Skip to main content

Is a Systematic Two-Dimensional EMI Soil Survey Always Relevant for Vineyard Production Management? A Test on Two Pedologically Contrasting Mediterranean Vineyards

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Proximal Soil Sensing

Part of the book series: Progress in Soil Science ((PROSOIL))

Abstract

Thanks to recent technological developments, apparent soil electrical conductivity (ECa) can now be mapped over large areas, providing new data for precision agriculture. However, in Mediterranean vineyards, rooting depth can be greater than usual and the volume of soil that needs to be explored is greater. This study examined two vineyard blocks in southern France and looked at the ability of an ECa map, derived from a commercial mobile EMI system, to predict water-related vineyard variability [defined by variation in a normalised difference vegetation index (NDVI) map of the canopy]. To validate the ECa–canopy relationship, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) profiles and soil observations (42 soil cores sampled to 4 m depth) were made over seven representative transects across the two blocks. In one of the blocks, the ECa map and the NDVI map were correlated, whereas only weak correlations were found for the other block. The examination of ERT data and soil observations in the first block showed a clear relation between soil electrical properties and soil properties known to influence vine water supply (e.g. bedrock depth) and a good discrimination of ERT measures at the measurement depth explored by EM38. In contrast, the second block showed lower ERT measurements and they were not directly related to any soil property that could cause variations in plant water. The contrasting responses between the two blocks demonstrate, as a prerequisite to ECa survey, the importance of prior and local knowledge of soil patterns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Corwin DL, Lesch SM (2005) Apparent soil electrical conductivity measurements in agriculture. Comput Electron Agric 46:11–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dabas M, Tabbagh A (2003) A comparison of EMI and DC methods used in soil mapping – theoretical considerations for precision agriculture. In: Stafford J, Werner A (eds) Precision agriculture. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, pp 121–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Falipou P, Legros JP (2002) Le système STIPA-2000 d’entrée et édition des données pour la banque nationale de sols DONESOL II. Etude et Gestion des Sols 9:55–70 (in French)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamb DW, Mitchell A, Hyde G (2005) Vineyard trellising with steel posts distorts data from EM soil surveys. Aust J Grape Wine Res 11:24–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loke MH (2002) Tutorial: 2D and 3D electrical imaging surveys. Technical note, 2nd edn. Malaysia

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie D (2000) Soil survey options prior to vineyard design. Aust Grapegrower Winemaker Annu Tech Issue 438a:144–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samouëlian A, Cousin I, Tabbagh A, Bruand A, Richard G (2005) Electrical resistivity survey in soil science: a review. Soil Till Res 83:173–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sudduth KA, Drummond ST, Kitchen NR (2001) Accuracy issues in electromagnetic induction sensing of soil electrical conductivity for precision agriculture. Comput Electron Agric 31: 239–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sudduth KA, Kitchen NR, Bollero GA, Bullock DG, Wiebold WJ (2003) Comparison of electromagnetic induction and direct sensing of soil electrical conductivity. Agron J 95:472–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor J, Tisseyre B, Praat J-P (2005) Bottling good information: mixing tradition and technology in vineyards. Frutic ’05 symposium, Montpellier, France, Sept 12–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Telford WM, Geldart LP, Sheriff RE (1990) Applied geophysics, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Visser H, de Nijs T (2006) The map comparison kit. Environ Model Software 21:346–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This experiment was carried out in the ‘Pech Rouge’ vineyards of the INRA experimental laboratory and was undertaken within the program ‘Institut Languedocien de l’Eau et de l’Environnement’. We thank particularly Mr. O. Huttel for his help in ERT measurements and data inversion and J.L. Belotti for his help in soil sampling. The authors thank J. Taylor for assisting with the English as well as improving comments and analysis of our results.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Coulouma .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Coulouma, G., Tisseyre, B., Lagacherie, P. (2010). Is a Systematic Two-Dimensional EMI Soil Survey Always Relevant for Vineyard Production Management? A Test on Two Pedologically Contrasting Mediterranean Vineyards. In: Viscarra Rossel, R., McBratney, A., Minasny, B. (eds) Proximal Soil Sensing. Progress in Soil Science. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8859-8_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics