Full text: Resource and environmental monitoring (A)

    
   
     
     
       
   
   
  
  
   
spatial data in the form of a map. In addition, GIS forms an 
ideal platform for the storage and management of model input 
data and the presentation of model results which process model 
provides. The Global Positioning System (GPS) technology 
provides accurate positioning system necessary for field 
implementation of variable rate technology (VRT). The 
Internet makes possible the development of a mechanism for 
effective farm management using remote sensing. The 
potentials of remote sensing in providing information required 
for precision farming, in general, have been reviewed by 
Moran et al.(1997), and for Indian conditions by Ray et 
al.(2001). 
4.0 THE INDIAN INITIATIVE 
Realising the potential of space technology in precision 
farming, the Department of Space, Government of India has 
initiated eight pilot studies in well-managed agricultural farms 
of the ICRISAT, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research 
and the Agricultural Universities, as well as in farmers' fields. 
The pilot studies aim at delineating homogeneous zones with 
respect to soil fertility and crop yield, estimation of potential 
yield, yield gap analysis, monitoring seasonally-variable soil 
and crop conditions using optical and microwave sensor data, 
and matching the farm inputs to bridge the gap between 
potential and actual yield through spatial decision support 
systems (SDSS). The test sites are spread over a fairly large 
area across a cross section of agro-climatic zones of the 
Indian sub-continent, and cover some of the important crops 
like wheat, rice, sorghum, pigeon pea, chickpea, soybean and 
groundnut. 
5.1 A Case Study 
The study was taken up (i) to analyze the gap between 
potential and existing crop yields using crop growth simulation 
models, and (ii) to develop a spatial decision support system 
(SDSS) at ICRISAT farm bound by geo-co-ordinates17.6° to 
7.33? N and 78.1° to 78.4° E, and located in Patancheru, 
Medak district of Andhra Pradesh, southern India (Fig-1). The 
test site forms part of the pediplain developed over granite- 
gneiss complex. Both red soils (Alfisols) and black soils 
(Vertisols) and their intergrades are encountered in the farm. 
The climate is semi-arid and sub-tropical with around 800 mm 
of mean annual rainfall, which is received mostly from 
southwest monsoon. Within the farm, two nano-watersheds- 
one in the red soils (RW2) and another in black soils (BW7) 
have been selected. Whereas sorghum and groundnut were 
taken in RW2, BW7 had two types of cropping system viz., (i) 
Soybean var. PK72- a 90 to 100 days crop, during kharif 
followed by chickpea during rabi, and (ii) Soybean-pigeonpea 
(ICPL87119- a 210 to 240 days crop) intercrop. In the 
following section, the work on BW7 nano-watershed will be 
briefly discussed. 
Soybean and pigeonpea were sown on June 21,2002 with a 
row to row spacing of 30cm in case of soybean sole, and 
22.5cm for soybean and pigeon pea intercrop. A plant-to-plant 
distance of 7-10cm was maintained for soybean whereas it was 
25cm for pigeonpea. In order to demonstrate the utility of 
raised-bed system, crops were sown in two types of land 
configuration- the conventional flat bed, and broad bed and 
furrow (BBF) system which facilitates free movement of farm 
machinery apart from maintaining good drainage especially 
during rainy season. Whereas the distance between the 
furrows was maintained at 150cm, the furrow width and bed 
height were kept at 30cm and 20cm, respectively. The raised 
IAPRS & SIS, Vol.34, Part 7, “Resource and Environmental Monitoring”, Hyderabad, India, 2002 
310 
beds were tending to taper on either side towards the furrow 
while leaving an effective bed width of 110cm for sowing 
crops. Due care was taken to keep the crop free from weeds, 
insects, pests and diseases. 
Owing to persistent cloud cover during monsoon (kharif 
season), the microwave data from synthetic aperture radar 
(SAR) onboard Radarsat-1 in fine resolution beam mode with 
a spatial resolution of 8m and acquired from three overpasses- 
one on Augustl4, another on September7 and the third on 
October1,2002 were utilized. The cloud-free IRS-1D LISS-III 
and PAN data were also collected. Apart from satellite 
overpass-synchronous ground truth for soil moisture estimation 
and for deriving biophysical parameters crops, namely leaf 
area index (LAT) and phytomass, such observations were also 
routinely made at biweekly intervals throughout the crop 
growing season. Soybean crop was harvested on October] and 
2,2002. A 3x3m sample size was selected for harvesting and 
ultimately for yield estimation and mapping. Samples were 
taken both from broad bed and furrow (BBF) and flat bed (FB) 
plots. The locations of each segment was identified with the 
help of Nikon Total Station model 801. 
An attempt was made to correlate the back scattering 
coefficient as measured by Radarsat-1 SAR and soil 
moisture, and crop parameters including LAI and phytomass. 
An analysis of simulated yield using Agriculture Production 
Systems Simulator (APSIM) model and observed yield data 
(Table-1) for soybean/pigeonpea crop system for 1999-2000 
reveals a seed yield gap of 783kg ha'! (Singh et al.,2002). 
Table-1 Simulated and observed yields (t ha!) of soybean/ 
pigeonpea intercrop system on a shallow soil during 1999 - 
2000 season 
  
Flat shallow BBF shallow 
  
Soybean Pigeonpea Soybean Pigeonpea 
  
Simulated yield 
Total biomass 7162 1985 7377. 1980 
Seed yield 2083 325 2145 334 
Observed yield 
Total biomass 3286 1861 3781 2107 
Seed yield 1300 . 603 1497 721 
  
  
  
Singh et al., 2002 (Unpublished). 
Furthermore, a close look at historical yield data for a field 
within BW7 nanao-watershed, which is based on random 
sample of 10x4.5m segments, indicates a fairly large in-field 
heterogeneity (3,756 to 4,556kg/ha) in soybean grain yield 
(Table-2). 
Table-2 Soybean (variety PK472) yield at ICRISAT farm in 
1999, 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
S.No Weight(kg)* Yield(kg/ha) 
Grain Fodder Grain Fodder 
with pods with pods 
1 6.911 16.9 1,536 3,756 
2 8.173 19.8 1,816 4,400 
3 8.556 20.5 1,901 4,556 
4 7.66 18.7 1,702 4,156 
5 8.344 19.4 1,854 4,311 
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
*Se; 
Cou 
Gro 
Prec 
in | 
stak 
How 
be « 
redi 
witl 
pote 
con 
esti: 
to f 
Croj 
maj 
mul 
low 
not 
mul 
det 
ord 
pre 
nee 
ben 
Bai 
Zac 
pro 
Bai 
bas 
227 
Bo 
gre 
ant 
Br 
19 
COI
	        
Waiting...

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.