Abstract
The proper handling soil allows the reduction of contaminants, maximize agricultural productivity, and is directly related the knowledge spatial variability of soil attributes. This spatial variability can express isotropic and anisotropic form. The latter being neglected in research related to management zones delineation. In this context, the present study aimed to evaluate the effect of the geometric anisotropy correction on the management zone delineation. The methodology was applied under database of soybean productivity and apparent electrical conductivity (CEa) of a rural property in Ponta Pora – MS. By means of this georeferenced database, maps was interpolated with ordinary kriging. For each combination, attribute (productivity and CEa) and number of classes, were produced two maps management zones, one without and one with anisotropy correction, the same were compared through the kappa index, with significance tested by the Z-test. The management zones number was also evaluated by Fuzziness Performance Index (FPI) and the Modified Partition Entropy (MPE). The area subdivision in two management zones, without and with anisotropy correction, presented higher Kappa index, with values of 0.89 and 0.91 respectively, but not presented significant differences with each other.
Highlights
The soybean culture presented, in the 2017/18 harvest, an estimated production of 336.7 million tons, in an area planted estimated at 90.1 million hectares (UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 2018)
Despite the difference of scale in the measurement of the attributes, the productivity presented a lower percentage variation of the data around the mean, than that presented for the condutividade elétrica aparente (CEa)
This author obtained a distribution of CEa values with positive asymmetry)
Summary
In the delimitation of management zones the maps of variability have been generated using several geostatistical interpolators such as ordinary kriging (ALVES et al, 2013; CHANG et al, 2014; FU; WANG; JIANG, 2010; MORAL; TERRÓN; REBOLLO, 2011; SAFANELLI; BOESING; BOTTEGA, 2015; TRIPATHI et al, 2015), the co-kriging (MORARI; CASTRIGNANO; PAGLIARIN, 2009), the regression kriging (MORAL; TERRÓN; SILVA, 2010), the linear programming (CIDGARCIA et al, 2013) among others. These surveys have ignored the geometric anisotropy correction. Given the importance of the geometric anisotropy correction, the present work aims to evaluate its effect on the delimitation of management zones
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
