Agricultura de Precisin

La agricultura de precisin es un trmino agronmico que define la gestin

de parcelas agrcolas sobre la base de la observacin, la medida y la actuacin
frente a la variabilidad inter e intra-cultivo. Requiere un conjunto de tecnologas
formado por el Sistema Global de Navegacin por Satlite (GNSS), sensores e
imagen tanto satelital como aerotransportada, junto con Sistemas de
Informacin Geogrfica (SIG) para estimar, evaluar y entender dichas
variaciones. La informacin recolectada puede ser empleada para evaluar con
mayor precisin la densidad ptima de siembra, estimar la cantidad adecuada
de fertilizantes o de otros insumos necesarios, y predecir con ms exactitud el
rendimiento y la produccin de los cultivos.
Search

Imagine you are a farmer riding along in your

50,000-acre wheat field early in the growing season.
You push a button on your tractor to turn on its
Global Positioning System (GPS) monitor, which
pinpoints your exact location to within one meter.
Touching another button, you display a series of
Geographical Information System (GIS) maps that
show where the soil in your field is moist, where the
soil eroded over the winter, and where there are
factors within the soil that limit crop growth. Next,
you upload remote sensing data, collected just
yesterday, that shows where your budding new crop
is already thriving and areas where it isnt. You hit
SEND to upload these data into an onboard machine
that automatically regulates the application of
fertilizer and pesticidesjust the right amount and
exactly where the chemicals are needed. You sit back
and enjoy the ride, saving money as the machines do
most of the work. Congratulations, you are among a
new generation of growers called "precision

farmers."

Does this sound like a science fiction scenario? Its

not. Even as you read this, there are already dozens
of farmers around the United States and Canada who
use satellite and aircraft remote sensing data to more
effectively and efficiently manage their croplands.
"Precision crop management is still in the
experimental phase," states Susan Moran, a research
hydrologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture
and member of the NASA Landsat 7 Science Team,
based in Tucson, Arizona. "But there is a significant
number of farmers who use high technology and
remote sensing data for precision crop management."
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, NASA, and
NOAA are among key agencies contributing to this
revolution in large-scale agriculture. The goal is to
improve farmers profits and harvest yields while
reducing the negative impacts of farming on the
environment that come from over-application of
chemicals.
The Right Stuff

A new generation of farmers

is using aerial and satellite
remote sensing imagery (like
this 4-meter resolution image
from IKONOS) to help them
more efficiently manage their
croplands. By measuring
precisely the way their fields
reflect and emit energy at
visible and infrared
wavelengths, precision
farmers can monitor a wide
range of variables that affect
their cropssuch as soil
moisture, surface
temperature, photosynthetic
activity, and weed or pest
infestations. (Image copyright
2000 Space Imaging)

The Right Stuff

Moran explains that a farmer, like any business
person, needs good and timely information to succeed.
To formulate an effective growing strategy, a farmer
needs to know three things: (1) which conditions are
relatively stable during the growing season; (2) which
conditions change continually throughout the growing
season; and (3) information to diagnose why their crop
is thriving in some parts of the field and struggling, or
even dying, in other parts. Increasingly, large-scale
growers are using information gathered by aircraft and
satellite-based remote sensors to help them gather
these types of information.
Early detection of any change in growing conditions is
the key to good crop management. While there is no
match for a farmers own firsthand observations, it
isnt always possible for large-scale growers to survey
all of their lands every week. In addition to watching
out for pests, such as weeds and insects, farmers must
also monitor variables like soil moisture and even
plant disease outbreaks.

A number of scientific studies over the last 25 years

have shown that measurements in visible, nearinfrared, thermal infrared, and microwave
wavelengths of light can indicate when crops are
under stress (Moran 2000). Using satellite- and

This false-color composite

image of the Maricopa
Agricultural Center, a
research farm in central
Arizona, was acquired in
June 1996 by the Daedalus
sensor flying aboard a
NASA aircraft. The
vegetation growing in the
fields is mostly cotton and
alfalfa. Bare fields appear
blue, while soils that have
recently been leveled in
preparation for planting
appear white. Dark red
areas show flood irrigation
(through the crop canopy),
which can be seen in the
eastern part of field 31.
(Image courtesy Susan
Moran, Landsat 7 Science

aircraft-based remote sensors to precisely measure the Team)

wavelengths of radiant energy that are absorbed and
reflected from the land surface, scientists can diagnose
a wide range of growing conditions. For instance,
these data can tell farmers where their crop is thriving
and how efficiently the plants are photosynthesizing.
Alternatively, remote sensing data can tell not only
where, but why, their crop is under stress and help
them diagnose the source.

This false-color image

shows the same scene as
the image above, but it
represents measurements
made at thermal infrared
wavelengths of the
spectrum, to represent
surface temperatures. Cool
temperatures (blue and
green) are associated with
vegetation and hot
temperatures (yellow and
red) with bare soil. (Image
courtesy Susan Moran,
Landsat 7 Science Team)
Satellites and aircraft have the added advantage of
allowing farmers to survey their entire land in mere
minutes. "In the early days, when farmers had small
fields, they knew from practical experience which subareas were wetter and more fertile," notes Craig
Daughtry, a research physical scientist at the U.S.
Department of Agriculture in Beltsville, MD. "But as
farms have grown from a few hundred acres to [as
much as] 50,000 acres, farmers start to lose touch with
their fields. Remote sensing provides a fabulous tool
for looking at changes on small scales of space and
time."
Once farmers can correctly diagnose exactly where
and when there is a problem, the next step is to
correctly apply the treatment.

At the Right Place and Time

According to Moran, the term "precision farming"
refers to the use of an information and technologybased system for within-field management of crops.
"It basically means adding the right amount of
treatment at the right time and the right location within
a fieldthats the precision part," Moran explains.
"Farmers want to know the right amounts of water,
chemicals, pesticides, and herbicides they should use
Critical to precision
as well as precisely where and when to apply them."
farming is the
sophisticated new
equipment that is now
Critical to the success of precision farming is the
sophisticated new equipment that is now commercially commercially available.
The photo above shows a
available. Called "variable rate technologies," there
tractor with an imaging
are devices that can be mounted on tractors and
system attached on a track
programmed to control the dispersion of water and
chemicals based upon the information gained from the to obtain spectral
measurements within a
remote sensors.
field. These measurements
provide information about
Thanks to the marriage of remote sensing data with
the health of a crop.
GIS and GPS software tools, and on-tractor variable
rate technologies, farmers no longer must treat a field [Photograph courtesy
United States Department
of crops as one homogeneous unit. Charles Walthall,
of Agriculture (USDA)
also a research physical scientist at the U.S.
Agricultural Research
Department of Agriculture in Beltsville, recalls that
the old way of doing business was planting a crop and Service]
then applying fertilizer evenly across the whole field.
"But now were characterizing zones within the field
so we can optimize what inputs are needed to go into
that zone according to what they need to produce the
crop," Walthall says. "But if you limit your inputs
such as fertilizers, seeds, water, pesticides, or
herbicidesto precisely where and how much is
needed, you are putting less on the landscape. So the
cost is less and energy is saved, which means better
profit."

Perhaps more significantly, it can mean there is much

less chemical runoff from farms to negatively impact
the environment. According to Walthall, statesponsored agencies are passing laws limiting the types
and amounts of chemicals that farmers can use. The
State of Maryland, for instance, passed a law requiring
farmers to have a documented "phosphorus
management plan." (This law is particularly enforced
in the Chesapeake Bay region where the runoff of
phosphates into the bay can contribute to harmful
algae blooms and other negative environmental
impacts.) Other states are considering similar laws
aimed at regulating the use of nitrogen. Too much
nitrogen in the water supply is a health hazard to both
humans and animals.
But by using the tools of precision farming, growers
can specifically target areas of need within their fields
and apply just the right amounts of chemicals where
and when they are needed, saving both time and
money and minimizing their impact on the
environment.
Our Most Precious Resource

Ultra-low volume
herbicide application
methods (developed by
Agricultural Research
Service plant physiologist
Chester McWhorter and
colleagues) combined with
new techniques to
determine where
pesticides are needed
could significantly reduce
the use of agricultural
chemicals. (Photograph by
Keith Weller, courtesy
USDA Agricultural
Research Service)

Ironically, Earths most abundant resourcewaterhas become one of

the most precious resources in the United States as rivers, lakes, and
freshwater reservoirs are increasingly exploited for human use.
Consequently, using precision farming techniques to refine "irrigation
scheduling" is a research area of particular interest to Moran. She
explains that in the southwest, irrigation is both difficult and expensive.
There, she says, farmers have a tendency to over-irrigate, spending both
more time and money than is necessary.
This photo
shows a movable
"I'm trying to provide new information that could be used by farmers to linear irrigation
system with an
schedule irrigations to improve their profitability and use less water,"
imaging system
Moran says. "Often times, farmers look at weather variables and then
attached. Such
schedule irrigation based on that information. But if they had better
information, they could use scientific models and equations to compute devices can be
programmed,
more precisely how much water their crop is using."
based on remote
sensing data, to
Rather than guessing their crops potential need for water based upon
weather variables, farmers can use remote sensors to measure how much provide the right
water their crop is actually using. This would give them a more accurate amount of water
at the right time
measure of how much more water it needs.
to different areas
within a field.
(Photograph
courtesy USDA
Agricultural
Research
Service)

These three
false-color
images o

The basic concept is that as a plant grows, it takes in sunlight, nutrients

from the soil, and water to build plant structures during photosynthesis.
Some of the incoming sunlight is reflected, while some is absorbed and
either used for photosynthesis or converted into heat. Similar to the way
humans perspire to cool off, healthy plants use a process called
"transpiration" to keep cool. There are tiny pores on plants leaves, called
"stomata," that can open to allow water droplets to evaporate, thereby
releasing heat. But a plant that is under stress does not transpire well and
begins to overheat. At a certain temperature threshold, the plants internal
functions begin to break down. The plant begins to whither and change
its texture or shape or color, or all of the above, and there is potential for
damage. Remote sensors can measure the temperature of plants; or to be
more precise, they can measure how much energy plants emit at thermal

ver the Maricopa

Agricultural
Center were
acquired by the
Daedalus sensor
flying aboard a
NASA aircraft.
The top image
shows the color
variations
determined by
crop density
(also referred to
as "Normalized
Difference
Vegetation
Index," or
NDVI), where
dark blues and
greens indicate
lush vegetation
and reds show
areas of bare
soil. The middle
image is a map
of water deficit,
derived from the
Daedalus'
reflectance and
temperature
measurements.
The image
shows an
ongoing flood
irrigation in the
northern Field 7
and Field 107, in
which greens
and blues
indicate wet,

infrared wavelengths of the spectrum.

Moran explains that her computer model takes a given plants physical
attributes into consideration when making its calculations. As they are
gathered, new remote sensing data are also input into the model to
indicate which variablessuch as air temperature or soil moistureare
changing over time and by how much. She then uses mathematical
formulas to relate the plants temperature to the surrounding air
temperature and calculate how much water the plant is using. The
models output value falls somewhere on an index scale of from 0
(meaning no stress) to 1 (serious stress and the crop is probably
damaged). Corn, for example, could go as high as 0.4 on the crop water
stress index and still produce a harvest, whereas cotton has a much lower
stress threshold.
Moran concludes that if farmers are getting good and timely
measurements of plant and air temperature, then they can program when
and how much water to give each crop through an irrigation system. No
more water would be used than needed, thus saving cost and conserving
water.
Moran cites one study she conducted in Arizona to investigate the use of
remote sensing data for scheduling cotton irrigations. Typically, those
farmers irrigate ten times per growing season, but evidence showed that
some of those farmers could achieve basically the same harvest with only
nine irrigations.
"In those cases, one less irrigation saved more than all the cost of remote
sensing data," she states. "Both [irrigation and satellite remote sensing
data] are expensive. But then again many farmers are used to working
together as a group. They are used to sharing. Im hoping they could do
the same with remote sensing datapurchase one scene over a large area
to cover many farms, which would further offset the cost."
Search

Data Requirements for Precision Farming

According to Moran, an optimum remote sensing
system for precision farming would provide data as
often as twice per week for irrigation scheduling and
once every two weeks for general crop damage
detection. The spatial resolution of the data should be
as high as 2 to 5 square meters per pixel with
positional accuracy of within 2 meters. Additionally,
the data must be available to the farmer within 24

bare soil and

reds are dry, bare
soil. The bottom
image shows
where crops are
under serious
stress, as is
particularly the
case in Fields
120 and 199
(indicated by red
and yellow
pixels). These
fields were due
to be irrigated
the following
day. (Image
courtesy Susan
Moran, Landsat
7 Science Team)

hours of acquiring them.

Turnaround time, she says, is more important to
farmers than data accuracy. They would gladly accept
remote sensing measurements that are as poor as 75
percent accurate if they were assured of getting them
within 24 hours of acquisition. Unfortunately, says
Moran, there are currently no Earth orbiting satellites
that can meet all of a precision farmers requirements.
But she is optimistic that this will change within the
next 10 years as exciting new satellite remote sensing
technologies emerge. Until that time, there are still a
variety of sources of remote sensing data that farmers
can use.

This falsecolor image

was acquired
by Landsat 7's
Enhanced
Thematic
Mapper Plus
(ETM+) in
August 1999
over the
Maricopa
Agricultural
Center in
central
Arizona.
Bright red
For instance, the Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus
areas are
(ETM+) aboard Landsat 7 and the Advanced
irrigated
Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection
fields.
Radiometer (ASTER) aboard Terra provide good
According to
spatial and spectral resolution (up to 15 meters per
Susan Moran,
pixel) as well as good scientific calibration accuracy.
although most
But used by themselves these satellites revisit cycles
satellite
are too infrequent to be of use to precision farmers.
sensors
Moran is also interested in the new Advanced Land
currently lack
Imager (ALI) and the hyperspectral Hyperion sensor
the desired
aboard the newly launched EO-1. But none of these
spatial and
satellite sensors have the desired temporal resolution,
temporal
as they "see" a given patch of ground only once every
resolution,

16 days, on average. The Moderate resolution Imaging they may still

Spectroradiometer (MODIS), aboard Terra, sees a prove to be
given patch of ground almost every day (high valuable
temporal resolution), but its highest spatial resolution information
is only 250 meters per pixeltoo coarse for precision resources for
farming but perfect for regional to global-scale precision
research.
farmers as
these data are
Moran points out that precision farmers may use a incorporated
combination of satellite and airborne remote sensing into better
data to meet their needs. There are a growing number computer
of commercial companies that serve their local regions models that
by flying remote sensors aboard aircraft that collect allow farmers
data in visible and near-infrared channels at spatial to interpolate
resolution ranging from 0.3 to 1 meter per pixel and how growing
have turnaround times of less than 24 hours. For conditions
instance, it may be possible to purchase commercial change over
overflights periodically during the growing season to time and
fill in the gaps between acquisitions of satellite remote space. (Image
courtesy
sensing data.
Susan Moran,
Moran uses a computer model to integrate the various Landsat 7
data into a simulation of the growing conditions in the Science Team)
field. The model allows her to overcome some of the
spatial and temporal limitations in the Landsat 7 data
by interpolating or predicting the changes that occur
over time and space that the satellite cannot see.
Ultimately, where does Moran see all this new
precision farming technology heading? She envisions
a day when commercial companies can serve farmers
with new scientific tools that she calls "decision
support systems." In much the same way banks and
brokerages provide financial advice and accounting
services to business persons, there will be companies
using decision support systems to routinely map field
boundaries as well as weed, pest, or disease outbreaks.
These companies will track when a farmer plants,
waters, and applies fertilizers or other chemicals.
Based upon all this information, the companies will
help the farmers develop good precision management
strategies throughout the year to maximize their
harvest yields while saving them time and money.
"In a dream world, this is what should be happening,"
Moran muses. "That would be the entire precision

agriculture application in a nutshell. We dont yet have

such a system. But do we have the technology to build
one? Yes!"

References

Moran, M.S. and J. Irons, 2000: "New imaging

sensor technologies suitable for agricultural
management," Intl. J. Rem. Sens. (submitted).

Moran, M.S., 2000: "Technology and

techniques for remote sensing in agriculture,"
Assoc. Appl. Biol. and Rem. Sens. Soc. Conf.
on Remote Sensing in Agriculture; June 26-28,
Cirencester, England; p. 1-10.

Moran, M. Susan, 2000: "Image-Based

Remote Sensing for Precision Crop
ManagementA Status Report." Proceedings of
the Conference American Society of Civil
Engineers; Feb. 27-March 2, pp. 185-93.

Moran, M. Susan, 2000: "Image-Based

Remote Sensing for Agricultural Management
Perspectives of Image Providers, Research
Scientists, and Users." Proceedings of the 2nd
International Conference on Geospatial
Information in Agriculture and Forestry; Jan.
10-12.

Moran, M. Susan, Y. Inoue, and E.M. Barnes,

1997: "Opportunities and Limitations for
Image-Based Remote Sensing in Precision
Crop Management." Remote Sensing of the
Environment, vol. 61, pp. 319-46.

What
Is

Precis
ion
Farmi
ng?
Agri-News
This Week

Note, this document was created in 1997. It is being left

active on our website for those interested in the history of
precision agriculture and historical documentation.)
The electronics revolution of the last several decades has
spawned two technologies that will impact agriculture in
the next decade. These technologies are Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) and Global Positioning System
(GPS). Along with GIS and GPS there have appeared a
wide range of sensors, monitors and controllers for
agricultural equipment such as shaft monitors, pressure
transducers and servo motors. Together they will enable
farmers to use electronic guidance aids to direct equipment
movements more accurately, provide precise positioning
for all equipment actions and chemical applications and,
analyze all of that data in association with other sources of
data (agronomic, climatic, etc). This will add up to a new
and powerful toolbox of management tools for the
progressive farm manager.
Precision farming should not be thought of as only yield
mapping and variable rate fertilizer application and
evaluated on only one or the other. Precision farming
technologies will affect the entire production function (and
by extension, the management function) of the farm. A
brief overview of the components in precision farming is
presented in Figure 1 and listed below.
Yield monitoring
Instantaneous yield monitors are currently available from
several manufacturers for all recent models of combines.
They provide a crop yield by time or distance (e.g. every
second or every few metres). They also track other data
such as distance and bushels per load, number of loads and
fields.

Yield mapping
GPS receivers coupled with yield monitors provide spatial
coordinates for the yield monitor data. This can be made
into yield maps of each field.
Variable rate fertilizer
Variable rate controllers are available for granular, liquid
and gaseous fertilizer materials. Variable rates can either be
manually controlled by the driver or automatically
controlled by an on board computer with an electronic
prescription map.
Weed mapping
A farmer can map weeds while combining, seeding,
spraying or field scouting by using a keypad or buttons
hooked up to a GPS receiver and datalogger. These
occurrences can then be mapped out on a computer and
compared to yield maps, fertilizer maps and spray maps.
Variable spraying
By knowing weed locations from weed mapping spot
control can be implemented. Controllers are available to
electronically turn booms on and off, and alter the amount
(and blend) of herbicide applied.
Topography and boundaries
Using high precision DGPS a very accurate topographic
map can be made of any field. This is useful when
interpreting yield maps and weed maps as well as planning
for grassed waterways and field divisions. Field
boundaries, roads, yards, tree stands and wetlands can all
be accurately mapped to aid in farm planning.
Salinity mapping
GPS can be coupled to a salinity meter sled which is towed
behind an ATV (or pickup) across fields affected by
salinity. Salinity mapping is valuable in interpreting yield
maps and weed maps as well as tracking the change in
salinity over time.
Guidance systems
Several manufacturers are currently producing guidance
systems using high precision DGPS that can accurately
position a moving vehicle within a foot or less. These
guidance systems may replace conventional equipment

markers for spraying or seeding and may be a valuable

field scouting tool.
Records and analyses
Precision farming may produce an explosion in the amount
of records available for farm management. Electronic
sensors can collect a lot of data in a short period of time.
Lots of disk space is needed to store all the data as well as
the map graphics resulting from the data. Electronic
controllers can also be designed to provide signals that are
recorded electronically. It may be useful to record the
fertilizer rates actually put down by the application
equipment, not just what should have been put down
according to a prescription map. A lot of new data is
generated every year (yields, weeds, etc). Farmers will
want to keep track of the yearly data to study trends in
fertility, yields, salinity and numerous other parameters.
This means a large database is needed with the capability to
archive, and retrieve, data for future analyses.

Figure 1. Precision farming cycle.

Several benefits are achieved from an automated method of

capturing, storing and analyzing physical field records.

Detailed analyses of the farm production management
activities and results can be carried out. Farmers can look at
the performance of new varieties by site specific area,
measure the effect of different seeding dates or depths and
show to their banker the actual yields obtained and the
associated risk levels. It is imperative that trends and
evaluations are also measured over longer time spans.
Cropping strategies to control salinity may take several
years to evaluate while herbicide control of an annual weed
should only take one season. Precision farming can be
approached in stages, in order to ease into a more complex
level of management.
Precision farming allows for improved economic analyses.
The variability of crop yield in a field allows for the
accurate assessment of risk. For example, a farmer could
verify that for 70 % of the time, 75 % of the barley grown
in field "A" will yield 50 bushels. By knowing the cost of
inputs, farmers can also calculate return over cash costs for
each acre. Certain parts of the field which always produce
below the break even line can then be isolated for the
development of a site-specific management plan. Precision
farming allows the precise tracking and tuning of
production.
Precision farming makes farm planning both easier and
more complex. There is much more map data to utilize in
determining long term cropping plans, erosion controls,
salinity controls and assessment of tillage systems. But as
the amount of data grows, more work is needed to interpret
the data and this increases the risk of misinterpretation.
Farmers implementing precision farming will likely work
closer with several professionals in the agricultural, GPS
and computing sciences.
Where to start?
Precision farming does not "happen" as soon as one
purchases a GPS unit or yield monitor. It occurs over time
as a farmer adopts a new level of management intensity on
the farm. Implicit in this is an increased level of knowledge
of the precision farming technologies such as GPS. What is
perhaps more important for the success of precision
farming, at least initially, is the increased knowledge that a
farmer needs of his natural resources in the field. This
includes a better understanding of soil types, hydrology,

microclimates and aerial photography. A farmer should

identify the variance of factors within the fields that effect
crop yield before a yield map is acquired. A yield map
should serve as verification data to quantify the
consequences of the variation that exists in a field.
Management strategies and prescription map development
will likely rely on sources other than yield maps. The one
important key source of data a farmer should not start
precision farming without is an aerial photograph.
By Tom Goddard, Conservation and Development Branch, Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural
Development
(Proceedings: Precision Farming Conference, January 20 - 21, 1997, Taber, Alberta, Canada)

For more information about the content of this document,

contact Tom Goddard.
This document is maintained by Nicole Huggins-Rawlins.
This information published to the web on October 17,
2001.
Last Reviewed/Revised on February 18, 2014.

Home Jobs Volunteering Internships Giving Local Offices News About

What do you need?

Use the search below to search the site or find your local unit office.
Search

Agriculture

Community & Leadership

Natural Resources

Family

Food & Health

Lawn & Garden

4-H / Youth

Publications and Educational Resources

Precision Farming: A Comprehensive Approach

442-500
Robert "Bobby" Grisso, Extension Engineer, Biological Systems Engineering; Mark Alley,
Extension Agronomist & Professor, Crop & Soil Environmental Sciences; Phil McClellan,
President, MapTech, Inc., Blacksburg, VA; Dan Brann, Extension Grain Specialist, Crop &
Soil Environmental Sciences; and Steve Donohue, Extension Agronomist & Professor,
Crop & Soil Environmental Sciences; Virginia Tech
Table of Contents
Introduction
Precision Farming Terminology
Precision Farming vs. Traditional Agriculture
Information, Technology, and Decision Support
Getting Started
Reassessment
Examples of Site-Specific Crop Management
Questions to Continually Ask
Conclusion
Look for these Extension fact sheets for more information
Modified from
References
Acknowledgments

Precision Farming (PF), also referred to as precision agriculture or variable rate technology,
is the process used to vary management of crop production across a field. Midwestern
farmers have been using PF technologies for several years and it is now becoming popular

in Virginia. This publication introduces the principles and terminology used in PF. Crop
producers can use this information to gain a working knowledge of PF and develop the
ability to implement PF technologies in traditional crop production.
Return to Table of Contents

Precision Farming Terminology

Precision farming is a comprehensive approach to farm management and has the following
goals and outcomes: increased profitability and sustainability, improved product quality,
effective and efficient pest management, energy, water and soil conservation, and surface
and ground water protection. Table 1 provides a glossary of terms used in PF. These terms
may be confusing at first, but you will soon become familiar with the language of PF.

Return to Table of Contents

Precision Farming vs. Traditional Agriculture

In PF, the farm field is broken into "management zones" based on soil pH, yield
rates, pest infestation, and other factors that affect crop production.
Management decisions are based on the requirements of each zone and PF
tools (e.g. GPS/GIS) are used to control zone inputs. In contrast, traditional
farming methods have used a "whole field" approach where the field is treated
as a homogeneous area. Decisions are based on field averages and inputs are
applied uniformly across a field in traditional farming. The advantage of PF is
that management zones with a higher potential for economic return receive
more inputs, if needed, than less productive areas. Therefore, the maximum
economic return can be achieved for each input.

Return to Table of Contents

Information, Technology, and Decision Support

PF relies on three main elements: information, technology, and decision
support (management).

Information
Timely and accurate information is the modern farmer's most valuable resource. This
information should include data on crop characteristics, hybrid responses, soil properties,
fertility requirements, weather predictions, weed and pest populations, plant growth
responses, harvest yield, post harvest processing, and marketing projections.
Precision farmers must find, analyze, and use the available information (Figure 1) at each
step in the crop system. An enormous database is available on the internet. This data is both
accessible and quickly updated.

Figure 1. The learning cycle

is on-going, and precisionfarming tools provide a means to record and save information for
year-to-year comparisons of a location.

Technology
Precision farmers must assess how new technologies can be adapted to their operations. For
example, the personal computer (PC) can be used to effectively organize, analyze, and
manage data. Record keeping is easy on a PC and information from past years can be easily
accessed. Computer software including spreadsheets, databases, geographic information
systems (GIS), and other types of application software are readily available and most are
easy to use.
Another technology that precision farmers use is the global positioning system (GPS). GPS
allows producers and agricultural consultants to locate specific field positions within a few
feet of accuracy. As a result, numerous observations and measurements can be taken at a
specific position. Global information systems (GIS) can be used to create field maps based
on GPS data to record and assess the impact of farm management decisions.
Data sensors used to monitor soil properties, crop stress, growth conditions, yields, or post
harvest processing are either available or under development. These sensors provide the
precision farmer with instant (real-time) information that can be used to adjust or control
operational inputs.

Precision farming uses three general technologies or sets of tools:

Crop, soil, and positioning sensors - these include both remote and vehicle-mounted, "onthe-go" sensors that detect soil texture, soil moisture levels, crop stress, and disease and
weed infestations;
Machine controls - these are used to guide field equipment and can vary the rate, mix, and
location of water, seeds, nutrients, or chemical applications;
Computer-based systems - these include GIS maps and databases that use sensor
information to "prescribe" specific machine controls.
Decision support (management)
Decision support combines traditional management skills with PF tools to help precision
farmers make the best management choices or "prescriptions" for their crop production
system (Figure 2). Unfortunately, decision support has many times been either unreliable or
difficult to understand. Building databases based on the relationships between input and
potential yields, refining analytical tools, and increasing agronomic knowledge at the local
level are yet to be accomplished. Most agricultural researchers agree that decision support
remains the least developed area of PF. Diagnostic and database development will
eventually replace technologies as the real benefit of PF.

Figure 2. The
learning cycle with equipment use and technology overlaid. The precision farming tools
provide a means to record and save information for year-to-year comparisons of a location.
Return to Table of Contents

Getting Started
PF is not appropriate for every field. To determine if a specific field will benefit from PF,
use the following steps:
1. Review current data. Review existing information such as soil survey
maps, cropping practice records, historical characteristics, and handdrawn maps that show weed and disease problems, wet areas, and other
field characteristics. Use existing maps or aerial photographs and draw
boundaries around areas that have different characteristics (e.g. soil
type, crop yield, or soil pH).
2. Obtain additional data. Several government agencies have produced
maps including the following:

digitized soil surveys (SSURGO)

digital line graphs (DLG)

digital ortho-photo quarter quads (DOQQ)

Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Reference

(Tiger) files, which describe roads and boundaries

Each of these maps contains unique data for a specific purpose (e.g. roads, soil type,
contour). Most information can be acquired at little or no cost.
Obtain recent aerial photographs of your farm. Photographs taken when fields were
barren and at two or three vegetative stages are especially useful. These should be
available from your local office of the Farm Service Agency (FSA). Use the
photographs to identify known property characteristics such as fence lines, sandy
areas, poor drainage areas, livestock usage, and other features.
3. Gather yield data. Determine the yield variation within each field by
using a yield monitor. Many yield monitors can be retrofitted to your
combine. Sometimes, the purchase of a yield monitor is too expensive or
a yield monitor does not exist for a particular crop. In these cases, you
can obtain a rough yield estimate by spot-checking various areas of the
field with a weigh wagon.
4. Examine results. Mark areas with different yield values on an aerial
photograph. Color-coding with a felt marker or crayon makes referencing
easier. For example, use green for areas with high yields, yellow for
areas with medium yields, and red for areas with low yield. Compare
yield data with physical characteristics of the field and field notes. If you
notice a pattern of cause and effect, such as a very heavy weed
infestation where yields are reduced, you probably need to increase your
management of that area. You may wish to collect soil samples across
the field to determine if soil nutrient levels limited the yield in less
productive areas. Keep a notebook for each field that contains notes,
photographs, and maps of each year's harvest.
5. Data interpretation. You may notice patterns of uniform and nonuniform variability throughout the field when interpreting yield maps.
Table 2 provides a guide to interpreting variability within a yield map.
Use this information to evaluate management techniques and other
influences on crop production. Verify the reasons for non-uniformity
found in yield maps by on-site inspection.

Use a systematic approach to storing information when collecting data. Make paper
or electronic copies of your information. Store this information in different places

from your usual record keeping area to prevent theft or damage from fire, water, or
some other disaster.
Computers with PF and record keeping software help manage and retrieve data. GIS
programs overlay geo-referenced information for further analyses. You may find
working with a computer difficult at first. If so, use services that collect, handle,
analyze, and interpret data for you.
6. Management strategy. Determine a course of action once a problem
has been identified. This is sometimes difficult since each farm is unique
and a prescribed solution may not be available. Use the services of an
agricultural consultant, county Extension agent, or Extension specialist
to evaluate your management strategy.

Return to Table of Contents

Reassessment
Precision farmers must continuously reassess the profitability of their PF
program. This can be done by comparing yield monitor data to the financial
records for a specific field. If a decision based on PF did not improve
profitability, a more or less intensive PF management scheme may or may not
be warranted.

Return to Table of Contents

Examples of Site-Specific Crop Management

Developing management strategies is the most difficult part of the PF process.
Precision farmers must consider the steps of crop production that can best be
controlled and managed to provide the greatest economic return. The following
examples provide a framework for developing a PF management plan. Although
conceptual in nature, these examples are common occurrences on farms and
could be used with any management strategy.

Example 1. Nutrient Management Plan.

A farmer wants to "fine tune" his nutrient management plans for optimal economic returns.
He starts by evaluating the soil characteristics (the lower right corner of Figure 2) within a
field. Next, the farmer classifies the field into areas or "management zones" based on
common soil types or crop potentials. Within these zones, the farmer decides on the
combination of operating strategies (e.g. conservation tillage with variable rate fertilizer
application) needed to obtain the maximum profit from that field. He can fine-tune the
nutrient management plan based on weather and market forecasts.
The fine-tuning job does not end at harvest. The farmer should gather yield data and
information on the amount of residual nutrients not utilized by the crop. He should compare
these results to his yield goals and economic returns to determine whether his management
decision worked.
Example 2. Management Strategy to Reduce Chemical Costs.
A farmer wants to save money by applying pesticides to the correct target at the proper rate
and time. The farmer selects a high accuracy applicator equipped with GPS-based
controllers. Next, he obtains field scouting or remote sensing data of pest-infestation zones
within a field and develops a geo-referenced map. The services of an integrated pest
management (IPM) specialist may be used to determine the optimal time for pesticide
application.
The farmer sprays only those areas that have both a high potential economic return and a
high threshold of pest infestation. The GPS-based controls ensure that those areas receive
the proper application rate. The controller also logs actual rate, time, and location data. As
in Example 1, the farmer should compare his harvest to his yield goals and economic
returns to determine whether his management decision worked.
Return to Table of Contents

Questions to Continually Ask

A farmer must continually ask questions to optimize his PF program. These may
include:

Is there error in the data collection process?

How accurate is the information?

What does the information tell me?

Do any observations indicate variation from other influences?

Is one year of information sufficient? (not likely)

Can I justify making final management decisions based on this

information?

Do I need additional information?

How much time and money have I spent on collecting information and
making decisions?

Have the decisions to correct problems influenced succeeding year's

yield map?

Return to Table of Contents

Conclusion
PF is used to vary crop production management across a field. This practice
requires farmers to use information, technology and decision support to
increase economic returns. Although getting started in PF is fairly easy, making
management decisions based on PF information can be difficult. However,
agricultural consultants, county Extension agents, and Extension specialists are
available to help farmers implement PF programs.

Return to Table of Contents

Look for these Extension fact sheets for more information:

Precision Farming Tools: Lightbar Navigation, (VCE Publication 442-501)
Precision Farming Tools: Yield Monitor, (VCE Publication 442-502)

Precision Farming Tools: Global Positioning System - GPS (VCE Publication 442-503)
Precision Farming Tools: GIS - Mapping Geo-Referenced Data (VCE Publication 442-504)
Precision Farming Tools: VRT - Variable Rate Technology (VCE Publication 442-505)
Precision Farming Tools: Remote Sensing (VCE Publication 442-506)
Precision Farming Tools: Map-Based versus Sensor-Based (VCE Publication 442-507)
Precision Farming Tools: Soil Electrical Conductivity (VCE Publication 442-508)
Interpreting Yield Maps - I gotta yield map, now what? (VCE Publication 442-509)
Developing a Prescription Map
Soil Nutrient Variability in Southern Piedmont Soils
Return to Table of Contents

Modified from:
Rains, G.C. and D.L. Thomas. 2000. Precision Farming: An Introduction.
Cooperative Extension Service, University of Georgia, Bulletin 1186.
http://www.ces.uga.edu/pubcd/b1186.htm

Roberson, G. 2000. Precision agriculture: a comprehensive approach. Cooperative

Extension, North Carolina State University.
http://www5.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/agmachine/precision/index.html
Stombaugh, T.S., T.G. Mueller, S.A. Shearer, C.R. Dillon, and G.T. Henson. 2001.
Guideline for Adopting Precision Agricultural Practices. Cooperative Extension Service,
University of Kentucky, PA-2.
http://www.bae.uky.edu/~precag/PrecisionAg/Exten_pubs/pa_2.htm
Watermeier, N. 2001. Considerations on Gathering and Interpreting Field-Based
Information for Precision Agriculture Decision Making. The Ohio State University
Extension. http://precisionag.osu.edu/library/decision.html
Return to Table of Contents

References:
Lotz, L. 1997. Yield Monitors and Maps: Making Decisions. Ohio State University
Fact Sheet AEX-550-97, Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 590
Woody Hayes Dr., Columbus, OH 43210

Return to Table of Contents

Acknowledgments:
The authors would like to express their appreciation for the review and
comments made by Paul Davis, Extension Agent, New Kent County; David
Moore, Extension Agent, Middlesex County; David Parrish, Professor, Crop & Soil
Environmental Sciences; Susan Gay, Assistant Professor and Extension
Engineer, Biological Systems Engineering.

Return to Table of Contents

Reviewed by Bobby Grisso, Extension Specialist, Biological Systems Engineering

Virginia Cooperative Extension materials are available for public use, reprint, or citation
without further permission, provided the use includes credit to the author and to Virginia
Cooperative Extension, Virginia Tech, and Virginia State University.
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, Virginia State University, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture
cooperating. Edwin J. Jones, Director, Virginia Cooperative Extension, Virginia Tech,
Blacksburg; M. Ray McKinnie, Interim Administrator, 1890 Extension Program, Virginia
State University, Petersburg.
May 1, 2009

Available as:

PDF (439 KB)

Virginia Cooperative Extension programs and employment are open to all, regardless of
age, color, disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, national origin, political
affiliation, race, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, veteran status, or any
other basis protected by law. An equal opportunity/affirmative action employer. Issued in

furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State

University, Virginia State University, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperating.
Edwin J. Jones, Director, Virginia Cooperative Extension, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg; M.
Ray McKinnie, Interim Administrator, 1890 Extension Program, Virginia State University,
Petersburg.

2016 Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Precision Agriculture: Higher Profit, Lower Cost

November 1, 2012

Email

Print

Facebook

LinkedIn

Google

Twitter

By: Jan Johnson | Email

Soybean growers are rapidly adopting precision technologies because they make their
farming operations cost less, allowing them greater profit.
This is clear result of a recent survey of soybean growers conducted by the PrecisionAg
Institute in cooperation with the American Soybean Association (ASA) to gain insight to
the return on investment (ROI) for precision farming tools and technology. Information

provided by growers surveyed shows that for those who use the technology well, there is
rapid payback. In some cases, it is accomplished within one season.
Other key learnings:

Growers report an average savings of about 15% on several crop inputs

such as seed, fertilizer and chemicals.

Savings on inputs often pays for the technology within a year for a large
cropping operation and two to three years for smaller operations.

Growers are increasingly using precision tools to conduct their own

comparisons on their own ground.

Findings show that most growers, particularly those with more than 500
total acres, are using several precision farming technologies.

The larger the acreage increase, the more likely the farmer is to use
multiple precision farming technologies.

Experienced users of precision farming tools point out that you dont have to go in wholehog to reap benefits. Even one new technology can save you money and pay for the
investment within a year or two, and it gives you a chance to try it out before adding more.
One step at a time is the advice most advanced users offered in the survey, and buy the
technology that addresses your highest costs first.
For example, seed is an input where costs have risen dramatically. Avoiding overlap with
new technology not only reduces total input costs, but it also improves yields on acres that
used to have poor production because of too much seed.
Precision Ag Is Profitable
In any given season, growers often find themselves ordering extra seed to cover their acres,
but growers who use automatic clutches often return the extra seed, using exactly as much
as their acres call for. The savings go directly into their pocket.
While growers who do not use precision technology believe that they can save money other
ways, like buying at a discount, the combination of astute buying and precision application
can save even more.
Its a big hurdle (cost), and its hard to get your noggin around it until you see it perform,
admits one grower from Kentucky. But once you see it work, its a no-brainer.

One of the findings of the qualitative interviews is that growers often calculate the return to
their investments the first year, because they are paying closer attention. Once they know
that they are saving money with the technology, the new cost figures become the baseline,
and they quit thinking about how much they used to spend. This would suggest, too, that
ROI for precision use in any given year is greater than most growers will readily express
when asked.
Swath control and seed command can easily save 10% to 15% in seed costs. The heavier
you plant, the greater the savings. Payback can be within the first year for larger growers,
two to three years for smaller growers.
Whole-Farm Experiment Stations
The traditional pushback on university research is that it doesnt happen in the real world.
Farmers often complain that one acre or even 10-acre plots are no match for whole field
information.
But precision technology allows growers to turn this one around, encouraging farmers to
conduct whole field experiments on their farms. Sometimes they are doing it on their own,
other times they are actively participating in industry and university programs designed to
put together real world results. Organizations like Iowa Soybean Association, with its OnFarm Network are coming alongside precision ag users to learn more about a variety of
farming practices on the farmers own ground. This is the nature of precision agriculture,
gaining more specific knowledge for MY operation on MY ground under MY conditions.
The enabling technology? Precision farming tools such as yield mapping.
One grower is testing fungicide applications on corn, having previously tested fungicide
applications on soybeans.
I am testing it on one field, one round with the fungicide, one round without, so I can see
the results, he explained. At $25/acre, I want to know that it pays. He said this test will
allow him to make a more informed decision about the ROI on treating more.
It will allow me to see if I want to spray 3,000 acres. It would cost $75,000 to spray the
whole thing and I would like to see the results before I commit to that kind of money.
What is the implication for input companies? Be prepared to prove your products in the
field with real data generated by your customers. This same implication holds for dealers as
well. Direct in-field comparisons are possible, and many of your farmer-customers are not
going to want to settle
for your smaller plots along the state route.

Some growers surveyed are now routinely planting half of their planter to one variety and
half to another. Yield maps show which one did best, and make decisions for next year
easier. But growers can also use variable-rate and automatic boom control to test the effect
of fungicides or fertilizer rates on yield, moisture content, and other factors. All it takes is
the time to enter the proper data when you are applying the materials and taking a look at
your yield maps at the end.
No longer do farmers need to think something helped their yield or was a waste of
money. Now they know. And the more they know, the more they want to know. While every
year is different, growers applying scientific methods have a better way to determine their
inputs, not just conventional wisdom or someone elses research results.
ROI For Precision: Not Just Dollars
But for all the savings and potential increases in yield, many farmers point out that
precision farming tools make farming less stressful, and the long days not as hard on their
back, shoulders and disposition. Tools like auto steering means that growers can spend
more time monitoring field activities rather than steering a straight line.
It also means practices like strip till are practical for more growers, as RTK signals can
keep planters where they need to be for the best results.
I always said, oh, we dont need it, but the auto steer really has reduced our stress, said a
grower from North Dakota. And our fields are straight wand square, so we probably dont
see quite the input savings that other guys would.
Growers have a difficult time calculating increased yields unless its to physical changes
made, such as increased tiling to improve field drainage. Typically, 80-foot spacing in a
field was considered well tiled, but now growers are moving to 40-foot spacing to increase
drainage and improve overall yields. This move was brought about by yield maps that show
advantages to more drainage.
Yield differences can not be attributable to much of anything specific, unless the maps
change. Maps show significant changes in yield when tile is added, or seed overlap is
eliminated.
Easy-to use? Yes. But still a ways to go.
While growers are using the technologies in the market place, they would like to see them
more user friendly.

The average age of soybean growers that responded to the survey is 54, and while some
have sons or consultants to help, 80% do all the evaluation, purchase and use of precision
technology by themselves.
Instruction is often hard to come by, and trial and error just doesnt cut it when theres work
to be done. Unfortunately, its hard to learn and retain working with the systems when they
are used for three weeks at a time, three times per year. Growers would like to see more
training offered, as well as opportunities to share their experiences and learn from other
farmers in the same situation.
While the results show that farmers can use more instruction and education to fully utilize
the benefits of the technology, as tangible benefits and increased input costs appear,
adoption is spreading quickly through all sizes and ages of farmers and will continue in the
future because of the numerous cost benefits the technology offers. The good news is that
63 percent of those surveyed indicate that precision technology is either fairly easy to
use, (41%); easy to use (20%) or very easy to use.
But very few growers report that precision technology is very easy to use (2%). And,
nine percent say its not at all easy to use. This, of course will be a challenge to the
equipment and service providers in the days to come.
Why? Well, consider the number of smart phones found in farmers pockets these days, not
to mention the number of tablet computers showing up in pickups these days. They cannot
help but compare their user-experience with precision technology with that of the
mainstream devices they are carrying everyday.
Growers are demanding the same ease of use of their farming technology as they see in the
consumer products they use. Making systems talk to each other so that data is only entered
once and shifts to everywhere it needs to be is many a growers dream.
Both crop input and machinery dealers can increase their roles too, as farming becomes
more specialized.
Its nearly impossible for growers to do everything necessary to be as successful as they can
be. Very large operations hire specialists, but growers with fewer acres need the same
expertise, just on a smaller scale. Dealers can meet this need for expertise and experience,
plus provide opportunities for grower to grower contact, because as high-tech as farming
gets, its still a high-touch business.
Leave a Reply

6 comments on Precision Agriculture: Higher Profit, Lower

Cost
1. Nourrir 9 milliards de personnes grce au big data ? | Forum des
Agricultures says:
June 5, 2014 at 6:52 am

[] en raison des promesses de gain de productivit et de la baisse des cots des

dispositifs. Une enqute auprs des producteurs de soja en 2012 a montr un retour
rapide sur investissement grce ces []
Reply
2. Maximizing ROI During Low Crop Prices | The Weigh Wagon says:
November 5, 2014 at 4:37 pm

[] available. The ROI ( of precision ag has now gone beyond speculation and
conjecture to solid fact . Nothing evidences precision ags move from fringe to
genuinely profitable more than the Johnny []
Reply
3. How Big Data Is Going To Help Feed Nine Billion People By 2050 |
The 7R Future Leadership Institute says:
November 11, 2014 at 11:36 am

[] and more prevalent in recent history because of the advanced technology

systems available on farms. A survey of soybean farmers in 2012 showed a rapid
payback using these technologies a 15% savings on []
Reply
4. How Big Data is Changing Agriculture says:
October 2, 2015 at 1:13 pm

[] data, when combined with precision agriculture, can produce higher yield
while lowering costs. Monsanto, which started out as a chemical manufacturing
company, has become one of the biggest []
Reply

5. What can precision agriculture do for you? says:

March 15, 2016 at 9:56 am

[] http://www.precisionag.com/works/institute/precision-agriculture-higher-profitlower-cost/ []
Reply
6. Agriculture Tests the Ground for Data Provisioning Policies &
PoliticsAnnalect says:
March 23, 2016 at 3:27 am

[] it enables offer tangible, bountiful benefits to farmers, consumers and the

environment alike. One 2012 survey of soybean farmers found that investing in
data-driven farming could bring a quick, measurable []
Reply

RSS Register/ Log in/

FFTC Document Database
Annual Reports
Books
Extension Bulletins
Issues in Asian Agriculture
Newsletters
Practical Technology
Research Highlights
Technical Bulletins
Technical Notes

Site search

Home>FFTC Document Database>Technical Bulletins>Precision Farming

Approaches to Small-Farm Agriculture

Precision Farming Approaches to Small-Farm Agriculture

Sakae Shibusawa
Faculty of Agriculture,
Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology
3-5-8 Saiwai-Cho, Fuchu, Tokyo 183-8509, Japan, 2002-08-01

Abstract
Precision farming implies a management strategy to increase productivity and
economic returns with a reduced impact on the environment. It is based on the
application of information technology to a description of variability in the field,
variable-rate operations and the decision-making system. There are three
technology levels and three strategies in the development of precision farming.
Precision farming practices can be used on small farms as well as big ones, and
they play a core role in rural development programs which are integrated with
industry. A real-time soil spectrophotometer was developed to describe soil
variability in farmers' fields, to be used in precision farming.

Introduction
Precison farming provides a new solution using a systems approach for today's agricultural
issues such as the need to balance productivity with environmental concerns. It is based on
advanced information technology. It includes describing and modeling variation in soils and
plant species, and integrating agricultural practices to meet site-specific requirements. It
aims at increased economic returns, as well as at reducing the energy input and the
environmental impact of agriculture.
This Bulletin describes the concept of precision farming, and also its use in rural areas,
including those with small-scale farms with diverse kinds of land use. A real-time soil
sensor developed in our laboratory is also introduced.

What Is Precision Farming?

The term "Precision Farming" or "Precision Agriculture" is capturing the imagination of
many people concerned with the production of food, feed, and fiber. It offers the promise of
increasing productivity, while decreasing production costs and minimizing the
environmental impact of farming (NRC 1997, SKY-Farm 1999).

Elements of the Technology

There are three fundamental elements in this technology ( Fig. 1(500)) (Shibusawa 2000,
2001).
Describing variability is the key concept. In particular, it is based on variation within each
field. Variability should be understood in at least three aspects: spatial, temporal and
predictive.
Variable-rate technology (VRT) is used to adjust the agricultural inputs according to the
site-specific requirements in each part of the field. If machines are used, this requires
variable-rate machinery. On small farms, inputs can be applied manually. Variable-rate
applications need:

Correct positioning in the field;

Correct information at the location; and

Timely operations at the site concerned.

Decision support systems offer a range of choices to farmers with respect to trade-off
problems where conflicting demands must be taken into account, such as productivity and
protection of the environment. This approach helps to optimize the whole farming system.
Information Levels

There are four levels or stages in the quality of information. The lowest level is data,
followed by information, knowledge, and finally wisdom ( Fig. 2(490)) (Shibusawa 1999,
2000). The "data-stage" means a mass of signals and numerical values, which have no
practical value in themselves. The "infor-mation-stage" provides some meaning from a set
of data, such as levels of excessive, appropriate or deficient fertilizer use. The "knowledgestage" implies that the information is individualized in some logical way which can enable
someone to make a decision, such as application guidelines. The "wisdom-stage" belongs to
an individual who finds an original solution, such as the approach of the skilled farmer.
Information technology tends to be powerful in levels up to the knowledge-stage. The
wisdom-stage requires the intellectual and creative activities of farmers and researchers, if
there is to be a break-through in accumulated knowledge. Precision farming needs all stages
of information in the agricultural production system, and also requires good linkage
between the stages. In particular, information technology should be closely linked to
farmers.

Scenarios

Developing system technology for precision farming is shown in Fig. 3(529) (Shibusawa
1999, 2000). First of all, we need to describe and understand the variability within and
between fields. Field sensors with GPS and monitors for machine application make this
easier. The next stage is to develop machines which can be operated by remote control.
There are three steps in technology development, and three strategies for precision farming,
as shown in Fig. 4(471) (Shibusawa 1999, 2000). Step 1 is based on conventional farming
technology, with intensive mechanization to reduce the labor input. Step 2 involves the
development of mapping techniques, VRT machines, and introductory DSS on the basis of
information technology. Step 3 implies the maturity of wisdom-oriented technologies.
Scenario 1 is based on a "high-input and high-output" conventional strategy. Scenario 2 has
a strategy for "low-input but constant-output", and Scenario 3 aims at "optimized inputoutput" as the goal of precision farming. Advanced technology levels allow us to choose
freely between these three scenarios. Effective regulations will encourage progress in
precision farming.
In Japan, technology at the moment is at the level between Step 1 and 2, while the farming
strategy is changing from Scenario 1 to 2. The shift from Step 2 to 3 involves a drastic
change in the farming system. In the mature stage of Step 2, each field has information
added which makes possible the best management of that field. In Step 3, all factors of the
farming system are well-organized for precision farming. This allows us to manage regional
variability, as well as the local variability within a single field.
What Can Precision Farming Achieve?

In general, a farming system involves five factors (Shibusawa 1999, 2000). These are: plant
variety, field features, technology, regional infrastructure, and the motivation/intentions of
the farmer. Better integration of these five factors can creat a competitive farming system
which suits local conditions.
Precision farming uses field maps, variable-rate technologies and a decision support
system. As shown in Fig. 5(561), generating the field maps is in itself an important source
of information. Variable-rate technology not only increases productivity by re-organizing
the three factors of technology, plants and fields, but also creates a better linkage with the
regional infrastructure, e.g. by following environmental regulations. A decision support
system provides the best technology, taking into account the aims and motivation of
farmers as well as environmental factors. In other words, precision farming brings about an
innovation in the whole system of agriculture.

Precision Farming for Small-Scale Farms

Whether precision farming is feasible for small-scale farms is a leading issue for
agricultural scientists and politicians in Japan. It should be noted that precision farming is
characterized by variable management. A key point in precision farming is understanding
variability in the field.
There are at least two types of variability. One is within-field variability, the other is
between-field or regional variability. Within-field variability focuses on a single field, and
the one plant variety being cultivated. Between-field variability considers each field as a
unit on a map.
We need to consider what kind of variability is involved when we consider precision
farming for small farms. Whether farms are large or small, precision farming should mean
improved farm management. It should give a higher economic return with a reduced
environmental impact.
On a single small farm, the farmer can understand fairly well what is going on in each field.
This makes possible variable-rate applications to meet site-specific requirements, using the
farmer's knowledge and skills. When it comes to an area of a few dozen hectares,
containing many small fields, precision farming has to coordinate diverse types of land use
and many farmers with different motivations, as shown in Fig. 6(457).
Regional precision farming must manage a hierarchy of variability: within-field, betweenfield and between-farmers. High-tech approaches, such as a yield meter with GPS, are
available for regional precision farming covering many small farms. Moreover, measures to
conserve or improve the environment should be undertaken on a similar scale.
From the point of view of development in a rural area which includes small farms and local
companies, precision farming offers the possibility of developing a new kind of industry, by
fusing agriculture to various kinds of industrial activity ( Fig. 7(494)).
If the multi-functions of agriculture are re-evaluated using information-added fields, valueadded space of this kind can be seen as providing new resources, such as new biological
materials, open-air classrooms and green tourism.

Real-Time Soil Sensing

In Japan, paddy fields occupy half of the agricultural area, producing about ten million
metric tons of grain every year. Paddy rice production is a kind of hydroponic system, with
well-organized irrigation and drainage facilities. In Japan, it is also highly mechanized.

Paddy rice production is very productive, but environmental concerns have become
national issues in Japan. The problem is how to manage precisely the paddy production
system while considering the environmental impact. Solving this problem requires a good
understanding of what is happening in the paddy field.
Shonk et al. (1991) developed a portable soil organic matter sensor with photodiodes using
a single wavelength. It gave good results in predicting soil organic matter in the range 1.5 6%. Sudduth and Hummel (1991) investigated the feasibility of spectral reflectance to
sense soil organic matter. A portable NIR spectrophotometer was designed to evaluate soil
organic matter, CEC and moisture content in a ploughed soil at a depth of 3.5 - 5 cm
(Sudduth and Hummel 1993a,b). This approach can be useful to get information about the
field surface, but we still need in situ soil sensing in the zone of root development for
practical use in crop management. Shibusawa et al. (2000) have developed a real-time soil
spectrophotometer with an RTK-GPS to sense underground soil parameters at depths of 15
- 40 cm.
The objective of this work was to use the soil spectrophotometer to generate detailed soil
maps of the paddy field, for the implementation of precision rice farming.
Soil Spectrophotometer

The soil spectrophotometer used in this study is shown in Fig. 8(543). It was designed to
collect data on soil reflectance at depths of 15 to 40 cm. The sensor system was composed
of three main units: the external housing, the soil penetrator and probes, and the external
sensing and monitoring devices.
The penetrator tip with its flat edge cuts the soil in a uniform way. The plane edge behind it
smooths the soil to produce a uniform surface. Inside the housing are seven micro optical
devices. Two optical fiber probes, using light energy at wave-lengths of 400 - 2400 nm, are
used for illumination, giving an illuminated area of about 50 mm diameter on the soil
surface. Two additional optical fiber probes are used to collect soil reflectance in the visible
and NIR ranges. One fiber bundle passes reflected energy in the 400 - 900 nm wavelength
range, while the other optical probe carries reflected energy in the 900 - 2400 nm
wavelength range. A micro CCD camera is adjusted to monitor a 75-mm focus point on the
soil surface.
The sensor unit's housing includes the core devices of the system, such as a 150 W halogen
lamp, a spectrophotometer (Carl Zeiss Ltd.), a FA computer (IBM, PC/AT, Pentium MMX),
a RTK-GPS (Trimble MS740) receiver, etc. The spectrophotometer has a 256-channel
linear photodiode array to quantify the reflected energy in the 400 - 900 nm wavelength
range. A 128 channel linear photodiode array is used to quantify the reflected energy in the

900 - 1700 nm wavelength range. Data scanning time is just over four microseconds.
Integration of scanned data is carried out for each individual scan to get average values.
A video data recorder on the tractor displays images of the soil surface during the
experiment. The displayed images are used to monitor operations in case of emergency,
such as blockages or obstacles. The images also provide information about which data
should be omitted from data analysis. The liquid crystal monitor serves as a touch control
panel, and a mouse and keyboard are also available for accessing the FA computer.
Field Tests and Results

The experiment was conducted in a 0.5 ha paddy field on the Experimental Farm of Kyoto
University, Japan in December 1999. The soil texture of the fields was 47% sand, 30% silt
and 23% clay. The working speed was about one kilometer per hour. Scans were at
approximately one-meter intervals. It took approximately 20 microseconds to do the scan,
and three seconds to record the data. The spectrum data was collected at intervals of about
5 m, which gave more than 800 locations for soil reflectance data. The working depth was
200 - 250 mm.
For calibration purposes, 25 soil samples were collected at the same location and depth as
the scanning points and analyzed in the laboratory for moisture, organic matter content,
nitrate (NO 3-N), pH and EC. Fifteen samples were used for calibration, and the remaining
ten samples were used for validation. A standard moisture content was obtained, by keeping
the samples 24 hours in an oven at 110 oC. Soil organic matter content was evaluated as the
loss after four hours of combustion in an oven at 800 oC. NO 3-N, pH and EC were analyzed
in the clear layer at the top of muddy water, using portable ion meters. The test muddy
water was provided by diluting 5 g dried soil with 25 g distilled water, stirring the mixture
for 30 minutes, and then leaving it to stand for 24 hours.
For the spectral reflectance, four stages were followed (Marten and Naes 1987). The first
stage was linearization with a Kubelka-Munk transform, while the second stage was
elimination of optical interference in the spectral data with a multiplicative scatter
correction. The third stage was to reduce the number of wavelengths used for calibration
with correlation analysis, including derivative operation. The final stage was the calibration
stage using the stepwise multiple linear regression analysis with S-Plus Data Analysis
Software. The calibration model was quantified using the standard error for calibration
(SEC), standard error for prediction (SEP) and coefficient of determination (R 2).
Semivariance analysis was performed using the GS+ Geostatistics Software, and soil maps
were obtained by the block kriging method.

Results of calibration and validation analysis ( Table 1(403)) produced higher scores of R 2
and fewer errors for the respective soil parameters. The second derivatives of light
absorption tended to provide best-fit prediction models (I Made Anom et al. 2001).
With the prediction models, values for soil parameters were evaluated at 860 locations in
the field. The means and standard deviations were 48.4% and 6.5% for moisture content,
9.51% and 1.06% for organic matter (OM) content, 42.1 mg/100g and 11.0 mg/100g for
NO 3-N content, 6.83 and 0.39 for pH, and 173.1 S cm and 69.6 S/cm for EC. Based
on these values, semivariance analysis ( Table 2(555)) was performed. Within the
experimental field, the soil OM content had the lowest spatial correlation (29.20 m),
followed by the NO 3-N content (34.50 m), moisture content (38.60 m), the pH (40.40 m),
and the EC (46.60 m).
With the results of the semivariance analysis, the soil parameter maps were then developed
( Fig. 9(448)). The maps were interpolated by block kriging with 10-neighborhood
interpolation. Errors of kriged to observed values were estimated over 40 grids, each 10 m
square. Error means and standard deviations were -0.35 and 2.25 for moisture content,
-0/01 and 0.46 for SOM content, 0.08 and 2.72 for NO 3-N content, -0.04 and 0.22 for pH,
and 3.31 and 12.26 for EC (I Made Anom et al. 2001).
The distribution of variability in soil parameters shows some stripes running east-west. For
example, there is a belt with a high moisture content and a high OM content in the eastern
part. Other belts have a high NO 3-N, a high EC or a low pH. The irrigation inlet was
located at the north-west, and the drainage gate at the south-east. This may have produced
the striped effect, since water flowed from north to south.

Conclusion
Precision farming implies a management strategy to increase productivity and economic
returns with an reduced impact on the environment, by taking into account the variability
within and between fields. Variability description, variable-rate technology and decision
support systems are the key technologies for precision farming. Precision farming on a
regional level is one way to apply this approach to small-farm agriculture. It may not only
improve farm management, but may also promote the development of rural areas.
A real-time soil spectrophotometer will be commercially available in a few years.

References

I Made Anom, S.W., S. Shibusawa, A. Sasao, S. Hirako. 2001. Parameters

Maps in Paddy Field Using the Real-time Soil Spectrophotometer. Journal
of the Japanese Society of Agricultural Machinery, 63, 3: 51-58.

National Researach Council (NRC) (1997). Precision Agriculture in the

21st Century. (Committee on Assessing Crop Yield: Site-Specific Farming,
Information Systems, and Research Opportunities), National Academy
Press, Washington DC., USA, pp. 149.

Marten, H., T. Naes. 1987. Multivariate calibration by data compression.

Near-infrared Technology in the Agricultural and Food Industries, P.
Williams and K. Norris (Eds.). American Associatiion of Cereal Chemists,
Inc. St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, pp. 57-87.

Shibusawa, S. 1999. Environmentally-friendly agriculture and

mechanization trend in Japan: Prospects of precision farming in Japan.
Proc. International Symposium on Farm Mechanization for
Environmentally-Friendly Agriculture, Seoul, Korea. The Korean Society
for Agricultural Machinery, pp. 53-80.

Shibusawa, S. 2000. Precision farming Approaches for model and control.

Proceedings of the XIV Memorial CIGR World Congress, Nov. 28-Dec. 1,
Tsukuba, Japan, pp. 133-141.

Shibusawa, S. 2001. Precision farming: Approaches for small-scale farms.

Proc. 2nd IFAC-CIGR Workshop on Intelligent Control for Agricultural
Applications, 22-24 August, 2001, Bali, Indonesia, pp. 22-27.

Shibusawa, S., A. Sasao, S. Sakai. 1999. Local variability of nitrate

nitrogen in a small field. Precision Agriculture '99, Proc. 2nd Euro. Conf.
Precision Agriculture, J.V. Stafford (Ed.). UK, pp. 377-386.

Shibusawa, S., H. Sato, S. Hirako, A. Otomo, A. Sasao. 2000. A revised

soil spectro-photometer. Proc. 2nd IFAC/CIGR International Workshop on
BIO-ROBOTICS II, Nov. 25-26, Osaka, Japan, pp. 225-230.

Shibusawa, S. et al. 2001. Soil mapping using the real-time soil

spectrophotometer. Proc. (on CD-ROM) 3rd European Conference on
Precision Agricultaure, Montpellier, France, June 18-20, 2001.

Shonk, J.L., L.D. Gaultney, D.G. Schulze, G.E. Van Scoyoc. 1991.
Spectroscopic sensing of soil organic matter content. Transactions of the
American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 34, 5: 1978-1984.

SKY-farm. 1999. Opportunities for precision framing in Europe: Updated

report 1999. 126 pp.

Sudduth, K.A., J.W. Hummel. 1991. Evaluations of reflectance methods

for soil organic matter sensing. Transactions of the American Society of
Agricultural Engineers. 34, 4: 1900-1909.

Sudduth, K.A., J.W. Hummel. 1993a. Portable, near-infrared

spectrophotometer for rapid soil analysis. Transactions of the American
Society of Agricultural Engineers. 36, 1: 185-193.

Sudduth, K.A., J.W. Hummel. 1993b. Soil organic matter, CEC, and
moisture sensing with a portable NIR spectrophotometer. Transactions of
the American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 36, 6: 1571-1582.

Index of Images

Figure 1 How Precision Farming Works

Figure 2 Level of Information

Figure 3 Development of Precision Farming Technologies

Figure 4 Development of Technology Level and Farming Strategies

Figure 5 Precision Farming Technologies Make Innovations in the Agricultural System

Figure 6 Regional Precision Farming (PF) for Small Farms

Figure 7 Role of Precision Farming in Regional Development

Table 1 Results of Calibration and Validation for Soil Parameter Prediction

Figure 8 Revised Soil Spectrophotometer

Figure 9 Soil Parameter Maps of a 0.5 Ha Paddy Field Using Soil Reflectance Collected by
the Real-Time Soil Spectrophotometer. 860 Data Points at Depths of 200 to 250 MM
Depth.

Table 2 Summary of Semivariance Analysis

Download the PDF. of this document(507), 567,468 bytes (554 KB).

Institutional Support / Farm Management and Farm Mechanization , Soil

and Fertilizers / Soil and Water Conservation and Management , Soil and
Fertilizers / Soil Survey and Classification ,
back
Food and Fertilizer Technology Center
Copyright 1998-2016 FFTC. All rights reserved.Email: info@fftc.agnet.org
5F, 14 Wenchow St., Taipei 10648 Taiwan R.O.C.Tel: +886-2-2362-6239Fax:
+886-2-2362-0478
August 17, 2015
0 Comments

Precision agriculture cuts costs

Kentucky grain operations are prime beneficiaries of the

nations ongoing agriculture technology revolution
By Mark Green

Five 12-row combine harvesters working in tandem at Seven Springs Farm in Trigg County
reap some that operations 11,000 to 12,000 acres of soybeans. Intensive use of Precision
Agriculture technology allows Seven Springs to efficiently raise more than 32,000 acres of
grain crops a year currently. Were always on the cutting edge, said founder/managing
partner Joe Nichols.
Agriculture technology is 10 to 15 years into a growth spurt that is revolutionizing the
efficiency of grain crop operations and especially benefitting Kentucky farmers who raise
corn, soybeans and wheat on rolling, irregular landscapes where conditions can vary not
only from field to field but from row to row.
Most tractors, combines and implements rolling across farmland circa 2015 are computercontrolled, Internet connected and have automated GPS-guided steering accurate down to

the centimeter. On the fly, equipment accesses the farm database and self-adjusts to soil
conditions while planting, harvesting or applying fertilizer and various other inputs then
updates the cloud-based network.
Watering systems can be monitored and operated remotely from a desktop computer,
laptop, mobile device or smartphone. On-farm crop storage systems improve harvest
logistics, then manage grain moisture content for quality and volume until contracted
delivery times arrive or the grower decides the market has ripened.
Agribusiness operations all over the nation are gaining efficiency as technology improves
every year. However, the geometric grain-growing grids typical in the Plains of Kansas,
Iowa, Illinois and Nebraska are less challenging to manage and derive less benefit than the
undulating, creek-carved fields farmed in the commonwealth.
That shapely Kentucky land might be more beautiful, but those curves create overlap and
waste 10 percent, 15 percent or more every time machinery makes a pass in the field.
Swath-control systems, however, weed out waste by very precisely avoiding overlaps of
expensive seed, fertilizer, pest control or other inputs.

Seven Springs Farm has $28 million in equipment to work more than 32,000 acres of grain
crops as well as raising tobacco and 10,000 head of cattle plus operating an excavation
business.
Swath controls impact in the commonwealth is astronomical compared to what it is in the
Plains, said Joe Nichols, founder and managing partner of Seven Springs Farm, one of the
states largest operations, near Cadiz in Trigg County. Its returning money more quickly
in Kentucky than anywhere else in the United States.
Big payback increasing land values
Tim Stombaugh, a biosystems and agriculture engineer with the University of Kentucky,
said Extension county agents estimate 75 to 80 percent of commonwealth farms have

adopted swath-control strategies even though the large-scale farm equipment necessary to
do so can easily run into multiple six figures.
Some of it is a real no-brainer, Stombaugh said. The financial impact of swath control on
operations can create a positive return on investment in the first year.
Precision Agriculture, as current technology-intensive farming is called, increases
production. Although the weather remains beyond mans control and impacts harvests from
year to year, USDA figures show corn yields growing significantly in the past quarter
century. Annual average yields that ranged from around 100 to 130 bushels an acre in the
1990s increased to a range of 129 to 164 bushels in the 2000s, and since 2010 have ranged
from 123 to 171 bushels per acre.
The trend line for average U.S. soybean yields also has risen steadily from around 35
bushels an acre in the mid-1990s to nearly 45 bushels this year, according to USDA
statistics. USDA stats also show winter wheat yields trending higher as well for the long
term from roughly 40 bushels an acre in the mid-1990s to around 45 bushels, even though
the all-time high U.S. average yield of more than 47 bushels an acre occurred in the 200001 season.
Precision farmings bigger benefit today, accord to members of Kentuckys increasingly
high-tech agribusiness sector, is that ever-improving technology nearly eliminates waste of
seed, fertilizer, insecticide, herbicide, crop spillage and spoilage, fuel and time.
We dont run a farm. We run a business and the product is food, said Nichols. We use
technology for everything.
He is a very big fan of swath-control systems, which have brought dramatic savings in the
cost of inputs the seed, fertilizer or other soil augmentation, insecticide and herbicide
that are significant for 30,000-plus acres. Wheat fields get five passes by some form of
equipment in a growing season.
It took us from 15 percent overlap to 2 percent to 3 percent, Nichols said, thus a 12-13
percent savings on input costs.
Swath control has changed land values in Trigg, Christian and Caldwell counties, he said,
referencing a section considered to have some of Kentuckys best grain crop soils. Now
you can farm it just like you would a section in central Illinois.
New equipment every year every piece

Seven Springs, Trigg Countys second largest private employer with 86 positions, farms
regionally on around 35,000 acres. Like other large agribusiness operations today, it owns
some but leases most of that property. It has a 10,000-head herd of cattle, burley and darkfired tobacco, an excavations business, an events facility and its own restaurant, Nichols
said, but primarily Seven Springs grows grain crops.
It produces white and yellow corn, double-cropped and full-season soybeans, wheat and
grain sorghum. This year there is more than 32,000 acres of corn, soybean and wheat.
Individual grains plantings can increase or decrease by several thousand acres from year to
year. For example, there is corn on 8,100 acres this year compared to about 10,000 acres in
2014.
It varies, Nichols said. We just always do what the market tells us to do.
Seven Springs is on track to produce 4.3 to 4.4 million bushels of grain this year, he said.
Were having a good crop.
Lots of technology-enhanced equipment makes it possible to operate effectively on such a
large scale.
Nichols estimates the value of Seven Springs Farms machinery, implements and equipment
at $28 million. It includes 20 tractors, 10 planters, eight combines, four sprayers, six selfpropelled loaders, three bulldozers, two trackhoes and two bucket lifts each less than a
year old.
We trade about $10 million annually, Nichols said.
Some of that total is a result of increasing the number of machines to keep up with growth
in crop acreage, but most of it is trade literally: Like many large agribusiness operations,
to keep up with the latest technology and keep operations at top efficiency and profitability,
Seven Springs trades in all of its tractors, machinery and implements every year.
Were more prone to buy what has the best resale value, Nichols said.
Beyond the mechanical hardware, Seven Springs has $1 million worth of GPS software. In
2008 it built new offices designed around its computer servers and ran its own T1 Internet
line 8 miles from town to ensure adequate and ongoing connectivity.
Additionally, the precision agriculture technology Seven Springs uses includes 25 centerpivot watering systems that farm managers monitor from their smartphones, Nichols said. It
has 2.35 million bushels of on-farm grain storage, 1.8 million bushels of which has
monitoring systems

The grain bin systems that track the condition hence the value of harvested crops can all
be monitored by desktop computer, laptop, tablet or smartphone.
Better harvest logistics, less loss risk
Im seeing more automation in monitoring the grain storage environment, said Sam
McNeill, a UK College of Agriculture associate Extension professor and ag engineer based
at the Research and Education Center in Princeton, Ky.
McNeills focus is on the value chain from the field for crops: what happens when
growing concludes or post harvest engineering. That includes getting grain from the field,
grain drying and
storage methods, how its handled, transportation to grain elevators,
discussion with elevator managers and operators through their storage period and more.
At harvest time nowadays, McNeill said, farmers focus on getting crops in out of the field
as fast as they can when conditions are deemed best. On-farm storage systems can speed
the work significantly and preserve market value if the alternative is driving truckloads to
an elevator where harvest season can mean long lines for unloading.
Other variables that come into play, he said, can include the contract an agribusiness is
holding for its crop a major farm-management category unto itself. On-farm storage
systems give operators the option of holding grain for three months, six months, or other
lengths of time to fulfill contracts at the correct time or waiting to sell at the point they
decide the market price is the best they can get.
The drying systems used with on farm storage also give farmers more control and lessen
risk, McNeill said. Controlled heated airflow lowers moisture enough to alleviate potential
spoilage but not so much that it excessively shrinks the volume of bushels sold.
The alternative to the drying system is leaving a crop in the field until its moisture level is
appropriate, during which time a grower risks a storm laying it on the ground, he said.
Storage monitoring systems have sensors on wires that place them at strategic locations
throughout a bin. It gives a farm manager continuous information on a stored crops
condition without having to physically visit a bin, climb a ladder, gather samples and
analyze them.
Storage systems let operators focus on timely harvest, which becomes increasingly
important the larger a farming operation is.
The vast majority of the acres

Kentucky still has many small farms. The 2014 State Agriculture Overview from the USDA
National Agriculture Statistics Service reports the commonwealths 76,400 farm operations
totaled 13 million acres, which is an average of 170 acres apiece. It does not break out the
averages for grain farming operations.
Large farms such as Seven Springs are a small minority in terms of numbers, Stombaugh
said, but they work the vast majority of the acres.
Most Kentucky farms are family operations and small their operators also have outside
jobs to make enough money to support themselves and their families. For grain farming
operations to generate enough money to be a familys primary source of income and cover
living expenses including health insurance, Stombaugh said, it must be a minimum of 750
acres.
According to Nichols, 750 acres is not nearly enough.
They agree, though, that agribusiness economics clearly is pushing operations to be ever
larger. And the large operations have strong motivation to pursue the incremental gains
Precision Agriculture technology offers.
A large grain combine harvesting a field can process $30,000 to $40,000 worth of gain an
hour, Stombaugh said. A 2 percent gain in efficiency means a $600 to $800 an hour return.
Combines, tractors, sprayers and other equipment today have grown very highly
integrated, very highly computer controlled, he said.
An implements main controller area network bus monitors and responds to engine speed
and the transmission gear to adjust output rate for seed or the spray pressure levels for each
nozzle in booms that can spread more than 100 feet. It monitors fuel input and mixture for
the engine to control and lessen emissions. Its all networked together and linked to the
farms master computer.
Farmers took most of the low-hanging fruit that improved equipment technology offered
in the period five to 10 years ago, according to Stombaugh.
Were off the steep part of the curve for what technology is going to gain us, he said.
The focus in pursing further gains from agribusiness technology is shifting now toward the
databases that farm operations in Kentucky and elsewhere have been building since then.
We definitely are a Big Data player, Stombaugh said. Weve now got 10 to 15 years of
data to work with and can develop long-term strategies.

The question individual operators and hundreds of members of the agribusiness technology
sector are examining now is: How can I use that (data) to make management decisions?
Mark Green is editorial director of The Lane Report. He can be reached at
markgreen@lanereport.com.

RUMBO A LA AGRICULTURA DE
PRECISIN. I-TOPOGRAFA
Cuando se habla de agricultura de precisin, nuestra mente inmediatamente se va hacia
agricultura de Pases Desarrollados, de altos insumos y alta tecnologa. Hablar de este tema
en la Venezuela de hoy, provoca escepticismo por parte de la comunidad Agroproductiva.

Por Ing. Agr. Reinaldo J. Mauriello V/ rmauvar@live.com

La agricultura de precisin es un concepto que nos permite disminuir considerablemente la
cantidad de insumos, reducir el impacto ambiental de agroqumicos, bajar costos y
aumentar los rendimientos. En la actividad agrcola Venezolana es impostergable y requiere
del concurso recurrente de Profesionales del Agro. El concepto es simple, se trata de la
gestin de tierras, basada en la existencia y el reconocimiento de variabilidad en campo.
Requiere el uso de las tecnologas de Sistemas de Posicionamiento Global, sensores
remotos como los satlites e imgenes areas, junto con Sistemas de Informacin
Geogrfica (SIG) para estimar, evaluar y entender dichas variaciones. La informacin
recolectada es usada para evaluar con mayor precisin la densidad ptima de siembra,
estimar fertilizantes y otros insumos necesarios.
Con lo antes expuesto, alguien se podra preguntar Dnde compro un sistema de
agricultura de precisin para 3 hectreas de tomate?; Y eso es lo ms interesante. La
agricultura de precisin es un sistema de gestin, que debe ser construido paso a paso y a
lo largo de una serie de artculos profundizaremos sobre cmo construirla.

Qu necesitamos? Lo primero en agricultura de precisin es tener informacin bsica del

lote de tierras (Relieve, Suelo, agua y Clima)
I- TOPOGRAFA
Debido a la poltica local en los ltimos aos, todas las fincas del pas han sido levantadas
topogrficamente, fundamentalmente para realizar trmites ante el INTI (Instituto Nacional
de Tierras) y as tramitar los crditos gubernamentales. Este plano es un comienzo.
Seguramente existirn levantamientos topogrficos ms completos que otros. Para nuestro
propsito, el plano topogrfico de la unidad de produccin debe tener al menos definido los
Lotes de tierra.
El lote de tierras donde comenzaremos a hacer agricultura de precisin requiere de
informacin altimtrica (CURVAS DE NIVEL), este proceso puede hacerse por varios
mtodos: Topografa convencional (teodolitos, nivel de ingeniero, Estaciones Totales), o
Topografa Satelital (Geoposicionadores Topogrficos). Tambin puede hacerse empleando
Aerofotogrametra, la cual se realiza hoy en da desde pequeos aviones no tripulados (Ver
Imagen 1) y resulta ms econmica y rpida que usando tcnicas tradicionales.

Imagen 1.
Plataforma Area para toma de Fotografas a baja altura.
Estos equipos se han constituido como la punta de lanza en el mundo, para el levantamiento
de la informacin bsica y el monitoreo de cultivos. En Venezuela ya est disponible este
servicio. (Ver http://ingenieriagalileo.com).
Centrndonos en la informacin topogrfica, existen requerimientos comunes para poder
aplicar cualquier tcnica de forma exitosa.

Para realizar un levantamiento topogrfico de calidad, es imprescindible lo siguiente:

Construir una red de control topogrfico, materializada en el terreno. Para esto, se

construyen Hitos topogrficos o Mojones en concreto en zonas adyacentes a los
lotes de inters. Estos puntos deben ser perdurables y estar colocados en zonas que
no se inunden y que se protejan del paso de vehculos y maquinaria. Los puntos de
control no deben estar debajo de rboles. Posteriormente estos puntos deben ser
medidos con Geoposicionadores Topogrficos para conocer sus coordenadas.
(Imagen 2)

Imagen 2.
Medicin GPS Punto de Control Topogrfico.

Al momento del levantamiento, el terreno debe estar limpio, resulta ideal en

agricultura hacerlo inmediatamente despus de la cosecha. Si es un terreno no
productivo, es recomendable entonces el pase de rotativa antes de la llegada de los
topgrafos. (Ver Imagen 3)

Imagen 3.
Estado de la Vegetacin para el Levantamiento Topogrfico.

El topgrafo, debe entregar al productor el plano topogrfico del lote, vinculado a la

red de control previamente construida. El productor deber disponer de toda esta
informacin en formato digital.

Con esta informacin se construye el Modelo Digital de Terreno o MDT, el cual

ser objeto de anlisis y ser la base para alimentar el Sistema de Informacin
Geogrfica.

Al disponer de un levantamiento Planialtimtrico (Curvas de nivel), ya tenemos un primer

insumo para planificar el lote de tierras donde se aplicara Agricultura de Precisin, esto nos
permitir ver si es necesario realizar alguna nivelacin del terreno y as reducir la aparicin
de malezas, o en todo caso determinar espacios inundables, donde no es recomendable
invertir en preparacin de tierras.
Adicionalmente el plano topogrfico, es indispensable para el Estudio de Suelos del que
hablare en el prximo artculo.
Lo que no se puede medir no se puede controlar; lo que no se puede controlar no se
puede gestionar; lo que no se puede gestionar no se puede mejorar. Peter Drucker