Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Smart Agriculture System with Soil Moisture Alerts: Review Paper

Anoushka Nayak, Gajanan M Naik

Abstract


Agriculture is crucial for sustaining human life, but it faces challenges like unpredictable climate conditions, limited water availability, and pest infestations that lower productivity. To tackle these problems, using smart technologies, especially Internet of Things (IoT)-based soil moisture alert systems, has become essential in modern precision agriculture. These technologies use sensors and wireless networks to monitor important environmental factors such as soil moisture, humidity, temperature, and nutrient composition in real time. Moving from traditional manual monitoring to smart, automated systems has greatly improved irrigation efficiency. This change allows for better water management and reduces waste. New innovations, such as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), satellite-based remote sensing (RS), and optical or electrical soil sensors, have further improved the accuracy and reach of data. However, the widespread use of IoT-enabled smart farming is still limited due to high installation costs, low digital literacy, and concerns about data security. This paper looks at developments in soil moisture monitoring and alert technologies from 2013 to 2024, emphasizing their potential to improve crop yield, optimize water use, and support sustainable farming practices, especially in water-scarce regions of developing countries.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Clothier, B.E.; Hall, A.J.; Deurer, M.; Green, S.R.; Mackay, A.D. Soil Ecosystem Services: Sustaining Returns on Investment into Natural Capital. In Sustaining Soil Productivity in Response to Global Climate Change: Science, Policy, and Ethics; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: West Sussex, UK, 2011; pp. 117–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Tuller, M.; Babaeian, E.; Jones, S.; Montzka, C.; Sadeghi, M.; Vereecken, H. The Paramount Societal Impact of Soil Moisture. Eos 2019, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Babaeian, E.; Sadeghi, M.; Jones, S.B.; Montzka, C.; Vereecken, H.; Tuller, M. Ground, Proximal, and Satellite Remote Sensing of Soil Moisture. Rev. Geophys. 2019, 57, 530–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Fischer, G.; Tubiello, F.N.; van Velthuizen, H.; Wiberg, D.A. Climate change impacts on irrigation water requirements: Effects of mitigation, 1990–2080. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2007, 74, 1083–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Viscarra Rossel, R.A.; Adamchuk, V.I. Ch 6: Proximal Soil Sensing. In Precision Agriculture for Sustainability and Environmental Protection Edition: 1; Oliver, M., Bishop, T., Marchant, B., Eds.; Earthscan: Oxford, UK, 2013; p. 304. [Google Scholar]

Kang, C.S.; Kanniah, K.D.; Alvin Lau, M.S. Microwave remote sensing for soil moisture estimation in tropical regions—A review and SMOS L2 products validation. Int. J. Geoinform. 2016, 12, 9–16. [Google Scholar]

Peng, J.; Loew, A.; Merlin, O.; Verhoest, N.E.C. A review of spatial downscaling of satellite remotely sensed soil moisture. Rev. Geophys. 2017, 55, 341–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Srivastava, P.K. Satellite Soil Moisture: Review of Theory and Applications in Water Resources. Water Resour. Manag. 2017, 31, 3161–3176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Montagu, K.D.; Stirzaker, R.J. Why do two-thirds of Australian irrigators use no objective irrigation scheduling methods. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2008, 112, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]

Leib, B.G.; Hattendorf, M.; Elliott, T.; Matthews, G. Adoption and adaptation of scientific irrigation scheduling: Trends from Washington, USA as of 1998. Agric. Water Manag. 2002, 55, 105–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.