Citation
Soil moisture sensors

Material Information

Title:
Soil moisture sensors
Series Title:
Bulletin
Creator:
Zazueta, F. S ( Fedro S )
Xin, Jiannong, 1961-
Florida Cooperative Extension Service
Place of Publication:
Gainesville
Publisher:
Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
12 p. : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Soil moisture -- Measurement ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
General Note:
Title from caption.
General Note:
"April 1994."
Statement of Responsibility:
Fedro S. Zazueta and Jiannong Xin.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
AAA6791 ( LTQF )
AKA2280 ( LTUF )
30692174 ( OCLC )
026329706 ( ALEPHBIBNUM )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text




UNIVERSITY OF

SFLORIDA

Florida Cooperative Extension Service


Soil Moisture Sensors'


Bulletin 292
April 1994


Fedro S. Zazueta and Jiannong Xin2


INTRODUCTION

This bulletin is a survey and classification of the
general methods for determining soil moisture. The
techniques reviewed here involve the use of
gravimetric, nuclear, electromagnetic, tensiometric,
hygrometric, and remote sensing processes. Other
miscellaneous methods are grouped under the
heading Other Related Papers. Each of the soil
moisture measuring methods is presented by means of
(1) simple description, (2) measured parameter, (3)
estimated response time, (4) disadvantages, (5)
advantages, and (6) related papers.

GRAVIMETRIC TECHNIQUES

1. Description:

The oven-drying technique is probably the most
widely used of all gravimetric methods for measuring
soil moisture and is the standard for the calibration of
all other soil moisture determination techniques. This
method involves removing a soil sample from the field
and determining the mass of water content in relation
to the mass of dry soil. Although the use of this
technique ensures accurate measurements, it also has
a number of disadvantages: laboratory equipment,
sampling tools, and 24 hours of drying time are
required. In addition, it is a destructive test in that it
requires sample removal. This makes it impossible to
measure soil moisture at exactly the same point at a
later date. Eventually, measurements will become


inaccurate because of field variability from one site to
another.

2. Measured Parameter.

Mass water content (percentage of dry vs. wet soil
weight)

3. Response Time: a 24 hours

4. Disadvantages:

Destructive test
Time consuming
Inapplicable to automatic control
Must know dry bulk density and transform
data to volume moisture content

5. Advantages:

Ensures accurate measurements
Not dependent on salinity and soil type
Easy to calculate

6. Related Literature:

Erbach, D.C. 1983. Measurement of soil moisture
and bulk density. ASAE Paper No. 83-1553.

Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods
of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and
Mineralogical Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy


1. This document is Bulletin 292, a series of the Agricultural Engineering Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food
and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Publication date: April 1994. First published: June 1993 as Special Series AGE-27.
2. FS. Zazueta, Professor, Agricultural Engineering Department; Jiannong Xin, Graduate Assistant, Agricultural Engineering Department,
Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville FL 32611.
The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer authorized to provide research,
educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function without regard to race, color, sex, age, handicap,
or national origin. For information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension Service office.
Florida Cooperative Extension Service / Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences / University of Florida / John T. Woeste, Dean

utinvl Y OF FLOSIBA L BRARIES






Soil Moisture Sensors


Series No. 9. Am. Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition,
pp. 493-544.

Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980.
Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture
in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers,
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab.,
Special Report 80-31.

Reynolds, S.G. 1970. The gravimetric method of soil
moisture determination part I: a study of
equipment, and methodological problems. J.
Hydrology. Vol. 11, pp. 258-273.

Reynolds, S.G. 1970. The gravimetric method of soil
moisture determination part II: typical required
sample sizes and methods of reducing variability.
J. Hydrology. Vol. 11, pp. 274-287.

Reynolds, S.G. 1970. The gravimetric method of soil
moisture determination part III: an examination
of factors influencing soil moisture variability. J.
Hydrology. Vol. 11, pp. 288-300.

Taylor, SA. 1955. Field determinations of soil
moisture. Ag. Engineering. 26:654-659.

NUCLEAR TECHNIQUES

Neutron Scattering

1. Description:

Neutron scattering is widely used for estimating
volumetric water content. With this method, fast
neutrons emitted from a radioactive source are
thermalized or slowed down by hydrogen atoms in the
soil. Since most hydrogen atoms in the soil are
components of water molecules, the proportion of
thermalized neutrons is related to soil water content.
This method offers the advantage of measuring a
large soil volume, and also the possibility of scanning
at several depths to obtain a profile of moisture
distribution. However, it also has a number of
disadvantages: the high cost of the instrument,
radiation hazard, insensitivity near the soil surface,
insensitivity to small variations in moisture content at
different points within a 30 to 40 cm radius, and
variation in readings due to soil density variations,
which may cause an error rate of up to 15 percent
(Phene, 1988). 1 0 I


: w.-;t


2. Measured Parameter:

Volumetric water content (percentage of volume)

3. Response Time: 1 to 2 min.

4. Disadvantages:

Costly
Dependent on dry bulk density and salinity
Radiation hazard
Must calibrate for different types of soils
Access tubes must be installed and removed
Depth resolution questionable
Measurement partially dependent on physical
and chemical soil properties
Depth probe cannot measure soil water near
soil surface
Subject to electrical drift and failure

5. Advantages:

Nondestructive
Possible to obtain profile of water content in
soil
Water can be measured in any phase
Can be automated for one site to monitor
spatial and temporal soil water
Measurement directly related to soil water
content

6. Related Literature:

Augustin, BJ. and G.H. Snyder. 1984. Moisture
sensor-controlled irrigation for maintaining
bermudagrass turf. Agron. J., 76:848-850.

Bavel, C.H.M., D.R. Nielsen and J.M. Davidson.
1961. Calibration and characteristics of two
neutron moisture probes. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
Proc., Vol. 25. pp. 329-333.

Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods of
Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical
Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy Series No. 9.
Am. Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition, pp. 493-544.

Gardner, Wilford and Don Kirkham. 1952.
Determination of soil moisture by neutron
scattering. Soil Sci., Vol. 73, pp. 391-401.


Page 2






Soil Moisture Sensors


Goodspees, MJ. 1981. Neutron moisture meter
theory. Soil Water Assessment by The Neutron
Method. Gsiro, Australia.

Klenke, J.M., A.L. Flint and R.A. Nicholson. 1987.
A collimated neutron probe for soil-moisture
measurements. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 21-28.

Lawless, G.P, NA. MacGillivray and P.R. Nixon.
1963. Soil moisture interface effects upon
readings of neutron moisture probes. Soil Sci.
Soc. Am. Proc., Vol. 27. pp. 502-507.

Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980.
Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture
in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers,
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab.,
Special Report 80-31.

Rawls, WJ. and L.E. Asmussen. 1973. Neutron
probe field calibration for soil in the Georgia
Coastal Plain. Soil Sci., 110, pp. 262-265.

Simpson, J.R. and JJ. Meyer. 1987. Water content
measurements comparing a TDR array to neutron
scattering. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 111-114.

Stafford, J.V. 1988. Remote, non-contact and in-situ
measurement of soil moisture content: a review.
J. Agric. Eng. Res. 41:151-172.

Taylor, S.A. 1955. Field determinations of soil
moisture. Ag. Engineering. 26:654-659.

Tollner, E.W. and R.B. Noss. 1988. Neutron probe
vs. tensiometer vs. gypsum blocks for monitoring
soil moisture status. Sensors and Techniques for
Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation
Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA
93740-0018. pp. 95-112.

Tyler, S.W. 1987. Application of neutron moisture
meters in large diameter boreholes. International
Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant


Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 41-
44.

Gamma Attenuation

1. Description:

The gamma ray attenuation method is a
radioactive technique that can be used to determine
soil moisture content. This method assumes that the
scattering and absorption of gamma rays are related
to the density of matter in their path and that the
specific gravity of a soil remains relatively constant as
the wet density changes with increases or decreases in
moisture. Changes in wet density are measured by
the gamma transmission technique and the moisture
content is determined from this density change.

2. Measured Parameter: Volumetric water content

3. Response Time: < 1 min.

4. Disadvantages:

Restricted to soil thickness of 1 inch or less,
but with high resolution
Affected by soil bulk density changes
Costly and difficult to use
Large errors possible when used in highly
stratified soils

5. Advantages:

Can determine mean water content with
depth
Can be automated for automatic
measurements and recording
Can measure temporal changes in soil water
Nondestructive measurement

6. Related Literature:

Gardner, W.H., G.S. Campbell and C. Calissendorff.
1972. Systematic and random errors in dual
gamma energy soil bulk density and water content
measurements. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 36:393-
398.

Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods of
Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical


Page 3






Soil Moisture Sensors


Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy Series No. 9. Am.
Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition, pp. 493-544.

Gurr, C.C. 1959. Use of gamma rays in measuring
water content and permeability in unsaturated
columns of soil. Soil Sci. pp. 224-229.

Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980.
Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture
in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers,
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab.,
Special Report 80-31.

Nofziger, D.L. 1978. Errors in Gamma-ray
measurements of water content and bulk density
in nonuniform soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc.,
Vol. 42. pp. 845-850.

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance

1. Description:

With this technique, water in the soil is subjected
to both a static and an oscillating magnetic field at
right angles to each other. A radio frequency
detection coil, turning capacitor, and electromagnet
coil are used as sensors to measure the spin echo and
free induction decays. Nuclear magnetic resonance
imaging can discriminate between bound and free
water in the soil.

2. Measured Parameter: Volumetric water content

3. Response Time: < 1 min.

4. Disadvantages: Same as for neutron scattering

5. Advantages: Same as for neutron scattering

6. Related Literature:

Anderson, S.H. and CJ. Gantzer. 1987.
Determination of soil water content by X-ray
computed tomography and NMR imaging.
International Conference on Measurement of Soil
and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State
Univ., pp. 239-246.

Paetzold, R.F., A.D. Santos and GA. Matzkanin.
1987. Pulsed nuclear magnetic resonance
instrument for soil-water content measurement:
sensor configurations. Soil Sci. Am. J. 51:287-
290.


Stafford, J.V. 1988. Remote, non-contact and in-situ
measurement of soil moisture content: a review.
J. Ag. Eng. Res. 41:151-172.

Tollner, E.W., J.M. Cheshire, Jr. and B.P. Verma.
1987. X-ray computed tomography and nuclear
magnetic resonance for soil systems.
International Conference on Measurement of Soil
and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State
Univ., pp. 247-254.

ELECTROMAGNETIC TECHNIQUES

Resistive Sensor (General)

1. Description:

Electromagnetic techniques include methods that
depend upon the effect of moisture on the electrical
properties of soil. Soil resistivity depends on
moisture content; hence it can serve as the basis for
a sensor. It is possible either to measure the
resistivity between electrodes in a soil or to measure
the resistivity of a material in equilibrium with the
soil. The difficulty with resistive sensors is that the
absolute value of soil resistivity depends on ion
concentration as well as on moisture concentration.
Therefore, careful calibration is required for these
techniques.

2. Measured Parameter:

Soil water potential aided by electrical resistance
measurements

3. Response Time: Instantaneous

4. Disadvantages:

Calibration not stable with time and affected
by ionic concentration
Cost of equipment to generate signal and
readout system is high but could decrease
with new solid-state technology

5. Advantages:

Theoretically, can provide absolute soil water
content
Can determine water content at any depth
Sensor configuration can vary in size so
sphere of influence or measurement is
adjustable


Page 4







Soil Moisture Sensors


Relatively high level of precision when ionic
concentration of the soil does not change
Can be read by remote methods

Resistive Sensor (Gypsum)

1. Description:

One of the most common methods of estimating
matric potential is with gypsum or porous blocks.
The device consists of a porous block containing two
electrodes connected to a wire lead. The porous
block is made of gypsum or fiberglass. When the
device is buried in the soil, water will move in or out
of the block until the matric potential of the block
and the soil are the same. The electrical conductivity
of the block is then read with an alternating current
bridge. A calibration curve is made to relate
electrical conductivity to the matric potential for any
particular soil. Using a porous electrical resistance
block system offers the advantage of low cost and the
possibility of measuring the same location in the field
throughout the season. The blocks function over the
entire range of soil water availability. The
disadvantage of the porous block system is that each
block has somewhat different characteristics and must
be individually calibrated. The main disadvantage of
the gypsum block is that the calibration changes
gradually with time, limiting the life of the block
(Phene, 1988).

2. Measured Parameter: Soil moisture tension

3. Response Time: 2 to 3 hours

4. Disadvantages:


Each block requires individual calibration
Calibration changes with time
Life of device limited
Provides inaccurate measurements


5. Advantages: Inexpensive

6. Related Literature:

Armstrong, C. Fletcher, J.T. Ligon and M.F. Mcleod.
1987. Automated system for detailed
measurement of soil water potential profiles using
watermark brand sensors. International
Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant
Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ.,
pp. 201-206.


Bloodworth, M.E. and J.B. Page. 1957. Use of
thermistor for the measurement of soil moisture
and temperature. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., Vol.
21. pp. 11-15.

Bouyoucos, G.J. and AH. Mick. 1948. A
comparison of electric resistance units for making
a continuous measurement of soil moisture under
field conditions. Plant Physiology. pp. 532-543.

Bouyoucos, G.J. and R.L. Cook. 1961. Humidity
sensor: permanent electric hygrometer for
continuous measurement of the relative humidity
of the air. Soil Sci., Vol. 100. pp.63-67.

Carlson, T.N. and J.E. Salem. 1987. Measurement of
soil moisture using gypsum blocks. International
Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant
Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ.,
pp. 193-200.

Cary, J.W. and H.D. Fisher. 1983. Irrigation
decisions simplified with electronics and soil water
sensors. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 47:1219-1223.

Collins, J.E. 1987. Soil moisture regimes of
rangelands: using datapods to record soil
moisture. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 193-200.

Erbach, D.C. 1983. Measurement of soil moisture
and bulk density. ASAE Paper No. 83-1553.

Fowler, W.B. and W. Lopushinsky. 1987. An
economical, digital readout for soil moisture
blocks. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 215-218.

Fowler, W.B. and W. Lopushinsky. 1989. An
economical, digital meter for gypsum soil
moisture blocks. Soil Sci. Am. J. 53:302-305.

Freeland R.S. 1989. Review of soil moisture sensing
using soil electrical conductivity. Trans. of ASAE,
Vol. 32(6):2190-2194.

Freeland, R.S., L.M. Callahan and R.D. Von Bernuth.
1990. Instrumentation for sensing rhizosphere
temperature and moisture levels. Applied
Engineering in Agriculture. 6(1):106-110.


Page 5







Soil Moisture Sensors


Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods of
Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical
Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy Series No. 9.
Am. Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition, pp. 493-544.

Henson, Jr., W.H., G.M. Turner, M. Collins and OJ.
Yeoman. 1987. Electrical measurement of the
moisture content of Baled Alfalfa Hay. Paper
No. 87-1073, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI 49058.

Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980.
Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture
in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers,
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab.,
Special Report 80-31.

Rose, M.A. and J.M. Russo. 1987. Integrated system
for evaluating performance of soil moisture units
in field capacity conditions. International
Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant
Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ.,
pp. 207-214.

Taylor, S.A. 1955. Field determinations of soil
moisture. Agr. Engineering. 26:654-659.

Thomson, SJ. and C.F. Armstrong. 1987.
Calibration of the watermark model 200 soil
moisture sensor. Applied Eng. in Agr. Vol. 3. pp.
186-189.

Tollner, E.W. and R.B. Noss. 1988. Neutron probe
vs. tensiometers vs. gypsum blocks for monitoring
soil moisture status. Sensors and Techniques for
Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation
Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA
93740-0018. pp. 95-112.


Wheeler, PA. and G.L.
Electromagnetic detection
ASAE Paper No. 84-2078.


Duncan. 1984.
of soil moisture.


Capacitive Sensor

1. Description:

Soil moisture content may be determined via its
effect on dielectric constant by measuring the
capacitance between two electrodes implanted in the
soil. Where soil moisture is predominantly in the
form of free water (e.g., in sandy soils), the dielectric
constant is directly proportional to the moisture
content. The probe is normally given a frequency
excitation to permit measurement of the dielectric


constant. The readout from the probe is not linear
with water content and is influenced by soil type and
soil temperature. Therefore, careful calibration is
required and long-term stability of the calibration is
questionable.

2. Measured Parameter:

Volumetric soil water content

3. Response Time: Instantaneous

4. Disadvantages:

Long-term stability questionable
Costly

5. Advantages:

Theoretically, can provide absolute soil water
content
Water content can be determined at any
depth
Sensor configuration can vary in size so
sphere of influence or measurement is
adjustable
Relatively high level of precision when ionic
concentration of soil does not change
Can be read by remote methods

6. Related Literature:

Bell, J.P., TJ. Dean and AJ.B. Baty. 1987. Soil
moisture measurement by an improved
capacitance technique, Part II. Field techniques,
evaluation and calibration. J. of Hydrology.
93:79-90.

Dean, TJ., J.P. Bell and A.J.B. Baty. 1987. Soil
moisture measurement by an improved
capacitance technique, Part I. Sensor design and
performance. J. of Hydrology. 93:67-78.

Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods
of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and
Mineralogical Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy
Series No. 9. Am. Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition,
pp. 493-544.

Halbertsma, J., C. Przybyla and A. Jacobs. 1987.
Application and accuracy of a dielectric soil water
content meter. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 11-16.


Page 6







Soil Moisture Sensors


Malicki, M.A., E.C. Campbell and RJ. Hanks. 1987.
Investigation on power factor of the soil electrical
impedance as related to moisture, salinity and
bulk density. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 233-238.

Malicki, M.A. and RJ. Hanks. 1989. Interfacial
contribution to two-electrode soil moisture
sensors reading. Irrig. Sci., 10:41-54.

Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980.
Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture
in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers,
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab.,
Special Report 80-31.

Varallyay, G. and K. Rajkal. 1987. Soil moisture
content and moisture potential measuring
techniques in Hungarian soil survey.
International Conference on Measurement of Soil
and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State
Univ., pp. 183-184.

Time-Domain Reflectometer (TDR)

1. Description:

Time-domain reflectometer (TDR)
determinations involve measuring the propagation of
electromagnetic (EM) waves or signals. Propagation
constants for EM waves in soil, such as velocity and
attenuation, depend on soil properties, especially
water content and electrical conductivity. The
propagation of electrical signals in soil is influenced
by soil water content and electrical conductivity. The
dielectric constant, measured by TDR, provides a
good measurement of this soil water content. This
water content determination is essentially independent
of soil texture, temperature, and salt content.

2. Measured Parameter:

Volumetric water content aided by propagation of
electromagnetic wave measurements.

3. Response Time: = 28 sec.

4. Disadvantages: Costly

5. Advantages:

Independent of soil texture, temperature, and
salt content


Possible to perform long-term in situ
measurements
Can be automated

6. Related Literature:

Baker, J.M. and R.R. Allmaras. 1990. System for
automating and multiplexing soil moisture
measurement by time-domain reflectometry. J.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am., 54(1):1-6.

Dalton, F.N. 1987. Measurement of soil water
content and electrical conductivity using time-
domain reflectometry. International Conference
on Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 95-98.

Dasberg, S. and F.N. Dalton. 1985. Time domain
reflectometry field measurements of soil water
content and electrical conductivity. Soil Sci. Soc.
Am. J., 49:293-297.

Dasberg, S. and A. Nadler. 1987. Field sampling of
soil water content and electrical conductivity with
time domain reflectometry. International
Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant
Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ.,
pp. 99-102.

Drungil, C.E.C., K. Abt and TJ. Gish. 1989. Soil
moisture determination in gravelly soils with time
domain reflectometry. Transaction of ASAE,
Vol. 32(1), pp. 177-180.

Heimovaara, TJ. and W. Bouten. 1990. A
computer-controlled 36-channel time domain
reflectometry system for monitoring soil water
contents. Water Resource Research, Vol. 26, pp.
2311-2316.

Herkelrath, W.N., S.P. Hamburg and Fred Murry.
1991. Automatic, real-time monitoring of soil
moisture in a remote field area with time domain
reflectometry. Water Resour. Res., Vol. 27, pp.
857-864.

Reeves, T.L. and S.M. Elgezawi. 1992. Time domain
reflectometry for measuring volumetric water
content in processed oil shale waste. Water
Resource Research, 28:769-776.

Simpson, J.R. and JJ. Meyer. 1987. Water content
measurements comparing a TDR array to neutron
scattering. International Conference on


Page 7







Soil Moisture Sensors


Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 111-114.

Stein, J. and D.L. Kane. 1983. Monitoring the
unfrozen water-content of soil and snow using
time domain reflectometry. Water Resour. Res.,
19:1573-1584.

Topp, G.C. 1980. Electromagnetic determination of
soil water content: measurements in coaxial
transmission lines. Water Resources Research,
16:574-582.

Topp, G.C., J.L. Davis and A.P. Annan. 1982.
Electromagnetic determination of soil water
content using TDR: I. Application to wetting
fronts and steep gradients. Soil Sci. Am. J., Vol.
46, pp. 672-677.

Topp, G.C. and J.L. Davis. 1985. Measurement of
soil water content using time-domain
reflectometry (TDR): A field evaluation. Soil Sci.
Soc. Am. J., 49:19-24.

Topp, G.C. 1987. The application of time-domain
reflectometry (TDR) to soil water content
measurement. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 85-94.

TENSIOMETRIC TECHNIQUES

1. Description:

Theprimary method for measuring matric
potential (capillaric tension in soil involves the use of
the tensiometer, which Idirectly- measures matric
-otentia." Tefisiometers are commercially available
from several different sources and in numerous
configurations. The main disadvantage of the
tensiometer is that it functions only from zero to
about -0.8 bar, which represents a small part of the
entire range of available water. The lower moisture
limit for the good growth of most crops is beyond the
tensiometer range. It is apparent, therefore, that the
use of the tensiometer to schedule irrigation can
cause overirrigation, unless tensiometer readings are
combined with information on soil water content
(Phene, 1988).

2. Measured Parameter:

/Soil water potential (capillary potential)


3. Response Time: 2 to 3 hours

4. Disadvantages:

Limit range of 0 to -0.8 bar not adequate for
sandy soil
Difficult to translate data to volume water
content
Hystersis
Requires regular (weekly or daily)
maintenance, depending on range of
measurements
Subject to breakage during installation and
cultural practices
Automated systems costly and not
electronically stable
Disturbs soil above measurement point and
can allow infiltration of irrigation water or
rainfall along its stem

5. Advantages:

Recommendation for irrigation policy
developed with the aid of tensiometers
Inexpensive and easily constructed
Works well in the saturated range
Easy to install and maintain
Operates for long periods if properly
maintained
Can be adapted to automatic measurement
with pressure transducers
Can be operated in frozen soil with ethylene
glycol
Can be used with positive or negative gauge
to read water table elevation and/or soil water
tension

6. Related Literature:

Augustin, BJ. and G.H. Snyder. 1984. Moisture
sensor-controlled irrigation for maintaining
bermudagrass turf. Agron. J., 76:848-850.

Cassell, D.K. and A. Klute. 1986. Water potential:
tensiometry, Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1.
Physical and Mineralogical Methods (Klute, A.,
ed.). 2nd edition, Madison, Wisconsin.

Erbach, D.C. 1983. Measurement of soil moisture
and bulk density. ASAE Paper No. 83-1553.

Lowery, B., B.C. Datiri and BJ. Andraski. 1986. An
electrical readout system for tensiometer. Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50:494-496.


Page 8






Soil Moisture Sensors


Marvil. J.D., A.L. Flint and WJ. Davies. 1987.
Tensiometer-transducer system: calibration and
testing. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 151-155.

Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980.
Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture
in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers,
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab.,
Special Report 80-31.

Pogue, W.R. and S.G. Pooley. 1988. Tensiometric
management of soil water. Sensors and
Techniques for Irrigation Management. Center
for Irrigation Technology, California State Univ.,
Fresno, CA 93740-0018, pp. 175-180.

Rogers, E.P. 1988. Care and Checking of
Tensiometers. Sensors and Techniques for
Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation
Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA
93740-0018, pp. 111-112.

Snyder, G.H., BJ. Augustin and J.M. Davidson.
1984. Moisture sensor-controlled irrigation for
reducing N leaching in bermudagrass turf. Agron.
J. 76:964-969.

Taylor, S.A. 1955. Field determinations of soil
moisture. Ag. Engineering. 26:654-659.

Tollner, E.W. and R.B. Moss. 1988. Neutron probe
vs. tensiometers vs. gypsum blocks for monitoring
soil moisture status. Sensors and Techniques for
Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation
Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA
93740-0018, pp. 95-112.

Wierenga, PJ., J.L. Fowler and D.D. Davis. 1987.
Use of tensiometer for scheduling drip-irrigated
cotton. International Conference on Measurement
of Soil and Plant Water Status. Centennial of
Utah State Univ., pp. 157-161.

SHYGROMETRIC TECHNIQUES

1. Description:

The relationship between moisture content in
porous materials and the relative humidity (RH) of
the immediate atmosphere is reasonably well known.
Since thermal inertia of a porous medium depends on
moisture content, soil surface temperature can be


used as an indication of moisture content. Electrical
resistance hygrometers utilize chemical salts and acids,
aluminum oxide, electrolysis, thermal principles, and
white hydrosol to measure RH. The measured
resistance of the resistive element is a function of
RH. The main application for this technology seems
to be in materials where RH is directly related to
other properties.

2. Measured Parameter: Soil water potential
3. Response Time: < 3 min.

4. Disadvantages:

Sensing element deteriorates through
interaction with soil components
Each material to be tested requires special
calibration

5. Advantages:

Wide soil matric potential range
Low maintenance
Well suited for automated measurements and
control of irrigation systems

6. Related Literature:

Brown, R.W. and J.C. Chambers. 1987.
Measurements of in situ water potential with
thermocouple psychrometer: a critical evaluation.
International Conference on Measurement of Soil
and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State
Univ., pp. 125-136.

Campbell, G.S. and W.H. Gardner. 1971.
Psychometric measurement of soil water
potential: temperature and bulk density effects.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., Vol. 35. pp. 8-11.

Campbell, G.S. 1979. Improved thermocouple
psychrometers for measurement of soil water
potential in a temperature gradient. J. Physics. E:
Sci. Instr., 12:739-743.

Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980.
Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture
in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers,
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab.,
Special Report 80-31.

Phene, CJ., GJ. Hoffman and S.L. Rawlins. 1971.
Measuring soil matric potential in situ by sensing
heat dissipation within a porous body I. Theory


Page 9






Soil Moisture Sensors


and sensor construction. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc.,
Vol. 35. pp. 27-33.

Phene, CJ., GJ. Hoffman and R.S. Austin. 1973.
Controlling automated irrigation with soil matric
potential sensor. Trans. of ASAE, Paper No. 71-
230.

Phene, CJ. and T.A. Howell. 1984. Soil sensor
control of high-frequency irrigation systems.
Trans. of ASAE, pp. 392-396.

Rawlins, S.L., W.R. Gardner and F.N. Dalton. 1968.
In situ measurement of soil and plant leaf water
potential. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., Vol. 32. pp.
468-450.

Rawlins, S.L. and F.N. Dalton. 1967. Psychrometric
measurement of soil water potential without
precise temperature control. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
Proc., 31:297-301.

Savage, MJ., J.T. Ritchie and I.N. Khuvutlu. 1987.
Soil hygrometers for obtaining water potential.
International Conference on Measurement of Soil
and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State
Univ., pp. 119-124.

Shaw, B.S. and L.D. Baver. 1939. An electrothermal
method for following moisture changes of the soil
in situ. Soil Sci. pp. 78-83.

Wiebe, H.H., R.W. Brown and J. Barker. 1977.
Temperature gradient effects on in situ
hygrometer measurements of water potential.
Agron. J. 69:933-939.

REMOTE SENSING TECHNIQUES

1. Description:

This method includes satellite, radar
(microwaves), and other non-contact techniques. The
remote sensing of soil moisture depends on the
measurement of electromagnetic energy that has been
either reflected or emitted from the soil surface. The
intensity of this radiation with soil moisture may vary
depending on dielectric properties, soil temperature,
or some combination of both. For active radar, the
attenuation of microwave energy may be used to
indicate the moisture content of porous media
because of the effect of moisture content on the
dielectric constant. Thermal infrared wavelengths are
commonly used for this measurement.


2. Measured Parameter:

Soil surface moisture, through the measurement
of electromagnetic energy

3. Response Time: Instantaneous

4. Disadvantages:

System large and complex
Costly
Usually used for surface soil

5. Advantages:

Method allows remote measurements to be
taken
Enables measurements to be taken over a
large area

6. Related Literature:

Blanchard, BJ. and A.T.C. Chang. 1983. Estimation
of soil moisture from Seasat SAR data. Water
Resources Bulletin. Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 803-810.

Carlson, T.N., F.G. Rose and E.M. Perry. 1984.
Regional-scale estimates of surface moisture
availability from GOES infrared satellite
measurements. Agron. J., 76:972-978.

Estes, J.E., M.R. Mel and J.O. Hooper. 1977.
Measuring soil moisture with an airborne imaging
passive microwave radiometer. Photogrammetric
Eng. and Remote Sensing, 43(10):1273-1281.

Gutwein, BJ., EJ. Monke and D.B. Beasley. 1986.
Remote sensing of soil water content. ASAE
Paper No. 86-2004, St. Joseph, MI 49085-9659.


Jackson, TJ. 1980. Profile
surface measurements.
Drainage. 106(IR2):81-92.


soil moisture from
J. Irrigation and


Jackson, TJ., TJ. Schmugge and P. O'Neill. 1984.
Passive microwave remote sensing of soil
moisture from an aircraft platform. Remote
Sensing of Environment, 14:135-151.

Jackson, TJ., M.E. Hawley and P.E. O'Neill. 1987.
Preplanting soil moisture using passive microwave
sensors. Water Resources Bulletin. Vol. 23
No.l, pp. 11-19.


Page 10






Soil Moisture Sensors


Myhre, B.E. and S.F. Shih. 1990. Using infrared
thermometry to estimate soil water content for a
sandy soil. Trans. ASAE 33(5):1479-1468.

Price, J.C. 1980. The potential of remotely sensed
thermal infrared data to infer surface soil
moisture and evaporation. Water Resources
Research, 16(4):787-795.

Rasmussen, V.P. and R.H. Campbell. 1987. A
simple microwave method for measurement of
soil moisture. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 275-278.

Schmugge, TJ., J.M. Meneely, A. Rango and R. Neff.
1977. Satellite microwave observations of soil
moisture variations. Water Resources Bulletin,
13(2):265-281.

Shih, S.F., D.S. Harrison, A.G. Smajstrla and F.S.
Zazueta. 1990. Infrared thermometry to estimate
soil water content in pasture areas. Soil and
Crop Sci. Soc. of Florida, Proc. 50:158-162.

Wallender, W.W., G.L. Sackman. K. Kone and M.S.
Kaminaka. 1985. Soil moisture measurement by
microwave forward-scattering. Transactions of
the ASAE, Vol. 28(4), pp. 1206-1211.

Wang,. J.R., P.E. O'Neill, TJ. Jackson and E.T.
Engman. 1983. Multifrequency measurements of
the effects of soil moisture, soil texture, and
surface roughness. IEEE Trans. on Geoscience
and Remote Sensing, Vol. GE-21, No. 1, pp. 44-
51.


Wheeler, P.A. and G.L.
Electromagnetic detection
ASAE Paper No. 84-2078.


Duncan. 1984.
of soil moisture.


OPTICAL METHODS


1. Description:

Optical methods rely on changes in the
characteristics of light due to soil characteristics.
These methods involve the use of polarized light,
fibre optic sensors, and near-infrared sensors.
Polarized light is based on the principle that the
presence of moisture at a surface of reflection tends
to cause polarization in the reflected beam. Using


this device, an achromatic light source is directed at
the soil surface. Fibre optic sensors are based on a
section of unclad fibre embedded in the soil. Light
attenuation in the fibre varies with the amount of soil
water in contact with the fibre because of its effect on
the refractive index and thus on the critical angle of
internal reflection. Near-infrared methods depend on
molecular absorption at distinct wavelengths by water
in the surface layers; therefore, they are not
applicable where the moisture distribution is very
nonhomogeneous.

2. Measured Parameter: Soil water content

3. Response Time: Instantaneous

4. Disadvantages and Advantages:

These methods are still in developmental and
experimental stages.

5. Related Literature:

Bowman, G.E., A.W. Hooper and L. Hartshorn.
1985. A prototype infrared reflectance moisture
meter. J. Ag. Eng. Res. 31:67-79.

Kano, Yoshio, W.F. McClure and R.W. Skaggs. 1985.
A near infrared reflectance soil moisture meter.
Transactions of the ASAE, Vol. 28(6), pp. 1852-
1855.

Price, R.R., Ximing Huang and L.D. Gaultney. 1990.
Development of a soil moisture sensor. Paper
No. 90-3555, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI 49058.

Prunty, L. and R.S. Alessi. 1987. Prospects for fiber
optic sensing in soil. International Conference on
Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 261-265.

Stafford, J.V. 1988. Remote, non-contact and in-situ
measurement of soil moisture content: a review.
J. Ag. Eng. Res. 41:151-172.

OTHER RELATED PAPERS


Collins, J.E.
rangelands:
moisture.


1987. Soil moisture regimes of
using datapods to record soil
International Conference on


Page 11






Soil Moisture Sensors


Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status.
Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 193-200.

Gardner, W.R. 1987. Water content: an overview.
International Conference on Measurement of Soil
and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State
Univ., pp. 7-9.

Hutmacher, R.B. 1988. Infrared thermometry for
canopy temperature measurements: applications
and limitation in irrigation scheduling. Sensor
and Techniques for Irrigation Management, Proc.
Center for Irrigation Technology. California
State Univ., Fresno, CA 93740-0018. pp. 19-22.

Merriam, J.L. 1988. Soil moisture deficiency and
fell/appearance technique for irrigation control.
Sensor and Techniques for Irrigation
Management. Center for Irrigation Technology,
California State Univ., Fresno, CA 93740-0018.
pp. 113-116.


Phene, CJ. 1988. Soil water relations. Sensor and
Techniques for Irrigation Management. Center
for Irrigation Technology, California State Univ.,
Fresno, CA 93740-0018. pp. 127-138.

Schmugge, TJ., TJ. Jackson and H.L. McKim. 1980.
Survey of methods for soil moisture
determination. Water Resources Research,
16:961-979.

Stafford, J.V. 1988. Remote, non-contact and in-situ
measurement of soil moisture content: a review.
J. Ag. Eng. Res., 41:151-172.

Wobschall, Darold. 1978. A frequency shift dielectric
soil moisture sensor. IEEE Trans. on Geosci.
Electronics. 16:112-118.


Page 12




Full Text

PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 2 Series No. 9. Am. Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition, 2. Measured Parameter: pp. 493-544. Volumetric water content (percentage of volume) Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980. Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture 3. Response Time: 1 to 2 min. in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab., 4. Disadvantages: Special Report 80-31. * Costly Reynolds, S.G. 1970. The gravimetric method of soil 0 Dependent on dry bulk density and salinity moisture determination part I: a study of * Radiation hazard equipment, and methodological problems. J. * Must calibrate for different types of soils Hydrology. Vol. 11, pp. 258-273. * Access tubes must be installed and removed * Depth resolution questionable Reynolds, S.G. 1970. The gravimetric method of soil * Measurement partially dependent on physical moisture determination part II: typical required and chemical soil properties sample sizes and methods of reducing variability. * Depth probe cannot measure soil water near J. Hydrology. Vol. 11, pp. 274-287. soil surface * Subject to electrical drift and failure Reynolds, S.G. 1970. The gravimetric method of soil moisture determination part III: an examination 5. Advantages: of factors influencing soil moisture variability. J. Hydrology. Vol. 11, pp. 288-300. * Nondestructive * Possible to obtain profile of water content in Taylor, SA. 1955. Field determinations of soil soil moisture. Ag. Engineering. 26:654-659. * Water can be measured in any phase * Can be automated for one site to monitor NUCLEAR TECHNIQUES spatial and temporal soil water * Measurement directly related to soil water Neutron Scattering content 1. Description: 6. Related Literature: Neutron scattering is widely used for estimating Augustin, BJ. and G.H. Snyder. 1984. Moisture volumetric water content. With this method, fast sensor-controlled irrigation for maintaining neutrons emitted from a radioactive source are bermudagrass turf. Agron. J., 76:848-850. thermalized or slowed down by hydrogen atoms in the soil. Since most hydrogen atoms in the soil are Bavel, C.H.M., D.R. Nielsen and J.M. Davidson. components of water molecules, the proportion of 1961. Calibration and characteristics of two thermalized neutrons is related to soil water content. oc neutron moisture probes. Soil Sci. SOc. Am. This method offers the advantage of measuring a 1 329 Proc., Vol. 25. pp. 329-333. large soil volume, and also the possibility of scanning at several depths to obtain a profile of moisture distribution. However, it also has a number of Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods of disadvantages: the high cost of the instrument, Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical radiation hazard, insensitivity near the soil surface, Methods (Kute, A., ed). Agronomy Series No. 9. insensitivity to small variations in moisture content at Am. Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition, pp. 493-544. different points within a 30 to 40 cm radius, and variation in readings due to soil density variations, Gardner, Wilford and Don Kirkham. 1952. which may cause an error rate of up to 15 percent Determination of soil moisture by neutron (Phene, 1988). 0 I scattering. Soil Sci., Vol. 73, pp. 391-401. : IENCF *' tur · r



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 9 Marvil. J.D., A.L. Flint and WJ. Davies. 1987. used as an indication of moisture content. Electrical Tensiometer-transducer system: calibration and resistance hygrometers utilize chemical salts and acids, testing. International Conference on aluminum oxide, electrolysis, thermal principles, and Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. white hydrosol to measure RH. The measured Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 151-155. resistance of the resistive element is a function of RH. The main application for this technology seems Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980. to be in materials where RH is directly related to Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture other properties. in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab., 2. Measured Parameter. Soil water potential Special Report 80-31. Special Report 80-31. 3. Response Time: < 3 min. Pogue, W.R. and S.G. Pooley. 1988. Tensiometric 4 Disadvantages: management of soil water. Sensors and Techniques for Irrigation Management. Center * Sensing element deteriorates through for Irrigation Technology, California State Univ., interaction with soil components Fresno, CA 93740-0018, pp. 175-180. * Each material to be tested requires special calibration Rogers, E.P. 1988. Care and Checking of Tensiometers. Sensors and Techniques for 5. Advantages: Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA * Wide soil matric potential range 93740-0018, pp. 111-112. * Low maintenance * Well suited for automated measurements and Snyder, G.H., BJ. Augustin and J.M. Davidson. control of irrigation systems 1984. Moisture sensor-controlled irrigation for reducing N leaching in bermudagrass turf. Agron. 6. Related Literature: J. 76:964-969. Brown, R.W. and J.C. Chambers. 1987. Taylor, SA. 1955. Field determinations of soil Measurements of in situ water potential with moisture. Ag. Engineering. 26:654-659. thermocouple psychrometer: a critical evaluation. International Conference on Measurement of Soil Tollner, E.W. and R.B. Moss. 1988. Neutron probe and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State vs. tensiometers vs. gypsum blocks for monitoring Univ., pp. 125-136. soil moisture status. Sensors and Techniques for Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation Campbell, G.S. and W.H. Gardner. 1971. Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA Psychometric measurement of soil water 93740-0018, pp. 95-112. potential: temperature and bulk density effects. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., Vol. 35. pp. 8-11. Wierenga, PJ., J.L. Fowler and D.D. Davis. 1987. Use of tensiometer for scheduling drip-irrigated Campbell, G.S. 1979. Improved thermocouple cotton. International Conference on Measurement psychrometers for measurement of soil water of Soil and Plant Water Status. Centennial of potential in a temperature gradient. J. Physics. E: Utah State Univ., pp. 157-161. Sci. Instr., 12:739-743. HYGROMETRIC TECHNIQUES Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980. Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture 1. Description: in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab., The relationship between moisture content in Special Report 80-31. porous materials and the relative humidity (RH) of the immediate atmosphere is reasonably well known. Phene, CJ., GJ. Hoffman and S.L. Rawlins. 1971. Since thermal inertia of a porous medium depends on Measuring soil matric potential in situ by sensing moisture content, soil surface temperature can be heat dissipation within a porous body I. Theory


xml version 1.0
xml-stylesheet type textxsl href daitss_report_xhtml.xsl
REPORT xsi:schemaLocation 'http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitss2Report.xsd' xmlns:xsi 'http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance' xmlns 'http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss'
DISSEMINATION IEID 'E20090919_AAABTL' PACKAGE 'UF00008529_00001' INGEST_TIME '2009-09-19T17:16:36-04:00'
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT 'UF' PROJECT 'UFDC'
REQUEST_EVENTS TITLE Disseminate Event
REQUEST_EVENT NAME 'disseminate request placed' TIME '2015-05-15T14:47:19-04:00' NOTE 'request id: 302233; This is a disseminate from UF Chelsea S Dinsmore for migration DigiTool to Islandora see CAS-56088-F3Z2' AGENT 'Stephen'
finished' '2015-05-15T17:12:37-04:00' '' 'SYSTEM'
FILES
FILE SIZE '179821' DFID 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUE' ORIGIN 'DEPOSITOR' PATH 'sip-files00001.jp2'
MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM 'MD5' 65621fdf6343dd54dd97e2a702bf5023
'SHA-1' 662688e1c8c327f48b7256c464b9cc5d4eaa58ee
EVENT '2012-04-03T18:54:37-04:00' OUTCOME 'success'
PROCEDURE describe
'170599' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUF' 'sip-files00001.jpg'
0df49c68169e14210e1234a7c658fe57
b3580c4e58129e9a6e900b967d46a4a284235a90
'2012-04-03T18:54:14-04:00'
describe
'77017' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUG' 'sip-files00001.pdf'
aaff1e520fd464090de23b3c12d281e6
6984b8f2a314c3d7c2b1f782c7746fc8d8261be5
'2012-04-03T18:54:25-04:00'
describe
'3037872' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUG-norm-0' 'ARCHIVE' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKUG-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
'2015-05-15T17:11:45-04:00'
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:25-04:00'
normalize
'88606' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUH' 'sip-files00001.pro'
4e7d96737230e7b7cab5207025a0fb4d
5e994437fce607e808989d4ae73e54842f7c7f81
'2012-04-03T18:54:34-04:00'
describe
'69677' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUI' 'sip-files00001.QC.jpg'
222be1e88c5d9cc781d1a4774f871eff
a01e3659d0401d27af8c3d555d4dba9bdda70bae
'2012-04-03T18:54:27-04:00'
describe
'1041524' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUJ' 'sip-files00001.tif'
d24dd972a5018f8b203c37557f6aeb04
fa4c6ef9ddcb3e072ea0b376a4fa742383def7a8
'2012-04-03T18:54:23-04:00'
describe
'3601' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUK' 'sip-files00001.txt'
07188442e946c6412c2cfb039ce0817c
fad28e2f7e484e28b5dc8818ebc1ed2d6aafb994
describe
'39287' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUL' 'sip-files00001thm.jpg'
f45c5f5a73e9f45b6b134fdbf350e3bb
446f610cd8564db6748ce3d85e19b495d887ad06
'2012-04-03T18:54:36-04:00'
describe
'184424' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUM' 'sip-files00002.jp2'
c48abf4d009636cf4885f60821ad5510
f7ec493ed6da5dd54527590e428c01524de892ce
'2012-04-03T18:54:28-04:00'
describe
'174445' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUN' 'sip-files00002.jpg'
7445a799e1d8dcea501a5f5b95daf5c8
7c02cfc3208629479a5952c316cb452e2fbadfa8
describe
'77546' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUO' 'sip-files00002.pdf'
4569aba201580e5065b8d09beb1277cf
085cec7807bbf4df47164cdf60298754e088b74c
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUO-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKUO-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
'2015-05-15T17:11:41-04:00'
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:13-04:00'
normalize
'87938' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUP' 'sip-files00002.pro'
041b52e6fac4afb3b7c8ba4dae26f025
de2884830dd295fb322339333087613a8dfb72ab
'2012-04-03T18:54:38-04:00'
describe
'70715' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUQ' 'sip-files00002.QC.jpg'
dd5cbce57ec32760508814b7b2adbbcc
87e73ce7148dbb70726b076332060f3fb03c58af
'2012-04-03T18:54:33-04:00'
describe
'1040932' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUR' 'sip-files00002.tif'
983355a82e609abfda2347768d000b7c
1f435ed72f9402b9450f746b9f35f3c9bbee389d
'2012-04-03T18:54:35-04:00'
describe
'3669' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUS' 'sip-files00002.txt'
45958418c19561a6f97e89d2b9e4cda2
79b1a21bcd29ddc6ba1d9b1158c2985ba75c35a7
'2012-04-03T18:54:16-04:00'
describe
'39137' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUT' 'sip-files00002thm.jpg'
d0a7a8c0380a84eef426961f4a0c82ad
bb57f3a110ad9f28ed48a72689ad539c18e53a39
'2012-04-03T18:54:08-04:00'
describe
'177807' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUU' 'sip-files00003.jp2'
ded718f872ae024fb2846d695df64577
a0c3f097f33757dd39c436117697e3f67f001999
'2012-04-03T18:54:03-04:00'
describe
'168595' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUV' 'sip-files00003.jpg'
cb3f4364dcc8f46731111eebcd9b1565
7b3f1f36c807380579ab59f427f6f9d525f53516
'2012-04-03T18:54:18-04:00'
describe
'74446' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUW' 'sip-files00003.pdf'
b034a469ad2a1e741d922c0c3b1e55b9
db60450c2a961ef770430d72a5add8a4fe3f0a93
'2012-04-03T18:54:29-04:00'
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUW-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKUW-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
'2015-05-15T17:11:42-04:00'
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:30-04:00'
normalize
'84696' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUX' 'sip-files00003.pro'
7a733390d868579b0e426f15b41ea938
fd3de753be46e6ddab98683c5b23cb7b7ecc2bd7
describe
'69838' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUY' 'sip-files00003.QC.jpg'
4139a267e7df8aec6a886c681ba96919
08f4f5c94e04eab306201c092a1634b5d51ea664
'2012-04-03T18:54:31-04:00'
describe
'1038784' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKUZ' 'sip-files00003.tif'
e007e6a1a459df2d972f4ee71495db70
0560d8862238150005f829b9e87a2ec8913ba0e8
describe
'3538' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVA' 'sip-files00003.txt'
bf4894e9fd8a5d3a089229cc32badec1
f608a670345d521cb8e0cecd55fb9c18cd404d6b
describe
'39485' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVB' 'sip-files00003thm.jpg'
5d0cb2affc5bb49be165fa9c4da35012
4ede28d0aad7d725c0367c25714e923cf112eaf2
'2012-04-03T18:54:19-04:00'
describe
'181184' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVC' 'sip-files00004.jp2'
d59ddd29b168e6f30eec29c63681c0aa
5b24e2071f935d04fe8f22ab98a4139b31487c46
describe
'171685' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVD' 'sip-files00004.jpg'
a8889b1e1ec13467cd8eb66fb4fe09e0
0008ecee56da66e43898ef89a779c251daabeac1
'2012-04-03T18:54:15-04:00'
describe
'75944' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVE' 'sip-files00004.pdf'
d99b0cc873d8d4c343e0f595176ac64b
6dbbd3a1a42f4a5d835ab02144c999fe52b9d777
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVE-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKVE-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
'2015-05-15T17:11:44-04:00'
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:28-04:00'
normalize
'86954' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVF' 'sip-files00004.pro'
558ebeda92dfd3ff9e5a82e81a99b73c
4f2ee35e320bd3e9440e39023e54bdfe5eb447e6
describe
'70835' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVG' 'sip-files00004.QC.jpg'
b2062ed84f27fcb35211a5b0854032c2
ca4743a43ce98588c1ae8b5d85095c170318b23b
'2012-04-03T18:54:30-04:00'
describe
'1038336' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVH' 'sip-files00004.tif'
8430f006c19719e8f45c9842099d7804
3f429a7b8e4f2f6908fa2978d1953f2e4edd9cc5
'2012-04-03T18:54:02-04:00'
describe
'3618' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVI' 'sip-files00004.txt'
970134a29d794316a73bb8db080f8db1
a16ce908bcb2cb21814431f6466babecbd74e2b1
'2012-04-03T18:54:13-04:00'
describe
'39405' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVJ' 'sip-files00004thm.jpg'
9b51b5f2b7924246dfd87c39a25a2c08
ffea49c35733896522c2c734083489e705119e6c
describe
'201753' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVK' 'sip-files00005.jp2'
718bfd285d2d73f7ff4a8a16e2a412e6
a21896408a0a8a090e604a490770c58d71b11688
describe
'191741' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVL' 'sip-files00005.jpg'
f451d8970e87db8fbfde1ba2fc99a213
94911223f356b15d0bb69c653c1ce1032e34c94b
describe
'84804' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVM' 'sip-files00005.pdf'
e1af2f676f3d1cace264c824f551ab5a
1297a2c0ac86e7c62aced4be5779461940d0846f
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVM-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKVM-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:37-04:00'
normalize
'98812' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVN' 'sip-files00005.pro'
17d4674f039dc873cdbb7070daa1116a
3e0435e0ea776dd381fdae72a8b2a5420e0b54d6
'2012-04-03T18:54:05-04:00'
describe
'76141' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVO' 'sip-files00005.QC.jpg'
dd22560cd6321b5aec079f356baa45bf
c173df3757d9878e861805e40d173388a113b6ef
'2012-04-03T18:54:22-04:00'
describe
'1043492' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVP' 'sip-files00005.tif'
50752b9d2695c37026d05d59df791620
c09819fed7d7519ad9ab65e178437d412fbbe09a
'2012-04-03T18:54:39-04:00'
describe
'4055' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVQ' 'sip-files00005.txt'
67e53bbdbf645f302bfe5c7c636cce6a
3eed01479a61880cffe43cb53edf07ed1948ff1c
'2012-04-03T18:54:32-04:00'
describe
'42375' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVR' 'sip-files00005thm.jpg'
43b64c2194f5fa482bb098cfd84a404b
0246995c719af93149fa71ea7c7b72df0156e716
describe
'191244' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVS' 'sip-files00006.jp2'
d23028e487ec6b98e8681fbee46843d8
d98e106acb25c90596bcc5e07719f32d7417892a
describe
'180938' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVT' 'sip-files00006.jpg'
22403e72c88eab06674a2612eba2e55f
8133cab81ce4a764b27f7bc456bb579258e45b92
'2012-04-03T18:54:09-04:00'
describe
'79439' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVU' 'sip-files00006.pdf'
e7bb8be0e48ad3a78a63f67a331e6f5a
341e7e2900cd3d13b6ce288a1957d289b6a31736
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVU-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKVU-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:20-04:00'
normalize
'92728' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVV' 'sip-files00006.pro'
b30f377175b684e662f2000c36579337
c9cb406cedad5d8251f8efe55ba72687264457b6
'2012-04-03T18:54:07-04:00'
describe
'74012' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVW' 'sip-files00006.QC.jpg'
38265dd542ccd8600fd8900b4f7e4f56
bf78d7f68d9cb28c5eb2cb3b706e7d7ea004f5d1
describe
'1042280' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVX' 'sip-files00006.tif'
7be58c096228f0d094bdd551e9b31efd
5f53abb0daa74fd52bac7de47d7a4ff8455310c0
describe
'3873' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVY' 'sip-files00006.txt'
4cb90486b7840f9b3db1ea9e761f6413
f0d89d7d93935079b76c96f3c53d7ef369ae465a
describe
'41246' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKVZ' 'sip-files00006thm.jpg'
7aaf769ed9915498ae0cd4d1ab5551fa
6075ec84e545ecd79872bad72cd2f623b16d911f
'2012-04-03T18:54:17-04:00'
describe
'200093' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWA' 'sip-files00007.jp2'
8e289a2ca10408df2abdb4f1ee7c17be
75dec9b09dc902176f5204f4a192015089ab5c59
'2012-04-03T18:54:04-04:00'
describe
'187661' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWB' 'sip-files00007.jpg'
8942b87c04de4e99f8d7445283ba1758
dac8cd0e0291e8f5f188aea98d926a1e506b3275
describe
'83651' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWC' 'sip-files00007.pdf'
d8b3f243b739347c493c9974af621ba9
41441084527c9c0051baae4b19b2dfd6e8333241
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWC-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKWC-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
'2015-05-15T17:11:40-04:00'
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:33-04:00'
normalize
'95064' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWD' 'sip-files00007.pro'
cd0c29bbc6c9880cc02700d056090cc1
01fdeb56dfb5ad5bab5f659c7fcb520618dbe561
describe
'75352' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWE' 'sip-files00007.QC.jpg'
e16951dda2104f05b73024df13819f1b
d4a9cc4a29f307cc7608171a2212ce3a93e55a93
describe
'1039908' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWF' 'sip-files00007.tif'
154e93ea58b46b51e721f6c08916ee5d
93242577f37ba3f9ede934aecaeef8f6a7fed94f
'2012-04-03T18:54:24-04:00'
describe
'3967' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWG' 'sip-files00007.txt'
2f2dd4e3515fe44534d458b2a3032059
4d44521012871a61359762e0457120681e6be25b
describe
'41213' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWH' 'sip-files00007thm.jpg'
e99c8ea23c68b32845e570cee6b5e1e1
a45ef002f323eda8e60468c3055a4823af84fe34
describe
'191348' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWI' 'sip-files00008.jp2'
09135956017936af98722b6b5343b9b0
a73416efd0e5cd1ef633fa6948d24e6d91370bfb
'2012-04-03T18:54:21-04:00'
describe
'180158' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWJ' 'sip-files00008.jpg'
f97f186e5ca5960377a65aec1c7d93d9
2ba729195cdb32ff50d1bee6bd3ec6dc84776a83
'2012-04-03T18:54:11-04:00'
describe
'80494' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWK' 'sip-files00008.pdf'
73cdea502f02d5215db4bf4b4094668b
f4b2eecb3c82c817a35b6a0c9b37f1192eaf32c3
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWK-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKWK-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:22-04:00'
normalize
'91202' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWL' 'sip-files00008.pro'
56315807e9d92f148235f9d31eef4580
fa97d052f7132d11a015284b3ea8e17b3d5f2911
'2012-04-03T18:54:10-04:00'
describe
'74759' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWM' 'sip-files00008.QC.jpg'
de5078131703e490e5cd1905aad4f4a0
9ac18d1921f020ed4bcb716d3814a6315d8bcf08
describe
'1040076' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWN' 'sip-files00008.tif'
7d91ceb29205827ce3c985522291e3ca
dd514b78d804da8d538c24a84e2de2a1202f681e
describe
'3871' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWO' 'sip-files00008.txt'
25279b8009d54426a9d349ac209ab560
d979183a108495d6e7206272e64e4b51f5ba7875
describe
'41788' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWP' 'sip-files00008thm.jpg'
f85910187e09935f901cab210f76438e
13e19131d76e4bcb6f04d4d0a8d410544d431960
describe
'201561' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWQ' 'sip-files00009.jp2'
ccfdb0776ebd0fa61acf79f5210b42ed
cf06dc563e2a064c21a94b328c9100ed959fed7d
describe
'192631' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWR' 'sip-files00009.jpg'
fe2a54b630fffb672d2e40ba58d0f1e2
d97b556a205e4ff826c9a662250c0f18135b8cee
describe
'85252' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWS' 'sip-files00009.pdf'
1506dff95d0a462f0036fe92f8169566
e19c8ffff88a30ecdb727e7bbc032a6a2e51ff9b
'2012-04-03T18:54:00-04:00'
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWS-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKWS-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
'2015-05-15T17:11:43-04:00'
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:04-04:00'
normalize
'97117' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWT' 'sip-files00009.pro'
569b190997007ad7b2035c6dd83ccd51
8f1651ef584ee6d039b9a6be3f69d5ce288aa935
'2012-04-03T18:54:26-04:00'
describe
'76207' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWU' 'sip-files00009.QC.jpg'
6cfbd93cc72651a0bdbeb8d0acbcec46
782a1001dbdb88b66f18f3a84b2988f153bad355
describe
'1040760' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWV' 'sip-files00009.tif'
d2e1fc9103ecb7acbcd3ddf25b32db2d
fac5ada2312c351e1dafde79e9bfc585bafbe628
describe
'4039' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWW' 'sip-files00009.txt'
d40e64e4b501a457d98b330fb04882e4
47f0e71ef8c432017a521ee94260ecd7418b5c7b
'2012-04-03T18:54:06-04:00'
describe
'42343' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWX' 'sip-files00009thm.jpg'
28edcb245e5f80dd1d1a68f9a74e54b3
966e891666814a5de052be89faaa76d51c5bb56a
describe
'187130' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWY' 'sip-files00010.jp2'
635906b296966850c2df025083279d0c
d5d1aaf0af99c3e28e530473ef69c2eff4b36793
describe
'179503' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKWZ' 'sip-files00010.jpg'
e1689b48d99d8235b0ff4aee5edeba6b
0372972ce542a0003800245b332451ff69082de7
describe
'78178' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXA' 'sip-files00010.pdf'
c9a1409bd02ffa8f514a5712f55271a7
37ed19fb3673e08abede7cd4043cec7a25f21e14
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXA-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKXA-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:16-04:00'
normalize
'89629' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXB' 'sip-files00010.pro'
a32f49035d765ab9a89ff78ac8bc0e53
8ff2e20c8d704075f775b51830a1a2ee7a023d0b
describe
'73629' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXC' 'sip-files00010.QC.jpg'
e145e9ca403b9ed431da4a6d6e1813f5
c782e183cc21be8e31fcb6b28465a78a2cacd6f4
describe
'1039296' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXD' 'sip-files00010.tif'
bc9c4c7dce4c46138de25f4a771584e5
b367bc92d258d8221f36058240599d79d5172ec8
describe
'3679' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXE' 'sip-files00010.txt'
38f33bc5f56ffd65debebfe0c4607714
f981567882198b4cc6cc8010cf8f457931504e2a
describe
'40789' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXF' 'sip-files00010thm.jpg'
ad0ce0720d6a492ff8f48dbe7eff6c3e
df68ec126ad7d33396a4a4082ba892bf62d8df35
describe
'192106' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXG' 'sip-files00011.jp2'
f31194c83bd5d1051e80ff618c08a323
59382fd2aa608ea1ead0541f2895dc80913fd42d
describe
'184272' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXH' 'sip-files00011.jpg'
22681213c7f79ce19b771b5f579a6f96
7e4df32685d72e22db131f52bf7389a583af5dd9
describe
'81142' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXI' 'sip-files00011.pdf'
7d3b776e072f8afb331dab6de67ab892
622025ae10e272414602817ec9e3d5c60d882adf
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXI-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKXI-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:07-04:00'
normalize
'92457' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXJ' 'sip-files00011.pro'
2a9024dd6c1ebecb8dd8befb554c5337
4785daf4efa3962317ad5d2317f793bf1f151e68
describe
'74858' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXK' 'sip-files00011.QC.jpg'
28bf819de9c9765d9abaa0fea4ee038e
13fe7ef20f2c0c4754e08f5a2a3addeb85e86c53
describe
'1036240' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXL' 'sip-files00011.tif'
b17d68fd1856122f504def1505e5fe64
12620b9abd9f8f0fc79f2e8fbb1e79dc5b08143c
'2012-04-03T18:54:40-04:00'
describe
'3788' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXM' 'sip-files00011.txt'
386419bdc2fdd7b0b4f44c2044ab0145
3ae3e64e721ee5adc95be47cedd3b4b6f9f9047c
describe
'41667' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXN' 'sip-files00011thm.jpg'
09a24e48cfff7530a02ac7b306f98667
1bf35f0f7bd6c640ed41d8d157f44f3789e02d74
describe
'82479' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXO' 'sip-files00012.jp2'
29312be719c6bef8d0b8383c8a9e2044
a74a8a34b8fbaea5a681bd121b215efee7b80b64
describe
'82284' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXP' 'sip-files00012.jpg'
8d881b787cbf20329636cdd75aac3638
8be5c7a3140c0980adbfb5766f156361275b3cda
describe
'34776' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXQ' 'sip-files00012.pdf'
979eee20fa5dd0956248ca7a270e34b3
c8fc7185f78c786c638e9f23b8e7ba106ab1c510
describe
'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXQ-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20090919_AADKXQ-norm-0.pdf'
f1f59ad7d39927e36766de20dc51726d
47d890447f3fa0f04054e853e39ccc8b1571d028
describe
'2015-05-15T17:11:11-04:00'
normalize
'36949' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXR' 'sip-files00012.pro'
e2cd80096521838e96db075097a7357c
c403d8f4a6f9d3b73a7473e531f18608860c4168
describe
'35247' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXS' 'sip-files00012.QC.jpg'
09ace7ad6d224bdf3187d196cea2051f
b9375b8775cb4948c3835245273bc560674d5023
describe
'1022256' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXT' 'sip-files00012.tif'
e70b643187b48a35da02167267037c1f
73c4dabd469fa0b29735c14276331704ca5d0a76
describe
'1554' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXU' 'sip-files00012.txt'
6e1d9831428d25151b242d6282b80222
b560cd633ecb20630c4eb6389c4dd8f23c2ce2ba
describe
'21164' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXV' 'sip-files00012thm.jpg'
4e5994c4b6ba1ae39529a01bf50444dd
63e76f1cce7ef1d893c2fc6d1120f2dbee6d2cb6
describe
'28447' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXW' 'sip-filesUF00008529_00001.mets'
ed928478f819c86cba35f357bff954ec
949c42cede20c78c218aeaedea3c9fa779f04f4c
describe
TargetNamespace.1: Expecting namespace 'http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/', but the target namespace of the schema document is 'http://digital.uflib.ufl.edu/metadata/ufdc2/'.
'2015-05-15T17:11:47-04:00' 'mixed'
xml resolution
http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/ufdc2.xsd
BROKEN_LINK schema http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/ufdc2.xsd
WARNING CODE 'Daitss::Anomaly' The element type "div" must be terminated by the matching end-tag "
".
TargetNamespace.1: Expecting namespace 'http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/', but the target namespace of the schema document is 'http://digital.uflib.ufl.edu/metadata/ufdc2/'.
'34774' 'info:fdaE20090919_AAABTLfileF20090919_AADKXZ' 'sip-filesUF00008529_00001.xml'
70b9cd7a1bf0e6f6056d77de7067dc54
d81b31996917d6493e5b86f8916ca5ff97d5c9ab
describe
TargetNamespace.1: Expecting namespace 'http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/', but the target namespace of the schema document is 'http://digital.uflib.ufl.edu/metadata/ufdc2/'.
xml resolution
http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/ufdc2.xsd
http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/ufdc2.xsd
The element type "div" must be terminated by the matching end-tag "".
TargetNamespace.1: Expecting namespace 'http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/', but the target namespace of the schema document is 'http://digital.uflib.ufl.edu/metadata/ufdc2/'.



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 8 Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. 3. Response Time: 2 to 3 hours Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 111-114. 4. Disadvantages: Stein, J. and D.L. Kane. 1983. Monitoring the unfrozen water-content of soil and snow using * Limit range of 0 to -0.8 bar not adequate for time domain reflectometry. Water Resour. Res., sandy soil 19:1573-1584. 0 Difficult to translate data to volume water content Topp, G.C. 1980. Electromagnetic determination of · Hystersis soil water content: measurements in coaxial * Requires regular (weekly or daily) transmission lines. Water Resources Research, maintenance, depending on range of 16:574-582. measurements * Subject to breakage during installation and Topp, G.C., J.L. Davis and A.P. Annan. 1982. cultural practices Electromagnetic determination of soil water * Automated systems costly and not content using TDR: I. Application to wetting electronically stable fronts and steep gradients. Soil Sci. Am. J., Vol. * Disturbs soil above measurement point and 46, pp. 672-677. can allow infiltration of irrigation water or rainfall along its stem Topp, G.C. and J.L. Davis. 1985. Measurement of soil water content using time-domain 5 Ad t reflectometry (TDR): A field evaluation. Soil Sci. R o. Am, 7~ 49-19.~ 24o * Recommendation for irrigation policy Soc. Am. J., 49:19-24. developed with the aid of tensiometers * Inexpensive and easily constructed Topp, G.C. 1987. The application of time-domain neensie and easil onstrute * Works well in the saturated range reflectometry (TDR) to soil water content to install and maintain measurement. International Conference on E to installandmaintain Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. atesfor long peods f properly Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 85-94. anta ' Can be adapted to automatic measurement with pressure transducers TENSIOMETRIC TECHNIQUES * Can be operated in frozen soil with ethylene glycol 1. Description: glycol ~~1. Description: *,~· Can be used with positive or negative gauge i~~~~~~~~~~~~/ . ~~to read water table elevation and/or soil water J/ The_pnmrary method for measuring matric tension potential (capillaic tensionyin soil involves the use of the tensiometer, which directly ' measures matric 6. Related Literature: -otentia'I Teinsiometers are commercially available from several different sources and in numerous Augustin, BJ. and G.H. Snyder. 1984. Moisture configurations. The main disadvantage of the sensor-controlled irrigation for maintaining tensiometer is that it functions only from zero to bermudagrass turf. Agron. J., 76:848-850. about -0.8 bar, which represents a small part of the entire range of available water. The lower moisture Cassell, D.K. and A. Kute. 1986. Water potential: limit for the good growth of most crops is beyond the tensiometry, Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1. tensiometer range. It is apparent, therefore, that the Physical and Mineralogical Methods (Klute, A., use of the tensiometer to schedule irrigation can ed.). 2nd edition, Madison, Wisconsin. cause overirrigation, unless tensiometer readings are combined with information on soil water content Erbach, D.C. 1983. Measurement of soil moisture (Phene, 1988). and bulk density. ASAE Paper No. 83-1553. 2. Measured Parameter: Lowery, B., B.C. Datiri and BJ. Andraski. 1986. An '~oil water potential~~~/ (eaelectrical readout system for tensiometer. Soil Soil water potential (capillary potential) Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50:494-496.



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 10 and sensor construction. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., 2. Measured Parameter: Vol. 35. pp. 27-33. Soil surface moisture, through the measurement Phene, CJ., GJ. Hoffman and R.S. Austin. 1973. of electromagnetic energy Controlling automated irrigation with soil matric potential sensor. Trans. of ASAE, Paper No. 713. Response Time: Instantaneous 230. 4. Disadvantages: Phene, CJ. and T.A. Howell. 1984. Soil sensor control of high-frequency irrigation systems. * System large and complex Trans. of ASAE, pp. 392-396. * Costly * Usually used for surface soil Rawlins, S.L., W.R. Gardner and F.N. Dalton. 1968. In situ measurement of soil and plant leaf water 5. Advantages: potential. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., Vol. 32. pp. 468450. * Method allows remote measurements to be taken Rawlins, S.L. and F.N. Dalton. 1967. Psychrometric * Enables measurements to be taken over a measurement of soil water potential without large area precise temperature control. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., 31:297-301. 6. Related Literature: Savage, MJ., J.T. Ritchie and I.N. Khuvutlu. 1987. Blanchard, BJ. and AT.C. Chang. 1983. Estimation Soil hygrometers for obtaining water potentialeasat SAR data. Water International Conference on Measurement of Soil Iand Plant Water Statu. Cenennnial of Utah State Resources Bulletin. Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 803-810. and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 119-124. Uni~v., pp. 119-124. Carlson, T.N., F.G. Rose and E.M. Perry. 1984. Shaw, B.S. and L.D. Baver. 1939. An electrothermal Regional-scale estimates of surface moisture method for following moisture changes of the soil availability from GOES infrared satellite in situ. Soil Sci. pp. 78-83. measurements. Agron. J., 76:972-978. Wiebe, H.H., R.W. Brown and J. Barker. 1977. Estes, J.E., M.R. Mel and J.O. Hooper. 1977. Temperature gradient effects on in situ Measuring soil moisture with an airborne imaging hygrometer measurements of water potential. passive microwave radiometer. Photogrammetric Agron. J. 69:933-939. Eng. and Remote Sensing, 43(10):1273-1281. REMOTE SENSING TECHNIQUES Gutwein, BJ., EJ. Monke and D.B. Beasley. 1986. Remote sensing of soil water content. ASAE 1. Description: Paper No. 86-2004, St. Joseph, MI 49085-9659. This method includes satellite, radar Jackson, TJ. 1980. Profile soil moisture from (microwaves), and other non-contact techniques. The surface measurements. J. Irrigation and remote sensing of soil moisture depends on the Drainage. 106(IR2):81-92. measurement of electromagnetic energy that has been either reflected or emitted from the soil surface. The Jackson, TJ., TJ. Schmugge and P. O'Neill. 1984. intensity of this radiation with soil moisture may vary Passive microwave remote sensing of soil depending on dielectric properties, soil temperature, moisture from an aircraft platform. Remote or some combination of both. For active radar, the Sensing of Environment, 14:135-151. attenuation of microwave energy may be used to indicate the moisture content of porous media Jackson, TJ., M.E. Hawley and P.E. O'Neill. 1987. because of the effect of moisture content on the Preplanting soil moisture using passive microwave dielectric constant. Thermal infrared wavelengths are sensors. Water Resources Bulletin. Vol. 23 commonly used for this measurement. No.1, pp. 11-19.



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 11 Myhre, B.E. and S.F. Shih. 1990. Using infrared this device, an achromatic light source is directed at thermometry to estimate soil water content for a the soil surface. Fibre optic sensors are based on a sandy soil. Trans. ASAE 33(5):1479-1468. section of unclad fibre embedded in the soil. Light attenuation in the fibre varies with the amount of soil ice, J 1 The pentia o reme ene water in contact with the fibre because of its effect on Price, J.C. 1980. The potential of remotely sensed thermal infrared data to infer surface soil the refractive index and thus on the critical angle of moisture and evaporation. Water Resources internal reflection. Near-infrared methods depend on Research, 16(4):787-795. molecular absorption at distinct wavelengths by water in the surface layers; therefore, they are not applicable where the moisture distribution is very Rasmussen, V.P. and R.H. Campbell. 1987. A nonhomogeneous. simple microwave method for measurement of soil moisture. International Conference on Measured Parameter Soil water content Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 275-278. R 3. Response Time: Instantaneous Schmugge, TJ., J.M. Meneely, A. Rango and R. Neff. 1977. Satellite microwave observations of soil Disadvantages andAdvantages: moisture variations. Water Resources Bulletin, T m a s i 13(2)i<:265-281.oi ~These methods are still in developmental and 13(2):265-281. -~~13(2):265-281. 'experimental stages. Shih, S.F., D.S. Harrison, AG. Smajstrla and F.S. 5 Related Literature: Zazueta. 1990. Infrared thermometry to estimate soil water content in pasture areas. Soil and Crop Sci. Soc. of Florida, Proc. 50:158-162. Bowman, G.E., AW. Hooper and L. Hartshorn. 1985. A prototype infrared reflectance moisture Wallender, W.W., G.L. Sackman. K. Kone and M.S. meter. J. Ag. Eng. Res. 31:67-79. Kaminaka. 1985. Soil moisture measurement by microwave forward-scattering. Transactions of Kano, Yoshio, W.F. McClure and R.W. Skaggs. 1985. the ASAE, Vol. 28(4), pp. 1206-1211. A near infrared reflectance soil moisture meter. Transactions of the ASAE, Vol. 28(6), pp. 1852Wang,. J.R., P.E. O'Neill, TJ. Jackson and E.T. 1855. Engman. 1983. Multifrequencymeasurements of the effects of soil moisture, soil texture, and the effects of soil moisture, soil texture, and Price, R.R., Ximing Huang and L.D. Gaultney. 1990. surface roughness. IEEE Trans. on Geoscience Development of a soil moisture sens. 1990. Development of a soil moisture sensor. Paper and Remote Sensing, Vol. GE-21, No. 1, pp. 44No. 90-3555 AAE, t. Jose M . 51. Wheeler, P.A and G.L. Duncan. 1984. Prunty, L. and R.S. Alessi. 1987. Prospects for fiber Electromagnetic detection of soil moisture. optic sensing in soil. International Conference on ASAE Paper No. 84-2078. Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 261-265. OPTICAL METHODS *1 ». Description: Stafford, J.V. 1988. Remote, non-contact and in-situ 1.~D~escn~ript ion: ~measurement of soil moisture content: a review. J. Ag. Eng. Res. 41:151-172. Optical methods rely on changes in the characteristics of light due to soil characteristics. These methods involve the use of polarized light, OTER RELATED PAPERS fibre optic sensors, and near-infrared sensors. Polarized light is based on the principle that the Collins, J.E. 1987. Soil moisture regimes of presence of moisture at a surface of reflection tends rangelands: using datapods to record soil to cause polarization in the reflected beam. Using moisture. International Conference on



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 3 Goodspees, MJ. 1981. Neutron moisture meter Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 41theory. Soil Water Assessment by The Neutron 44. Method. Gsiro, Australia. Gamma Attenuation Klenke, J.M., AL. Flint and R.A. Nicholson. 1987. A collimated neutron probe for soil-moisture 1. Description: measurements. International Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. The gamma ray attenuation method is a Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 21-28. radioactive technique that can be used to determine soil moisture content. This method assumes that the Lawless, G.P, N.A MacGillivray and P.R. Nixon. scattering and absorption of gamma rays are related Lawless, G.P, .i M a c G l l v r a y a n d i N o n to the density of matter in their path and that the 1963. Soil moisture interface effects upon readings of neutron moisture probes. Soil Sci. specific gravity of a soil remains relatively constant as readings of neutron moisture probes. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., Vol. 27. pp. 502-507. the wet density changes with increases or decreases in c. Am. Proc., Vol. 27. pp. 502-507. moisture. Changes in wet density are measured by the gamma transmission technique and the moisture Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980. content is determined from this density change. Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 2. Measured Parameter Volumetric water content Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab., Special Report 80-31. 3. Response Time: < 1 min. Rawls, WJ. and L.E. Asmussen. 1973. Neutron 4. Disadvantages: probe field calibration for soil in the Georgia Coastal Plain. Soil Sci., 110, pp. 262-265. * Restricted to soil thickness of 1 inch or less, but with high resolution Simpson, J.R. and JJ. Meyer. 1987. Water content * Affected by soil bulk density changes measurements comparing a TDR array to neutron * Costly and difficult to use scattering. International Conference on * Large errors possible when used in highly Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. stratified soils Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 111-114. 5. Advantages: Stafford, J.V. 1988. Remote, non-contact and in-situ Can determine mean water content with measurement of soil moisture content: a review. de J. Agric. Eng. Res. 41:151-172. * Can be automated for automatic measurements and recording Taylor, S.A. 1955. Field determinations of soil * Can measure temporal changes in soil water moisture. Ag. Engineering. 26:654-659. * Nondestructive measurement Tollner, E.W. and R.B. Noss. 1988. Neutron probe 6. Related Literature: vs. tensiometer vs. gypsum blocks for monitoring soil moisture status. Sensors and Techniques for Gardner, W.H., G.S. Campbell and C. Calissendorff. Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation 1972. Systematic and random errors in dual Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA gamma energy soil bulk density and water content 93740-0018. pp. 95-112. measurements. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 36:393398. Tyler, S.W. 1987. Application of neutron moisture meters in large diameter boreholes. International Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods of Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 7 Malicki, M.A., E.C. Campbell and RJ. Hanks. 1987. * Possible to perform long-term in situ Investigation on power factor of the soil electrical measurements impedance as related to moisture, salinity and * Can be automated bulk density. International Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. 6. Related Literature: Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 233-238. Baker, J.M. and R.R. Allmaras. 1990. System for Malicki, M.A. and RJ. Hanks. 1989. Interfacial automating and multiplexing soil moisture contribution to two-electrode soil moisture measurement by time-domain reflectometry. J. sensors reading. Irrig. Sci., 10:41-54. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., 54(1):1-6. Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980. Dalton, F.N. 1987. Measurement of soil water Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture content and electrical conductivity using timein situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers, domain reflectometry. International Conference Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab., on Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. Special Report 80-31. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 95-98. Varallyay, G. and K. Rajkal. 1987. Soil moisture Dasberg, S. and F.N. Dalton. 1985. Time domain content and moisture potential measuring reflectometry field measurements of soil water techniques in Hungarian soil survey. content and electrical conductivity. Soil Sci. Soc. International Conference on Measurement of Soil Am. J., 49:293-297. and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 183-184. Dasberg, S. and A. Nadler. 1987. Field sampling of soil water content and electrical conductivity with Time-Domain Reflectometer (TDR) time domain reflectometry. International Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant 1. Description: Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 99-102. Time-domain reflectometer (TDR) determinations involve measuring the propagation of Drungil, C.E.C., K. Abt and TJ. Gish. 1989. Soil electromagnetic (EM) waves or signals. Propagation moisture determination in gravelly soils with time constants for EM waves in soil, such as velocity and domain reflectometry. Transaction of ASAE, attenuation, depend on soil properties, especially Vol. 32(1), pp. 177-180. water content and electrical conductivity. The propagation of electrical signals in soil is influenced Heimovaara, TJ. and W. Bouten. 1990. A by soil water content and electrical conductivity. The computer-controlled 36-channel time domain dielectric constant, measured by TDR, provides a reflectometry system for monitoring soil water good measurement of this soil water content. This contents. Water Resource Research, Vol. 26, pp. water content determination is essentially independent 2311-2316. of soil texture, temperature, and salt content. Herkelrath, W.N., S.P. Hamburg and Fred Murry. 2. Measured Parameter: 1991. Automatic, real-time monitoring of soil moisture in a remote field area with time domain Volumetric water content aided by propagation of reflectometry. Water Resour. Res., Vol. 27, pp. electromagnetic wave measurements. 857-864. 3. Response Time: = 28 sec. Reeves, T.L. and S.M. Elgezawi. 1992. Time domain reflectometry for measuring volumetric water 4. Disadvantages: Costly content in processed oil shale waste. Water Resource Research, 28:769-776. 5. Advantages: Simpson, J.R. and JJ. Meyer. 1987. Water content * Independent of soil texture, temperature, and measurements comparing a TDR array to neutron salt content scattering. International Conference on



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 5 * Relatively high level of precision when ionic Bloodworth, M.E. and J.B. Page. 1957. Use of concentration of the soil does not change thermistor for the measurement of soil moisture * Can be read by remote methods and temperature. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., Vol. 21. pp. 11-15. Resistive Sensor (Gypsum) Bouyoucos, G.J. and AH. Mick. 1948. A 1. Description: comparison of electric resistance units for making a continuous measurement of soil moisture under One of the most common methods of estimating field conditions. Plant Physiology. pp. 532-543. matric potential is with gypsum or porous blocks. The device consists of a porous block containing two Bouyoucos, G.J. and R.L. Cook. 1961. Humidity electrodes connected to a wire lead. The porous sensor: permanent electric hygrometer for block is made of gypsum or fiberglass. When the continuous measurement of the relative humidity device is buried in the soil, water will move in or out of the air. Soil Sci., Vol. 100. pp.63-67. of the block until the matric potential of the block and the soil are the same. The electrical conductivity Carlson, T.N. and .E. Salem. 1987. Measurement of of the block is then read with an alternating current soil moisture using gypsum blocks. International bridge. A calnration curve is made to relate bridge. A calibration curve is made to relate Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant electrical conductivity to the matric potential for any Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., particular soil. Using a porous electrical resistance . 193-200 block system offers the advantage of low cost and the possibility of measuring the same location in the field Cary, J.W. and H.D. Fisher. 1983. Irrigation throughout the season. The blocks function over the Cary, J. and H.. Fisher. 19. Irrigate entire range of soil water availability. The decisions simplified with electronics and soil water entire.11 * oft. Te sensors. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 47:1219-1223. disadvantage of the porous block system is that each block has somewhat different characteristics and must be individually calibrated. The main disadvantage of ollins, J.E. 1987. Soil moisture regimes of the gypsum block is that the calibration changes rangelands: using datapods to record soil gradually with time, limiting the life of the block sure ntnationaere (Phene, 1988). Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 193-200. 2. Measured Parameter: Soil moisture tension Erbach, D.C. 1983. Measurement of soil moisture 3. Response Time 2 to 3 hours and bulk density. ASAE Paper No. 83-1553. 4. Disadvantages: Fowler, W.B. and W. Lopushinsky. 1987. An economical, digital readout for soil moisture * Each block requires individual calibration blocks. International Conference on * Calibration changes with time Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. * Life of device limited Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 215-218. * Provides inaccurate measurements Fowler, W.B. and W. Lopushinsky. 1989. An 5. Advantages: Inexpensive economical, digital meter for gypsum soil moisture blocks. Soil Sci. Am. J. 53:302-305. 6. Related Literature: Freeland R.S. 1989. Review of soil moisture sensing Armstrong, C. Fletcher, J.T. Ligon and M.F. Mcleod. using soil electrical conductivity. Trans. of ASAE, 1987. Automated system for detailed Vol. 32(6):2190-2194. measurement of soil water potential profiles using watermark brand sensors. International Freeland, R.S., L.M. Callahan and R.D. Von Bernuth. Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant 1990. Instrumentation for sensing rhizosphere Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., temperature and moisture levels. Applied pp. 201-206. Engineering in Agriculture. 6(1):106-110.



PAGE 1

o/ ,"?Z UNIVERSITY\ OF Bulletin 292 /Ss UNIVERSITY OF April 1994 W FLORIDA Florida Cooperative Extension Service Soil Moisture Sensors' Fedro S. Zazueta and Jiannong Xin 2 INTRODUCTION inaccurate because of field variability from one site to another. This bulletin is a survey and classification of the general methods for determining soil moisture. The 2. Measured Parameter. techniques reviewed here involve the use of gravimetric, nuclear, electromagnetic, tensiometric, Mass water content (percentage of dry vs. wet soil hygrometric, and remote sensing processes. Other weight) miscellaneous methods are grouped under the heading Other Related Papers. Each of the soil 3. Response Time: 24 hours moisture measuring methods is presented by means of (1) simple description, (2) measured parameter, (3) 4. Disadvantages: estimated response time, (4) disadvantages, (5) advantages, and (6) related papers. 0 Destructive test * Time consuming GRAVIMETRIC TECHNIQUES * Inapplicable to automatic control * Must know dry bulk density and transform 1. Description: data to volume moisture content The oven-drying technique is probably the most 5. Advantages: widely used of all gravimetric methods for measuring soil moisture and is the standard for the calibration of * Ensures accurate measurements all other soil moisture determination techniques. This * Not dependent on salinity and soil type method involves removing a soil sample from the field * Easy to calculate and determining the mass of water content in relation to the mass of dry soil. Although the use of this 6. Related Literature: technique ensures accurate measurements, it also has a number of disadvantages: laboratory equipment, Erbach, D.C. 1983. Measurement of soil moisture sampling tools, and 24 hours of drying time are and bulk density. ASAE Paper No. 83-1553. required. In addition, it is a destructive test in that it requires sample removal. This makes it impossible to Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods measure soil moisture at exactly the same point at a of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and later date. Eventually, measurements will become Mineralogical Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy 1. This document is Bulletin 292, a series of the Agricultural Engineering Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Publication date: April 1994. First published: June 1993 as Special Series AGE-27. 2. FS. Zazueta, Professor, Agricultural Engineering Department; Jiannong Xin, Graduate Assistant, Agricultural Engineering Department, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville FL 32611. The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function without regard to race, color, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. For information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension Service office. Florida Cooperative Extension Service / Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences I University of Florida / John T. Woeste, Dean UF~i.rJr i'" G( Eo FLisLA L&adIRdaES


xml record header identifier oai:www.uflib.ufl.edu.ufdc:UF0000852900001datestamp 2009-04-07setSpec [UFDC_OAI_SET]metadata oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc http:www.openarchives.orgOAI2.0oai_dc xmlns:dc http:purl.orgdcelements1.1 xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.openarchives.orgOAI2.0oai_dc.xsd dc:title Soil moisture sensors Bulletin dc:creator Zazueta, F. S ( Fedro S )Xin, Jiannong, 1961-Florida Cooperative Extension Servicedc:subject Soil moisture -- Measurement ( lcsh )dc:description b Bibliography Includes bibliographical references.Statement of Responsibility Fedro S. Zazueta and Jiannong Xin.Title from caption."April 1994."dc:publisher Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Floridadc:type Bookdc:format 12 p. : ; 28 cm.dc:identifier http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/ufdc/?b=UF00008529&v=00001AAA6791 (LTQF)AKA2280 (LTUF)30692174 (OCLC)001926319 (ALEPHBIBNUM)dc:source University of Floridadc:language English



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 12 Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. Phene, CJ. 1988. Soil water relations. Sensor and Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 193-200. Techniques for Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation Technology, California State Univ., Gardner, W.R. 1987. Water content: an overview. Fresno, CA 93740-0018. pp. 127-138. International Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Schmugge, TJ., TJ. Jackson and H.L. McKim. 1980. Univ., pp. 7-9. Survey of methods for soil moisture determination. Water Resources Research, Hutmacher, R.B. 1988. Infrared thermometry for 16:961-979. canopy temperature measurements: applications and limitation in irrigation scheduling. Sensor Stafford, J.V. 1988. Remote, non-contact and in-situ and Techniques for Irrigation Management, Proc. measurement of soil moisture content: a review. Center for Irrigation Technology. California J. Ag. Eng. Res., 41:151-172. State Univ., Fresno, CA 93740-0018. pp. 19-22. Wobschall, Darold. 1978. A frequency shift dielectric Merriam, J.L. 1988. Soil moisture deficiency and soil moisture sensor. IEEE Trans. on Geosci. fell/appearance technique for irrigation control. Electronics. 16:112-118. Sensor and Techniques for Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA 93740-0018. pp. 113-116.



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 6 Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods of constant. The readout from the probe is not linear Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical with water content and is influenced by soil type and Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy Series No. 9. soil temperature. Therefore, careful calibration is Am. Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition, pp. 493-544. required and long-term stability of the calibration is questionable. Henson, Jr., W.H., G.M. Turner, M. Collins and OJ. Yeoman. 1987. Electrical measurement of the 2. Measured Parameter: moisture content of Baled Alfalfa Hay. Paper No. 87-1073, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI 49058. Volumetric soil water content Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980. 3. Response Time: Instantaneous Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 4. Disadvantages: Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab., Special Report 80-31. · Long-term stability questionable * Costly Rose, M.A. and J.M. Russo. 1987. Integrated system for evaluating performance of soil moisture units 5. Advantages: in field capacity conditions. International Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant * Theoretically, can provide absolute soil water Water Status. Centennial of Utah State Univ., content pp. 207-214. * Water content can be determined at any depth Taylor, S.A. 1955. Field determinations of soil · Sensor configuration can vary in size so moisture. Agr. Engineering. 26:654-659. sphere of influence or measurement is adjustable Thomson, SJ. and C.F. Armstrong. 1987. * Relatively high level of precision when ionic Calibration of the watermark model 200 soil concentration of soil does not change moisture sensor. Applied Eng. in Agr. Vol. 3. pp. * Can be read by remote methods 186-189. 6. Related Literature: Tollner, E.W. and R.B. Noss. 1988. Neutron probe vs. tensiometers vs. gypsum blocks for monitoring Bell, J.P., TJ. Dean and AJ.B. Baty. 1987. Soil soil moisture status. Sensors and Techniques for moisture measurement by an improved Irrigation Management. Center for Irrigation capacitance technique, Part II. Field techniques, Technology, California State Univ., Fresno, CA evaluation and calibration. J. of Hydrology. 93740-0018. pp. 95-112. 93:79-90. Wheeler, PA. and G.L. Duncan. 1984. Dean, TJ., J.P. Bell and AJ.B. Baty. 1987. Soil Electromagnetic detection of soil moisture. moisture measurement by an improved ASAE Paper No. 84-2078. capacitance technique, Part I. Sensor design and performance. J. of Hydrology. 93:67-78. Capacitive Sensor Gardner, W.H. 1986. Water content. In: Methods 1. Description: of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy Soil moisture content may be determined via its Series No. 9. Am. Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition, effect on dielectric constant by measuring the pp. 493-544. capacitance between two electrodes implanted in the soil. Where soil moisture is predominantly in the Halbertsma, J., C. Przybyla and A. Jacobs. 1987. form of free water (e.g., in sandy soils), the dielectric Application and accuracy of a dielectric soil water constant is directly proportional to the moisture content meter. International Conference on content. The probe is normally given a frequency Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. excitation to permit measurement of the dielectric Centennial of Utah State Univ., pp. 11-16.



PAGE 1

Soil Moisture Sensors Page 4 Methods (Klute, A., ed). Agronomy Series No. 9. Am. Stafford, J.V. 1988. Remote, non-contact and in-situ Soc. Agronomy, 2nd edition, pp. 493-544. measurement of soil moisture content: a review. J. Ag. Eng. Res. 41:151-172. Gurr, C.C. 1959. Use of gamma rays in measuring water content and permeability in unsaturated Tollner, E.W., J.M. Cheshire, Jr. and B.P. Verma. columns of soil. Soil Sci. pp. 224-229. 1987. X-ray computed tomography and nuclear magnetic resonance for soil systems. Mckim, H.L., J.E. Walsh and D.N. Arion. 1980. International Conference on Measurement of Soil Review of techniques for measuring soil moisture and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State in situ. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Univ., pp. 247-254. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab., Special Report 80-31. ELECTROMAGNETIC TECHNIQUES Nofziger, D.L. 1978. Errors in Gamma-ray Resistive Sensor (General) measurements of water content and bulk density in nonuniform soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., 1. Description: Vol. 42. pp. 845-850. Electromagnetic techniques include methods that Nuclear Magnetic Resonance depend upon the effect of moisture on the electrical properties of soil. Soil resistivity depends on 1. Description: moisture content; hence it can serve as the basis for a sensor. It is possible either to measure the With this technique, water in the soil is subjected resistivity between electrodes in a soil or to measure to both a static and an oscillating magnetic field at the resistivity of a material in equilibrium with the right angles to each other. A radio frequency soil. The difficulty with resistive sensors is that the detection coil, turning capacitor, and electromagnet absolute value of soil resistivity depends on ion coil are used as sensors to measure the spin echo and concentration as well as on moisture concentration. free induction decays. Nuclear magnetic resonance Therefore, careful calibration is required for these imaging can discriminate between bound and free techniques. water in the soil. 2. Measured Parameter: 2. Measured Parameter: Volumetric water content Soil water potential aided by electrical resistance 3. Response Time: < 1 min. measurements 4. Disadvantages: Same as for neutron scattering 3. Response Time: Instantaneous 5. Advantages: Same as for neutron scattering 4. Disadvantages: 6. Related Literature: * Calibration not stable with time and affected by ionic concentration Anderson, S.H. and CJ. Gantzer. 1987. * Cost of equipment to generate signal and Determination of soil water content by X-ray readout system is high but could decrease computed tomography and NMR imaging. with new solid-state technology International Conference on Measurement of Soil and Plant Water Status. Centennial of Utah State 5. Advantages: Univ., pp. 239-246. * Theoretically, can provide absolute soil water Paetzold, R.F., A.D. Santos and GA. Matzkanin. content 1987. Pulsed nuclear magnetic resonance * Can determine water content at any depth instrument for soil-water content measurement: * Sensor configuration can vary in size so sensor configurations. Soil Sci. Am. J. 51:287sphere of influence or measurement is 290. adjustable