Agronomy Journal Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (24)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, C. K.
Right arrow Articles by Doran, J. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, C. K.
Right arrow Articles by Doran, J. W.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, C. K.
Right arrow Articles by Doran, J. W.
Related Collections
Right arrow Sustainable Agriculture
Right arrow Other Crop Management
Right arrow Dryland Cropping Systems
Right arrow Plant and Soil Interactions
Right arrow Other Geophysical Methods
Right arrow Soil Classification and Mapping
Right arrow Production Agriculture
Right arrow Crop Ecology
Right arrow Site-Specific Analysis
Agronomy Journal 95:303-315 (2003)
© 2003 American Society of Agronomy

SITE-SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT

Site-Specific Management Zones Based on Soil Electrical Conductivity in a Semiarid Cropping System

Cinthia K. Johnson*,a, David A. Mortensenb, Brian J. Wienholda, John F. Shanahana and John W. Dorana

a USDA-ARS, 120 Keim Hall, Lincoln, NE 68583-0934
b Dep. of Crop and Soil Sci., Pennsylvania State Univ., 116 ASI Building, University Park, PA 16802

* Corresponding author (cjohnso2{at}bigred.unl.edu)

Received for publication November 14, 2001.

    ABSTRACT
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 NOTES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Site-specific management (SSM) can potentially improve both economic and ecological outcomes in agriculture. Effective SSM requires strong and temporally consistent relationships among identified management zones; underlying soil physical, chemical, and biological parameters; and crop yields. In the central Great Plains, a 250-ha dryland experiment was mapped for apparent electrical conductivity (ECa). Eight fields were individually partitioned into four management zones based on equal ranges of deep (ECDP) and shallow (ECSH) ECa (approximately 0–30 and 0–90 cm depths, respectively). Previous experiments documented negative correlations between ECSH and soil properties indicative of productivity. The objectives of this study were to examine ECSH and ECDP relationships with 2 yr of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and corn (Zea mays L.) yields and to consider the potential applications of ECa–based management zones for SSM in a semiarid cropping system. Within-zone wheat yield means were negatively correlated with ECSH (r = -0.97 to -0.99) and positively correlated with ECDP (r = 0.79–0.97). Within-zone corn yield means showed no consistent relationship with ECSH but positive correlation with ECDP (r = 0.81–0.97). Equal-range and unsupervised classification methods were compared for ECSH; within-zone yield variances declined slightly (0–5%) with the unsupervised approach. Yield response curves relating maximum wheat yields and ECSH revealed a boundary line of maximum yield that decreased with increasing ECSH. In this semiarid system, ECSH–based management zones can be used in SSM of wheat for: (i) soil sampling to assess residual nutrients and soil attributes affecting herbicide efficacy, (ii) yield goal determination, and (iii) prescription maps for metering inputs.

Abbreviations: ECa, apparent electrical conductivity • ECDP, deep apparent electrical conductivity • ECSH, shallow apparent electrical conductivity • GIS, geographic information system • SSM, site-specific management


    INTRODUCTION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 NOTES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
DESPITE UNIFORM MANAGEMENT across a field, within-field variability in crop yields is a well-recognized phenomenon. For this reason, whole-field management is increasingly viewed as inefficient because it results in the overapplication of inputs in low-producing areas and suboptimal application in areas with high-production potential. Site-specific management—the spatially directed management of soils, crops, and pests based on varying conditions within a field (Larson and Robert, 1991)—provides an alternative to the use of the field as a primary management unit. Increasing fertilizer and pesticide costs, coupled with environmental concerns stemming from their use, conceptually advance SSM as a means to improve economic (Griffith, 1995; Reetz and Fixen, 1995) and ecological outcomes in agriculture (Wallace, 1994; Castelnuovo, 1995; Larson et al., 1997).

The implementation of SSM requires real-time and accurate global positioning system (GPS) equipment, geographic information systems (GIS) for spatial analysis and mapping, variable-rate applicators, and input prescription maps to define management zones and direct metering devices controlling input rates (Eliason et al., 1995). While the first three components are currently available, the last, an effective and economical basis for defining site-specific inputs, is lacking. In response to this need, significant research effort has been directed toward evaluating a variety of individual and combined GIS databases as frameworks for identifying stratified within-field management zones (regions of similar production potential). These include kriged soil test point data (Mulla, 1991); soil survey maps (Robert, 1989); topography (Kravchenko et al., 2000); remote sensing (McCann et al., 1996); topography and remote sensing (Tomer et al., 1995); topography, remote sensing, and farmer experience (Fleming et al., 1999); electrical conductivity sensors (Sudduth et al., 1997; Lund et al., 1999); and yield maps (Eliason et al., 1995; Stafford et al., 1999). These approaches to SSM have met with varying degrees of success that are often highly soil or region specific.

Because some factors affecting crop yields occur unpredictably, including weather, human error, and equipment malfunction (operator error, plugged spray nozzles or planters, herbicide drift, weed pressure, poor seed viability, etc.), the potential impact of SSM may be limited in some years. At best, it will optimize the interactions between soil and inputs of nutrients, seed, or pesticides by targeting soil indices related to production potential that are measurable, relatively stable, and manageable. The productivity of a given soil is determined by the cumulative effect of natural factors involved in its formation, including climate, topography, parent material, biological activity, and time (Jenny, 1941), and management history. Management history can significantly affect the range and spatial heterogeneity of soil chemical properties beyond that attributable to natural processes. This is particularly true in organic systems where input applications are typically less uniform than in conventional systems (Cambardella and Karlen, 1999).

While variations in individual soil factors have limited utility for SSM, their combined impact on water and nutrient use efficiency is highly relevant to both production potential and environmental concerns, such as NO3 leaching (Bouma and Finke, 1993) and soil acidification (Malhi et al., 1991). Fields can be mapped for multiple soil parameters using intensive grid sampling and interpolation. However, such techniques are often economically unfeasible, particularly in semiarid regions with predominately large-scale, dryland, low-input farms (McCann et al., 1996). For SSM to be cost effective in these regions, a surrogate measure is required, an external means for integrating and stratifying soil attributes associated with productivity. Whatever their derivation, prescription maps for SSM must satisfy two criteria. First, a strong relationship must exist between identified management zones and ground-truth soil test data, encompassing soil physical, chemical, and biological parameters underlying yield potential. Second, zones must be temporally consistent, given normal fluctuations in dynamic soil properties such as moisture and temperature. Ideally, farmers should be able to employ field-specific SSM prescription maps not only across seasons, but also for several years before re-evaluation.

One mapping option showing promise for SSM is soil ECa. Depending on the soil factor(s) dominating measured ECa and the strength of the relationship between the factor(s) and other soil characteristics, ECa may function as a direct and/or indirect indicator of multiple soil parameters (Sudduth et al., 1995; Doolittle et al., 1994; Jaynes et al., 1995b). For some soils, ECa mapping appears to integrate soil parameters related to productivity to produce a template of potential yield (Jaynes et al., 1993; Sudduth et al., 1995; Kitchen et al., 1999). Because most ECa research has been conducted in humid areas of the United States with high rates of precipitation, very little is known about the relationships among ECa, soil properties, and crop yields in semiarid regions.

In a farm-scale study in semiarid northeastern Colorado, Johnson et al. (2001) found that management zones based on ECa mapping (approximately 0–30 cm depth of measurement) provide a useful basis for soil sampling. Such zones also fulfill the first criteria for SSM prescription maps by effectively delineating within-field regions of varying production potential. Other published research indicates that spatial patterns in ECa do not change with temporal variation in soil moisture and/or temperature (Lund et al., 1999; Sudduth et al., 2001). These findings advance ECa mapping as a basis for SSM.

The primary objective of this study was to examine the relationships between ECa–based management zones and crop yields in a 4-yr crop rotation in the semiarid central Great Plains. Specifically, 2 yr of yield maps from two fields each of corn and winter wheat, two depths of ECa measurement (approximately 0–30 cm and 0–90 cm), and two methods for stratifying ECa into management zones (unsupervised and equal-size classification) were evaluated. A secondary objective was to consider the significance and potential application of ECa–based management zones for SSM in a semiarid cropping system. This second objective was supported by previous findings regarding the relationships between ECSH and soil physical, chemical, and biological properties (Johnson et al., 2001).


    MATERIALS AND METHODS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 NOTES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Site
This research was conducted on the farmer-owned and managed Farm-Scale Intensified Cropping Study, first described by Johnson et al. (2001), located approximately 30 km east of the town of Sterling in northeastern Colorado (40°36' N, 103° W). The site encompasses a contiguous section of farmland, approximately 250 ha. It is located in the heart of the central Great Plains where highly variable precipitation averages 420 mm annually. Soils are comprised of a mixture of Platner, Weld, and Rago loam soils (fine, smectitic, mesic, Aridic Paleustolls and fine, smectitic, mesic Pachic Argiustolls) with 0 to 5% slope.

In 1999, the experimental site was converted from a conventionally tilled wheat–fallow system to a no-tillage, high-intensity winter wheat–corn–proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.)–fallow rotation. Each of the four crop treatments is applied to two fields (approximately 31 ha each) in a given year (Fig. 1) .



View larger version (125K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Experimental layout superimposed on the March 1999 shallow (approximately 0–30 cm depth of measurement) apparent electrical conductivity map of the 250-ha site. Field numbers, followed by cropping treatments—winter wheat (W), corn (C), proso millet (M), and fallow (F)—for 1998 and 1999 (in parenthesis) are shown in the upper left-hand corner of each field.

 
Data Collection
Data layers that were analyzed and compared included: (i) maps of ECa collected at two depths of measurement, ECSH (0–30 cm) and ECDP (0–90 cm); (ii) the map of ECSH classified into four zones based on unsupervised classification; (iii) maps of ECSH and ECDP classified into four zones of equal size (containing the same number of ECa observations); and (iv) 2 yr of corn and winter wheat yield maps. All yield and ECa mapping was georeferenced using a Trimble AG132 D GPS receiver (Trimble Navigation, Sunnyvale, CA)1 with submeter accuracy.

Yield maps were taken from corn and wheat fields in 1999 (Fields no. 3 and 6 for corn and Fields no. 5 and 8 for wheat) and 2000 (Fields no. 5 and 8 for corn and fields no. 1 and 4 for wheat) (Fig. 1). Data collected with a Micro-Trak grain yield monitor (Micro-Trak Syst., Eagle Lake, MN)1 were verified with grain weigh-ticket information (total bushels, moisture content, and test weight) and mapped using Farm HMS software (Red Hen Syst., Fort Collins, CO).1

Mapping and Classification of Apparent Soil Electrical Conductivity
The entire site was ECa–mapped in March 1999 by direct contact (15-m swath width at a speed of 4.5 m s-1), using a Veris 3100 Sensor Cart (Veris Technol., a division of Geoprobe Syst., Salina, KS)1 (Fig. 1). Calibrations were performed according to manufacturer instructions. Latitude, longitude, and ECSH and ECDP readings (mS m-1) were recorded at 1-s intervals by the Veris datalogger. Values of ECa were converted to dS m-1 for reporting. All fields were uncropped at the time of mapping, except for Fields 5 and 8 (Fig. 1), which were planted to winter wheat.

The ECa raw (point) data files were projected to UTM (Universal Transverse Mercator) coordinates in the NAD83 datum (North American Datum of 1983) in ArcInfo (ESRI, Redlands, CA).1 They were then interpolated by inverse-distance weighting using the nearest-neighbor technique and redefined as grid files (10-m grid cell resolution). Four management zones based on ranges of ECSH and ECDP (low, medium low, medium high, and high) were determined for each of the eight fields comprising the study site using a method called equal-size classification. The number of ECSH or ECDP grid cells in each field was tallied and divided by four to identify four zones approximately equal in area.

In addition to equal-size classes, ECSH maps were classified using a second method termed unsupervised classification (ERDAS, 1997). 1 Unsupervised classification uses an iterative process to group clusters of statistically similar data. The ECSH maps from each of the eight fields in the study site were individually interpolated by inverse-distance weighting and classified using unsupervised classification to form 12 classes within each field at a 10-m grid cell resolution. The 12 classes were then recoded into four ranges of ECSH: low, medium low, medium high, and high. Recoding is a highly subjective process wherein the 12 original unsupervised classes of ECSH were combined to mimic the dominant visible spatial patterns seen in the original gray-scale ECSH maps (Fig. 2) . Through this process, ECSH measurements (pixels) were aggregated into naturally occurring clusters that may reduce within-zone variance.



View larger version (152K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. A gray-scale shallow (approximately 0–30 cm depth of measurement) apparent electrical conductivity map for (A) Field 1 and (B) following unsupervised classification and recoding into four electrical conductivity management zones. Variations in color, from dark to light, correspond to increasing conductivity, and {circ} symbols represent selected soil-sampling sites.

 
Soil Sampling
A soil-sampling scheme was developed based on management zones assigned by unsupervised classification of ECSH. For each of the eight fields in the study site, three representative georeferenced soil-sampling sites were arbitrarily selected within each of the four management zones to total 96 sites across the section (Fig. 3) . Sites were identified near the center of distinct, nonadjoining sections within each ECSH zone to avoid transition areas. They were placed in a manner to minimize clustering and provide comprehensive coverage of each field (Fig. 2). Because the long-term objective of this study is to track management effects on soil condition and production potential that occur primarily at the surface, soils were evaluated in the top 30 cm only. Seven 4-cm-diam. soil cores were collected, composited, and mixed from each sampling site at depths of 0 to 7.5 and 7.5 to 30 cm.



View larger version (192K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Classified apparent electrical conductivity (ECa ) map (applying the unsupervised classification method to 0–30 cm depth of ECa measurement) and soil-sampling scheme for the 250-ha experimental site.

 
A variety of soil analyses were conducted to assess physical (bulk density, soil texture, and water content), chemical (laboratory-measured electrical conductivity, NH4–N, NO3–N, whole-soil organic matter, particulate organic matter, pH, extractable P, and total C and N), and biological (microbial biomass C and N and potentially mineralizable NH4) soil parameters defining intrinsic soil fertility. Data in Table 1 represents 0- to 30-cm depth soil characteristics calculated from combined and weighted 0- to 7.5- and 0- to 30-cm depth analyses. Johnson et al. (2001) provide additional information on soil collection and analysis.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Apparent electrical conductivity (ECa) ranges, ECa means, and significance of soil physical and chemical parameters sampled postharvest (0–30 cm depth) within ECa management zones (Johnson et al., 2001). Zones were based on shallow ECa (approximately 0–30 cm depth of measurement) and were identified using unsupervised classification. Analyses of variance were run across replicates and fields.

 
Manipulation and Analysis of GIS Data Layers
As with ECa maps, winter wheat and corn yield map raw data files were imported into ArcInfo (ESRI, Redlands, CA)1 where they were projected to UTM coordinates in the NAD83 datum, interpolated by inverse-distance weighting using the nearest-neighbor technique, and redefined as grid files (10-m grid cell resolution). To align gridded ECa and yield maps with each other and with classified-ECa maps, all data layers were snapped into identical georeferenced positions by defining the furthermost northwest and southeast points of the experimental site (boundary control points). In this format, data layers were superimposed to create a grid stack wherein corresponding georeferenced data could be exported in spreadsheet format for statistical evaluation.

Both ECSH and ECDP were compared with winter wheat and corn yield maps for significant associations using ANOVA and regression techniques. Relationships between yield and ECa–classified data layers were assessed by ANOVA for a randomized complete block design with ECSH or ECDP zones (identified using equal-size and/or unsupervised classification) as a treatment factor. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS (SAS Inst., 1997),1 and differences were declared significant at the 0.05 level, unless stated otherwise.


    RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 NOTES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Apparent Electrical Conductivity (0–30 and 0–90 cm Depths of Measurement) versus Crop Yield
Table 1 illustrates the across-site range and means of ECSH within ECSH zones and the within-ECSH zone range, distribution, and significance for selected soil parameters sampled from the study site (Johnson et al., 2001). In this semiarid region, bulk density, clay content, and pH—soil properties associated with erosion—were positively correlated with ECSH. Conversely, water content, soil organic matter, C and N, and extractable P—properties indicative of yield potential—were negatively correlated with ECSH. These findings predicted a negative correlation between ECSH and yield that was corroborated by 1999 (Fields 5 and 8) and 2000 (Fields 1 and 4) wheat yield maps (Fig. 4) .



View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Mean wheat and corn yields for 1999 and 2000 within management zones based on unsupervised and equal-size classification of shallow electrical conductivity (ECSH) (approximately 0–30 cm depth of measurement) regressed against mean ECSH within ECSH zones. The error bars represent the standard error of the mean.

 
The regression of mean yield within ECSH class against mean ECSH within ECSH class, for each of the fields planted to wheat during these 2 yr, revealed strong and consistent relationships between the two data layers (r2 = 0.99 with equal-size classification). This was true even though wheat yields were significantly greater in 1999 than in 2000. Whole-field averages were 2958 and 3401 kg ha-1 (Fields 5 and 8) in 1999 compared with 2398 and 2476 kg ha-1 (Fields 1 and 4) in 2000. For the region, 1999 and 2000 represent above-average– and typical-yielding years for wheat, respectively. Figure 4 also shows that the magnitude of wheat yield improvement, among zones of decreasing ECSH, was greatest in the higher yielding 1999. Through increased (yield potential–based) application rates of inputs currently limiting yields in the best-producing areas of these fields, SSM has the potential to heighten yield differences among management zones to an even greater degree.

The relationship between ECSH and yield, while applicable to wheat, did not hold across crops for the 2 yr evaluated. Although ANOVA showed significant (P <= 0.0001) associations between ECSH and yield for three of four corn fields evaluated (Field 3 in 1999 and Fields 5 and 8 in 2000), these relationships were not consistent (Table 2). When regressing mean corn yields within ECSH class against mean ECSH within ECSH class, only Field 8 showed significant linearity (r2 = 0.90 with equal-size classification) (Fig. 4).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2. Comparison of 1999 and 2000 winter wheat and corn yield averages and significance within apparent electrical conductivity (ECa) zones classified based on shallow and deep ECa measurements (approximately 0–30 and 0–90 cm depths, respectively). Zones were determined for each depth of measurement using equal-size ECa classification.

 
The relationships between ECa and crop yields also varied with the depth of ECa measurement. Comparison of mean ECDP within ECDP zones to mean winter wheat and corn yields within ECDP zones revealed positive correlations between ECDP and yield across years for both crops (Table 2). Thus, while only ECDP adequately described corn yields, either ECSH or ECDP provided a useful basis for identifying management zones for winter wheat. Yet, winter wheat yield separation among ECa zones, for the highest-yielding zones of three of four fields evaluated (Fields 4, 5, and 8), was greatest when these zones were based on ECSH (Table 2). Management zones based on ECDP significantly partitioned corn yields in three of four fields examined (Field 3 and 6 in 1999 and Field 8 in 2000). The remaining corn field (Field 5 in 2000) had the lowest overall yield of the four fields and little across-field yield variation, likely causes of poor yield discrimination among classes. These findings indicate that for the 2 yr examined, ECSH provided the best basis for management zone determination in winter wheat while ECDP better integrated those soil characteristics defining corn yield.

The disparity in relationships between ECSH and yields of corn and wheat may simply reflect differences in crop response to both the soil factors contributing to measured ECSH and to other soil factors with which they are correlated. It has been documented that factors affecting yield variability may differ among crops (Vieira, 1999). Yet, different water stress levels between corn and wheat across the 2 yr studied and limitations in ECSH effectiveness for delineating soil factors associated with root-zone water availability may better explain the divergence in ECSH–yield relationships for corn and wheat. Because its growing season corresponds well with precipitation patterns for the region, wheat is a more suitable crop for the central Great Plains than is corn. In addition, greater soil water storage due to the rotational sequencing of wheat after fallow improves water availability to that crop. These factors reduce water stress on wheat crops to benefit yield and yield consistency across years. Previous experiments describing the soil characteristics of ECSH–delineated zones indicate that ECSH is highly correlated with soil water, organic matter content, and total C and N, all indicators of improved water-holding capacity (Johnson et al., 2001). These surface soil characteristics appear to be essential determinants of winter wheat yield in the typical and high-yielding years encountered during this study.

Conversely, the corn growing season spans a period of low precipitation and high evaporative demand that diminishes water availability and water use efficiency. Furthermore, corn follows wheat in the rotation under study, making yields more susceptible to annual variations in precipitation. For these reasons, corn yields in the central Great Plains are particularly vulnerable to water stress during a 6-wk period between 15 July and 25 August; precipitation rates within this period explain 70% of the variability in corn yields (Nielsen, 1996). Corn crops in both 1999 and 2000 were highly drought stressed during this critical time. Consequently, yields were low in 1999, averaging 2092 and 2654 kg ha-1 (Fields 3 and 6), and poor in 2000, averaging 1386 and 1621 kg ha-1 (Fields 5 and 8). Climatic influences, particularly variability in precipitation timing and quantity, appear to diminish or confound the impact that underlying surface soil characteristics, integrated by ECSH, have on corn yields. It is possible that, in a year with higher precipitation during July and August, corn yields would present the same negative association with ECSH identified for wheat. Further studies are required to investigate this possibility.

Other investigators have found highly variable relationships between corn yields and various methods for delineating management zones. A study in the southeastern USA by Sadler et al. (1995) examined correlations between corn yields and soil condition delineated by soil survey map units. They documented the variable response of corn yield, rainfall partitioning, and water use efficiency both among and within map units in dry years. In western Iowa, Jaynes et al. (1995a) found inconsistent correlations between corn and soybean yields and electrical conductivity (approximately 0–150 cm depth of measurement) in high- and low-precipitation years, both among fields and across years. They hypothesized that this resulted from opposing responses among electrical conductivity–delineated zones, to low vs. excessive soil moisture, causing heightened yield variability within fields. In semiarid regions, yield reductions from excessive precipitation are rare. Thus, electrical conductivity–delineated management zones may be a more reliable indicator of corn yield potential and, therefore, a more useful basis for SSM in these regions than in those receiving higher rates of precipitation.

Measured soil ECa is a function of salinity, clay type and percentage, water content, bulk density, and temperature (Rhoades et al., 1989; McNeill, 1980). Findings by Johnson et al. (2001) indicate that the primary drivers of ECSH at the Farm-Scale Intensive Cropping Study are clay content and CaCO3 salts (contributing to increased soil pH at high ECSH) (Table 1). Increases in these soil properties are characteristic of eroded parts of a field. Therefore, a negative correlation exists between ECSH and soil characteristics associated with yield potential. Conversely, decreases in surface clay content and CaCO3 correlate with other soil properties that improve water-holding capacity, nutrient exchange, and plant rooting depth (increase yield potential).

Because soil assessments corresponding to ECDP were not made, we must hypothesize the reason(s) for the reversal in relationship between (wheat and corn) crop yields and ECDP compared with that between wheat yields and ECSH. Because water is the greatest limiting factor to crop production in the central Great Plains, positive correlations between yield and ECDP must be linked to soil water content, particularly given that corn crops were highly drought stressed during both years examined. These findings indicate that ECDP is driven by soil water content, salts in the soil solution, and clay content, which at 0- to 90-cm depths likely both contributes to measured ECa and correlates with soil water-holding capacity. Probable factors controlling salinity of the soil solution are residual NO3 and NH4 and CaCO3. Measured ECDP may also reflect soil depth to lime present in the C horizon. Further research is needed to test associations among soil characteristics, crop yields, and ECDP.

Unsupervised versus Equal-Size Shallow Apparent Electrical Conductivity Classification
Classification is the partitioning of soil into regions of similar production potential as a means to describe within-field variability and create management zones. Clearly, for this study site, there exists a strong linear relationship between ECSH and wheat yields, allowing for the identification of ECSH–delineated management zones based on ranges of ECSH. Yet, how should these ranges be assigned? Classes may be defined using threshold values of either soil properties critical to productivity or regions of differing soil morphology (Lark, 1997). If these threshold values delineate levels of intrinsic soil fertility, they may present an ideal basis for SSM. Van Uffelen et al. (1997) applied a weighted distance measure to identify patterns in simulated yield maps for this purpose. Lark and Stafford (1997) used fuzzy multivariate clustering analysis to define heterogeneous management zones based on 3 yr of actual yield data. Yet, for farmers to adopt SSM, the development of management zones must be simple, functional, and economically feasible. Complex field assessments and data manipulation may not be justifiable in terms of time, benefit, or economics.

Unsupervised classification, one method for identifying ECa management zones, is based on the assumption that grouping ECa data points into naturally occurring clusters (ranges) will reduce within-zone yield variability. It represents a simplified approach for identifying threshold parameters related to yield potential. Table 3 compares unsupervised and equal-size classification methods. For three of four wheat fields evaluated, ECSH management zones derived from unsupervised classification showed increased F values over equal-size methods. Comparison of F values offers a rough estimate of the power of the two methods to separate yields. For the same three fields, unsupervised classification decreased variance within ECSH zones compared with equal-size methods. Fraisse et al. (2001) compared whole-field yield variance (one management zone) to yield variances calculated when fields were divided into one to six management zones using unsupervised classification. Yield variances associated with different numbers of management zones were expressed as a percentage of whole-field yield variance. Percentages were compared to determine which number of zones best reduced within-zone variance (increased between-zone variance) as a means to identify the optimal number of management zones for each field. Applying this approach to compare unsupervised and equal-size classification methods revealed a 0 and 5% reduction in yield variance with unsupervised classification (Table 3). Thus, differences in wheat yield partitioning due to classification method are subtle (Table 3 and Fig. 4), an indication that either unsupervised or equal-size classification methods may be acceptable bases for SSM.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 3. Comparison of wheat crop yield variances and standard errors within shallow apparent electrical conductivity (ECSH) management zones (0–30 cm depth of measurement) classified using equal-size and unsupervised methods.

 
Yield distribution and frequency among ECSH management zones is shown for both classification methods (Fig. 5) . Unsupervised classification partitioned a greater percentage of land area into low-end ECSH zones, particularly in the medium-low zone, at the expense of allocation into the high-ECSH zone. As a result, wheat yield standard errors within zones decreased in medium-low zones in all fields examined when unsupervised classification was used (Table 3). Therefore for this site, equal-size classification promotes the relatively even dispersal of seed, herbicide, and fertilizer inputs across fields while unsupervised classification will require higher total inputs. A farmer's personal observations of temporal and spatial variability in yield (the degree of heterogeneity) may be the best basis for deciding both the number of management zones to be assigned and the classification method to be applied to an individual field.



View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5. Wheat yield frequency distributions for shallow (approximately 0–30 cm depth of ECa measurement) apparent electrical conductivity classes with unsupervised and equal-size classification methods. The black arrows indicate mean yield within ECa classes.

 
An additional consideration when selecting a method for management zone classification is the degree of specificity desired. Are assigned zones applicable to only one field, or are they consistent among fields? Can soil parameters in management zones within one field be inferred from soil test data results collected from the same zone in another field? The answers to these questions are economically significant and will affect the likelihood of SSM acceptance.

The ECSH map collected from the experimental site used in this study documents the variability of ECSH among fields (Fig. 1). Measured ECSH is a reflection of both historic and recent management in each field. For example, the V-shaped patterns in each of the four corner fields are believed to be the result of around-and-around plowing of the east and west half sections of the site in the 1930s. Recent management history can be visually discerned by differences in the gray-scale map (differences in the magnitude of ECSH) among fields. These differences likely reflect variations in soil water and nutrient status due to uptake by the previous year's crop. For this reason, the application of equal-range classification to each field would preclude the association of ECSH zones across field boundaries. Conversely, the ECSH map classified by the unsupervised method (Fig. 3) shows a reasonable degree of continuity among ECSH zones in adjacent fields, indicating some normalization of measured ECSH.

For cropping systems using multiple-year rotations, such as the one studied at this experimental site, several years fall between times when a given crop is grown in a given field. This factor, in addition to climatic variability among years, requires the collection of data over several rotations (at least 10 or 12 yr) to build databases for the SSM of specific crops grown within individual fields. The use of unsupervised classification may allow data collected in multiple fields to be combined for extrapolation to many sites within and across farms.

Implications of Wheat Yield–Shallow Apparent Electrical Conductivity Relationships for Site-Specific Management
The ECa–yield relationships identified in this paper, coupled with ECa–soil attribute correlations identified in previous experiments (Johnson et al., 2001), provide information essential to the application of SSM in this semiarid cropping system. Effective SSM requires management zones that function: (i) to delineate variations in soil nutrient status and production potential; (ii) as a framework for metering inputs of fertilizer, pesticide, and seed; and (iii) as a basis for identifying yield goals or variations in yield potential across a field.

For a classification system to be effective, it should divide a field into zones delineating the same or similar yield-limiting factors (Lark and Stafford, 1997). Previous experiments at the Farm-Scale Intensive Cropping Study site reveal that management zones based on the unsupervised classification of ECSH effectively delineate soil characteristics related to productivity. Soil organic matter, total C and N, extractable P, water content, and microbial biomass were negatively correlated with ECSH and significantly different among ECSH zones. Because these zones partition both soil nutrients, N and P, and other soil characteristics related to nutrient and herbicide availability and production potential, they fulfill the first requirement for SSM, a useful basis for soil sampling to assess residual nutrients and soil attributes affecting herbicide efficacy. Second, the strong ECSH–yield–soil attribute relationships documented in this study support the employment of ECSH–based management zones as a framework for metering fertilizer, pesticide, and seed inputs.

Yield response curves can be used as a means to identify maximum crop yields, also known as the boundary line (Webb, 1972), by regressing yield against ECa. Kitchen et al. (1999) used this type of boundary-line analysis to estimate the magnitude of yield suppression for various crops given different weather and soil conditions; however, they stopped short of suggesting its use for yield goal setting in SSM. This is because ECa–yield relationships were highly variable for the claypan soils evaluated in north-central Missouri. Depending on the crop, weather conditions, and soil characteristics, yields increased with increasing ECa, decreased with increasing ECa, peaked at midrange values of ECa, or showed no relationship to ECa.

Although only 2 yr of data were evaluated, the strong and consistent negative correlations between ECSH and wheat yields and positive correlations between ECDP and yields of both corn and wheat support greater potential application for boundary-line analyses in this dryland cropping system. Yield data collected in a field in an above-average year may serve as an indicator of maximum potential yield, for that crop in that field, when expressed as a function of ECa. Given the 2 yr of available data for wheat, the regression of 1999 wheat yields against ECSH best portrays within-field wheat yield variability and yield potential (Fig. 6A) . Data from the two winter wheat fields in 1999 were combined for this analysis to increase the database size for future SSM application to the entire Farm-Scale Intensive Cropping Study site and potentially to nearby fields of similar soil type and topography. In highly heterogeneous soils, it may be important to collect yield data from specific fields for application to only those fields.



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6. A) Scatter plot of 1999 winter-wheat yield as a function of shallow (approximately 0–30 cm depth of measurement) apparent electrical conductivity. B) Potential winter wheat yield as a function of shallow apparent electrical conductivity.

 
Figure 6A illustrates that ECSH is yield limiting or more appropriately that soil characteristics integrated by ECSH and other soil properties with which they are correlated are yield limiting. As ECSH increases, mean and maximum wheat yields decrease. The regression line, defined as data falling at the 90th percentile of yield frequency for each 0.01 increment of ECSH, indicates maximum yield at various levels of ECSH (Fig. 6B). Even with the inclusion of infrequently occurring high- and low-end ECSH data, the points are reasonably linear (r2 = 0.77). A line, so defined, can be used to identify maximum yield goals for site-specific nutrient determination within ECSH–delineated management zones. Nutrient inputs can be based on maximum potential yield within ECSH class or a percentage thereof. The economic and ecological implications of fertilizer overapplication must be carefully considered. Nutrient rates based on yield goals short of maximum may be most appropriate in areas where precipitation inputs are rarely sufficient to achieve maximum yield.


    CONCLUSIONS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 NOTES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
The success of SSM relies on the creation of appropriate databases to describe spatial variability in past crop performance as a basis for future management decisions to improve economic and ecological outcomes. The exclusive use of ECa maps to explain yield variability is not effective, a fact poignantly illustrated by the lack of consistent relationships between corn yield and ECSH management zones in this study. This is because the soil factors controlling measured ECa may or may not delineate yield-limiting factors; furthermore, weather interactions may alter soil–yield relationships. Similar limitations exist for yield maps. While yield maps are the most realistic integrators of all factors driving yield, they encompass both management-affected (soil-based) and noncontrollable (climate and management) factors. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to isolate and quantify those factors in yield heterogeneity that can be managed.

However, complementary data layers including an ECSH–classified map, ground-truth soil test information, and accumulated yield maps appear to address both actual yield and intrinsic soil productivity factors essential to establishing appropriate management zones for the SSM of winter wheat in this semiarid system. Weather influences on crop yield variability tend to be relatively straightforward in semiarid systems where yield variability largely reflects varying degrees of drought stress. For this reason, soil–yield–ECa relationships may be a more stable across years than is true for areas receiving higher rates of precipitation.

Comparison of winter wheat yields and ECa showed strong correlations between yield and both ECSH and ECDP measurement depths in the average and above-average–yielding years encountered in this study. Yields were negatively correlated with ECSH and positively correlated with ECDP. Zone treatments based on ECSH showed better yield discrimination than those based on ECDP. Although ECa–yield relationships were not evaluated for a year with below-average yields, winter wheat yields tend to be reasonably consistent in the central Great Plains when wheat follows a fallow year. Field maps separated into management zones based on unsupervised ECSH classification showed slight improvement in zone partitioning (decreased within-zone variance) over equal-size classification. Thus, the unsupervised classification of ECSH appears to be the best basis for management zone identification in winter wheat. Future research is required to determine to what degree these results can be generalized to a regional scale.

Strong correlations among ECSH, soil properties, and wheat yields indicate that ECSH–delineated management zones provide an excellent framework for SSM of dryland winter wheat. Management zones based on the unsupervised classification of ECSH serve three functions essential to SSM. They provide: (i) a basis for soil sampling to assess nutrient levels and soil attributes affecting herbicide efficacy; (ii) a means to calculate nutrient inputs by using boundary-line analyses between ECSH and wheat yield to identify yield goals (variation in maximum yield potential across a field); and (iii) a prescription map for metering fertilizer, pesticide, and seed inputs. The first two functions are essential for determining fertilizer, herbicide, and seeding rates within management zones while the last delineates the zones to which they will be applied.

Similar potential exists for SSM of corn. Within-zone corn yield means for the below-average and low-yielding years studied showed no consistent relationship with ECSH but strong positive correlation with ECDP. Because corn yields are highly variable in the region studied, even if strong correlations are found between ECSH and corn yields in high-yielding years, ECDP may offer a more realistic basis for the establishment of SSM zones for corn. Further research is required to identify the soil factors driving measured ECDP and characterize soils falling within ECDP–based management zones. The continued collection of winter wheat and corn yield maps from this study site over a number of low-, average-, and high-yielding years, and the evaluation of these data in conjunction with ECSH and ECDP, will improve our ability to establish appropriate management zones for both wheat and corn in this semiarid setting.


    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Russ and Matt Johnson, landowners and managers of the experimental site, and Maribeth Milner, Michael Schlemmer, and Aaron Schepers for excellent technical assistance.


    NOTES
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 NOTES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
1 Mention of a trademark, proprietary product, or vendor does not constitute a guarantee of or warranty of the product by USDA nor imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that may be suitable. Back


    REFERENCES
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 NOTES
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Agron. J.Home page
J. Sawchik and A. P. Mallarino
Evaluation of Zone Soil Sampling Approaches for Phosphorus and Potassium Based on Corn and Soybean Response to Fertilization
Agron. J., November 6, 2007; 99(6): 1564 - 1578.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Agron. J.Home page
N. E. Derby, F. X. M. Casey, and D. W. Franzen
Comparison of Nitrogen Management Zone Delineation Methods for Corn Grain Yield
Agron. J., February 6, 2007; 99(2): 405 - 414.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Soil Sci.Home page
M. S. Grigera, R. A. Drijber, K. M. Eskridge, and B. J. Wienhold
Soil Microbial Biomass Relationships with Organic Matter Fractions in a Nebraska Corn Field Mapped using Apparent Electrical Conductivity
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., August 3, 2006; 70(5): 1480 - 1488.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Agron. J.Home page
A. Hornung, R. Khosla, R. Reich, D. Inman, and D. G. Westfall
Comparison of Site-Specific Management Zones: Soil-Color-Based and Yield-Based
Agron. J., March 2, 2006; 98(2): 407 - 415.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Agron. J.Home page
M. Flowers, R. Weisz, and J. G. White
Yield-Based Management Zones and Grid Sampling Strategies: Describing Soil Test and Nutrient Variability
Agron. J., May 13, 2005; 97(3): 968 - 982.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Agron. J.Home page
D. Inman, R. Khosla, D. G. Westfall, and R. Reich
Nitrogen Uptake across Site Specific Management Zones in Irrigated Corn Production Systems
Agron. J., January 1, 2005; 97(1): 169 - 176.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Agron. J.Home page
A. R. Schepers, J. F. Shanahan, M. A. Liebig, J. S. Schepers, S. H. Johnson, and A. Luchiari Jr.
Appropriateness of Management Zones for Characterizing Spatial Variability of Soil Properties and Irrigated Corn Yields across Years
Agron. J., January 1, 2004; 96(1): 195 - 203.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Agron. J.Home page
C. K. Johnson, K. M. Eskridge, B. J. Wienhold, J. W. Doran, G. A. Peterson, and G. W. Buchleiter
Using Electrical Conductivity Classification and Within-Field Variability to Design Field-Scale Research
Agron. J., May 1, 2003; 95(3): 602 - 613.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited