joint conference on neural networks, 2006, IJCNN’06 (pp. 913–920). IEEE.Google Scholar
  14. Ghazali, R., Hussain, A. J., & Salleh, M. M. (2008). Application of polynomial neural networks to exchange rate forecasting. In 8th international conference on intelligent systems design and applications, 2008 ISDA’08 (Vol. 2, pp. 90–95). IEEE.Google Scholar
  15. Haddeland, I., Lettenmaier, D. P., & Skaugen, T. (2006). Effects of irrigation on the water and energy balances of the Colorado and Mekong river basins. Journal of Hydrology, 324(1), 210–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hanks, R. J. (1983). Yield and water-use relationships: An overview. In Limitations to efficient water use in crop production, limitationstoef (pp. 393–411).Google Scholar
  17. Harpham, C., Dawson, C. W., & Brown, M. R. (2004). A review of genetic algorithms applied to training radial basis function networks. Neural Computing and Applications, 13(3), 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hassan-Esfahani, L., Ebtehaj, A. M., Torres-Rua, A., & McKee, M. (2017). Spatial scale gap filling using an unmanned aerial system: A statistical downscaling method for applications in precision agriculture. Sensors, 17(9), 2106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hochmuth, G. J. (1992). Fertilizer management for drip-irrigated vegetables in Florida. HortTechnology, 2(1), 27–32.Google Scholar
  20. Kacira, M., & Ling, P. P. (2001). Design and development of an automated and Non–contact sensing system for continuous monitoring of plant health and growth. Transactions of the ASAE, 44(4), 989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lambin, E. F., & Meyfroidt, P. (2011). Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(9), 3465–3472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lehner, B., Döll, P., Alcamo, J., Henrichs, T., & Kaspar, F. (2006). Estimating the impact of global change on flood and drought risks in Europe: A continental, integrated analysis. Climatic Change, 75(3), 273–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. MAIB. (2015). Frequency of irrigation, water management including micro irrigation, Agriculture Information Bank (MAIB).
  24. MDA. (2017). Irrigation management, conservation practices. Minnesota Conservation Funding Guide, Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA), Saint Paul, USA. Accessed November 20, 2017.
  25. Meade, Maureen O., Guyatt, Gordon H., Cook, Richard J., Groll, Ryan, Kachura, John R., Wigg, Melanie, et al. (2001). Agreement between alternative classifications of acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 163(2), 490–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mizoguchi, M., Mitsuishi, S., Ito, T., Oki, K., Ninomiya, S., Hirafuji, M., Fukatsu, T., Kiura, T., Tanaka, K., Toritani, H. and Hamada, H., (2008). Real-time monitoring of soil information in agricultural fields in Asia using Field server. In Proceedings of 1st global workshop on high resolution digital soil sensing and mapping (Vol. 2, pp. 19–24). Accessed November 20, 2016.
  27. Mosavi, M. R. (2008). Recurrent polynomial neural networks for enhancing performance of GPS based line fault location. In 9th International conference on signal processing, 2008, ICSP. (pp. 1668–1672). IEEE.Google Scholar
  28. Mosavi, M. R. (2009). Recurrent polynomial neural networks for enhancing performance of GPS in electric systems. Wireless Sensor Network, 1(02), 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nagle, L. K. (2016). Protected Food Production: Applications and Modeling (Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University).Google Scholar
  30. Nimmo, J. R., & Hillel, D. (2004). Porosity and pore size distribution. Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment, 3, 295–303.Google Scholar
  31. Raju, K. S., Kumar, D. N., & Duckstein, L. (2006). Artificial neural networks and multicriterion analysis for sustainable irrigation planning. Computers & Operations Research, 33(4), 1138–1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rudolph-Mohr, N., Vontobel, P., & Oswald, S. E. (2014). A multi-imaging approach to study the root–soil interface. Annals of Botany, 114(8), 1779–1787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sheppard, J., & Hoyle, F. (2016). Water availability, fact sheets, soil quality Pty Ltd, The University of Western Australia. Accessed November 20, 2016.
  34. SMART Fertilizer management (2008). Timing and frequency of fertilizer application.
  35. Sprenger, M., Tetzlaff, D., & Soulsby, C. (2017). Stable isotopes reveal evaporation dynamics at the soil-plant-atmosphere interface of the critical zone. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussion. (In review).
  36. Steduto, P., Hsiao, T. C., Fereres, E., & Raes, D. (2012). Crop yield response to water. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  37. Stephen, G. (2002). Best management practices for irrigating vegetables, extension specialist in vegetable crops, rutgers cooperative extension. New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.Google Scholar
  38. Testezlaf, R., Zazueta, F. S., & Yeager, T. H. (1997). A real-time irrigation control system for greenhouses. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 13(3), 329–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tetko, I. V., Aksenova, T. I., Volkovich, V. V., Kasheva, T. N., Filipov, D. V., Welsh, W. J., et al. (2000). Polynomial neural network for linear and non-linear model selection in quantitative-structure activity relationship studies on the internet. SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research, 11(3–4), 263–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tran, N. (2016). Irrigation scheduling based on cumulative vapour pressure deficit to predict nursery tree water stress (Doctoral dissertation).Google Scholar
  41. Treftz, C., & Omaye, S. T. (2016). Comparison between hydroponic and soil systems for growing strawberries in a greenhouse. International Journal of Agricultural Extension, 3(3), 195–200.Google Scholar
  42. Valipour, M. (2012). A comparison between horizontal and vertical drainage systems (include pipe drainage, open ditch drainage, and pumped wells) in anisotropic soils. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, 4(1), 7–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Valipour, M. (2014). Application of new mass transfer formulae for computation of evapotranspiration. Journal of Applied Water Engineering and Research, 2(1), 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Valipour, M. (2015). Future of agricultural water management in Africa. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 61(7), 907–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Valipour, M. (2016). How much meteorological information is necessary to achieve reliable accuracy for rainfall estimations? Agriculture, 6(4), 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Valipour, M. (2017). Global experience on irrigation management under different scenarios. Journal of Water and Land Development, 32, 95–102. Scholar
  47. Valipour, M., Banihabib, M. E., & Behbahani, S. M. R. (2013). Comparison of the ARMA, ARIMA, and the autoregressive artificial neural network models in forecasting the monthly inflow of Dez dam reservoir. Journal of Hydrology, 476, 433–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Valipour, M., Sefidkouhi, M. A. G., & Raeini, M. (2017). Selecting the best model to estimate potential evapotranspiration with respect to climate change and magnitudes of extreme events. Agricultural Water Management, 180, 50–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Van Zanten, H. H., Mollenhorst, H., Klootwijk, C. W., van Middelaar, C. E., & de Boer, I. J. (2016). Global food supply: Land use efficiency of livestock systems. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 21(5), 747–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Velasquez, M., & Hester, P. T. (2013). An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. International Journal of Operations Research, 10(2), 56–66.Google Scholar
  51. Viero, D. P., & Valipour, M. (2017). Modeling anisotropy in free-surface overland and shallow inundation flows. Advances in Water Resources, 104, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vyas, K. N., & Subbaiah, R. (2016). Application of artificial neural network approach for estimating reference evapotranspiration. Current World Environment, 11(2), 637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wang, X., Li, L., Lockington, D., Pullar, D., & Jeng, D. S. (2005). Self-organizing polynomial neural network for modelling complex hydrological processes. Research Report No R861, Department of Civil Engineering.Google Scholar
  54. Wilhite, D. A., & Glantz, M. H. (1985). Understanding: the drought phenomenon: the role of definitions. Water international, 10(3), 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yakowitz, D. S., Lane, L. J., & Szidarovszky, F. (1993). Multi-attribute decision making: Dominance with respect to an importance order of the attributes. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 54(2–3), 167–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Yannopoulos, S. I., Lyberatos, G., Theodossiou, N., Li, W., Valipour, M., Tamburrino, A., et al. (2015). Evolution of water lifting devices (pumps) over the centuries worldwide. Water, 7(9), 5031–5060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yin, H.Y., Huang, C.J., Chen, C.Y., Fang, Y.M., Lee, B.J. and Chou, T.Y., (2011). The present development of debris flow monitoring technology in Taiwan—A case study presentation. In Genevois, R., Hamilton, D. L., & Prestininzi, A. (Eds.) 5th International conference on debris-flow hazards mitigation: Mechanics, prediction and assessment. Casa Editrice Universita La Sapienza, Roma (pp. 623–631). Accessed November 20, 2016.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringNational Institute of TechnologyAgartalaIndia

Personalised recommendations