Advanced Irrigaion

W
Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

CB Hedley, Landcare Research, Palmerston North, New Zealand
JW Knox, Craneld University, Bedford, UK
SR Raine and R Smith, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia
r 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Glossary
Chemigation The injection of water-soluble chemicals,
such as herbicides and pesticides, through an irrigation
system for application to the land using the irrigation
system.
Feedback control A control system that monitors the
effect on the system that it controls and modies output
accordingly; for example, a system that controls irrigation
application rate based on real-time soil moisture
monitoring.
Fertigation The injection of water-soluble fertilizer
products through an irrigation system for application to the
land using the irrigation system.
Introduction
Limited opportunities to expand the volume of global freshwaters allocated to irrigation means that advanced irrigation
technologies, aiming to improve efciency of existing systems
are needed, timely, and are of paramount importance.
There is little scope for greater use of allocated global
freshwaters for irrigation, due to unprecedented expansion
since the 1950s, plus other multiple demands on that resource
to meet higher living standards: projected as 400%
(manufacturing), 140% (thermal electricity generation),
and 130% (domestic use) by 2050 (OECD, 2012).
Providing for a further 2 billion people by 2050 will
challenge our ability to manage and restore natural assets,
including freshwaters, on which life depends (OECD, 2012).
Irrigation will need to support a projected 50% increase in
global food supply to feed the additional 2 billion people
(Jury and Vaux, 2007).
Irrigated Areas and Volumes Abstracted

Globally, agriculture is the largest user of freshwater, with irrigation withdrawals representing approximately three-quarters
(70%) of the total freshwater use (Fischer et al., 2007). Of this,
only-one half is estimated to reach the crop the remainder
is lost during storage, conveyance, or as subsurface drainage
378
Microirrigation Microirrigation, also known as drip or

trickle irrigation, is an irrigation method that drips water
slowly onto plant roots, either via the soil surface or directly
onto the root zone, through a system of pipes, valves,
tubing, and emitters.
Partial root zone drying A potential water-saving
irrigation strategy which irrigates only one side of a root
system, potentially saving 50% water with no impact on
yield. This is because plant water potential equilibrates with
the wettest part of the soil. There is some evidence to show
that this effect is not long term.
after application (Jury and Vaux, 2007). In many developing

countries, the proportion used in agriculture is upwards of
80% of withdrawals (Turral et al., 2010) highlighting the dependence on water for food crop production in rural-based
economies (Knox et al., 2012).
Recent food shortages and commodity price spikes have
raised questions regarding food security at both global and
national scales (IAASTD, 2009). In this context, securing adequate water of sufcient quantity and quality for agriculture
will be essential in meeting future food demands for a growing
population with increasingly diverse dietary requirements.
Augmentation methods, such as rainwater harvesting, are
necessary to boost freshwater supplies (see e.g., Figure 1), but
improving the efciency of use is of paramount importance to
assist sustainable use of this resource. Agriculture sits at the
interface between the environment and society, so any increase
in water use will need to take into account the consequent
impacts on freshwater ecosystems and the multifunctional
nature and diversity of benets that irrigated agriculture provides, not just to food production (Knox et al., 2010).
The value of using freshwaters for irrigation should include
not only direct benets to the party who stands to gain
from the product but also the wider ecological consequences
of these decisions, and the social goals being served by
the decision (Costanza et al., 1997). Owing to this, there
will be greater government and regulatory demands for
Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems, Volume 5
doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-52512-3.00087-5
(a)
379
(b)
Improving Irrigation Efciency

Increases in the productivity (dened as the amount of yield
per unit of land, ton ha1) of irrigated land through changes in
management and improvements in efciency offer the greatest
potential for global water savings (e.g., Sadler et al., 2005),
because irrigated agriculture is the dominant consumptive user
of water.
Seckler et al. (1999) estimated the average irrigation efciency (water required for 100% yield divided by irrigation
withdrawals) for 118 countries around the world in 1990 as
43%, and showed that increasing irrigation effectiveness to
70% would produce a total water saving of 944 km3 per year
and reduce the need for development of further water supplies
for all sectors in 2025 by approximately 50%. In reality, when
3
2
1
Growth in irrigated area (%)
Green
Revolution
environmental protection of freshwaters, adding further competition for agricultural demands.

Irrigated croplands globally have increased from approximately 100 Mha in 1950 to 275 Mha in 2000 (Lal, 2009),
being twice as productive as nonirrigated croplands. However,
meeting future food demand will be signicantly more challenging than in the 1960s when the rst Green Revolution
occurred, and agricultural efciency was generally low everywhere (Jury and Vaux, 2007). Once surface waters become
fully allocated, communities turn to groundwaters with less
tangible accompanying ecosystem services. The unprecedented
demands on global groundwaters for food production has led
to overdrafting (rate of extraction4rate of recharge), which is
calculated to be as much as 163 km3 per year, with approximately 80% of this occurring in India and China (Postel,
1999). The implications of this are that close to 500 million
people are being fed by a water supply that could disappear in
the near future.
Seckler et al. (1999) estimated that up to 25% of Indias
grain harvest could be in jeopardy due to declining freshwater
resources. China increasingly faces water shortage and food
security challenges, with the area of land irrigated in 2003
having increased 3.5 times since 1949, and 75% of its grain
crop being dependent on irrigation.
Figure 1 Rainwater harvesting schemes supplement freshwater allocations for irrigation (Left: Opuha Dam, New Zealand, photo: Opuha Water
Ltd.; Right: Arvari River, India). Photo: C. Glendenning
1800
1850
1900
1950
2000
Year
Figure 2 Reported rate of growth (% per annum) in the global
irrigated area over the past 200 years. Modied from Jury, W.A.,
Vaux, H.J., 2007. The emerging global water crisis: Managing scarcity
and conict between water users. Advances in Agronomy 95, 176.
freshwater resources are limited, it is possible that saved water

will be directed elsewhere to increase overall productivity. The
efciency gains enable increased food production, but do not
address the need to allocate freshwaters for irrigation at a
sustainable rate. Efciency gains therefore need to be accompanied by catchment regulation to maintain a sustainable total
allocation of freshwaters for irrigation (Perry, 2007).
Irrigation efciency will become increasingly important as
constraints deepen on further expansion of irrigation. There is
also growing evidence that the expansion of irrigated lands,
which has been steadily rising since the 1950s, has slowed as we
enter the twenty-rst century (Figure 2; Jury and Vaux, 2007).
To create efciency gains, innovative irrigation technologies
will therefore be required:
more uniform application of water (Burt et al., 1997);

reduction of evaporation or runoff losses (Burt et al., 1997);
improvement of sprinklers by lowering the spray to reduce
air losses and kinetic energy of impact (Jury and Vaux,
2007);
380
improvement of irrigation scheduling and water delivery

timing to reduce water losses, as well as addressing crop
sensitivity at certain developmental stages (Jury and Vaux,
2007);
use of soil monitoring and PET estimates to ensure that
correct amounts of water are applied at the correct time
(Jury and Vaux, 2007);
correct tillage and eld preparation to enhance inltration
and reduce evaporative losses (Wallace and Batchelor,
1997); and
development of canal linings and other repair measures to
improve the efciency of water supply from source to eld,
which is estimated to average approximately 70% globally
(Bos, 1985).
Summary
There is much evidence in the scientic literature which conrms that global agriculture will face a major challenge over
the next few decades supplying more food to meet increasing
demands while simultaneously reducing its environmental
impact (Beddington, 2010; OECD, 2012). Dwindling water
supplies, an increasing frequency of droughts, and longer term
uncertainties associated with a changing climate, all mean
irrigated agriculture needs to do more with less. This implies
both increasing water productivity (ton ha1) and raising the
economic benets attributed to irrigated production (US$ per
m3) (Monaghan et al., 2013).
Farmers and agribusinesses are under pressure to reduce
production inputs and costs. There are, not surprisingly, a
number of emerging risks climate change, demands for
greater environmental protection, and increasing competition
for water resources.
Future advances in irrigation management are likely to
provide still more precision, greater automation, and increasingly ingenious and efcient irrigation options to farmers. The
challenge will be to meet farmer demands for smart irrigation
management in an increasingly water-constrained world.
This article therefore discusses the latest technologies
designed to improve the application of water by irrigation
systems both at the farm-scale and at larger regional schemes.
It presents the latest advances, such as precision tools,
remote sensing and web enablement. Finally, it presents an
insight into future needs and trends for advanced irrigation
technologies.
Technological Advances in Irrigation Application

Methods
Section Overview
The traditional irrigation application methods (surface and
pressurized) are now dated technologies and are at the limit of
their irrigation performance under current management practices. Future gains in performance can be achieved both
through improved design and through the use of advanced
technologies and management, in particular the use of adaptive control. The goal is for these adaptive control systems to
automatically and continuously readjust the irrigation
Figure 3 Surface irrigation of sugarcane in Swaziland. Gravity fed

furrow irrigation schemes are widespread in Africa although some are
being converted into either pressurized sprinkler or drip irrigation to
improve efciency and manage limited water resources. Photo: J.
Knox.
application system to a desired performance, and account for

any variability (temporal or spatial) in crop water requirements or water intake across the eld.
This section describes research directed at modernizing the
application methods, and focuses on both the factors that
limit performance and the simulation tools and control systems that aim to deliver the needed improvements in this
performance.
Surface Irrigation
Introduction
In various types of surface irrigation (e.g., Figure 3), the furrows, bays (border dykes), or basins serve both as a means
to convey water across the eld and as a surface through
which inltration occurs. The soil inltration characteristic
more than any other factor serves to determine the level of
performance or efciency achievable from surface irrigation.
The soil inltration characteristic can vary both across the
eld and also from one irrigation event to the next (Walker,
1989; McClymont and Smith, 1996; Emilio et al., 1997;
Gillies, 2008). Khatri and Smith (2006) and Gillies (2008)
identied this variability as a major physical constraint in
achieving higher irrigation performance in furrow-irrigated
elds.
In surface irrigation, inltration variability causes nonuniformity in water absorption rates and furrow stream advance rates (Trout, 1990). Furrow irrigation efciency is further
compounded by the furrow-to-furrow inow variability in
both gated pipe and siphon tube operated systems (Trout and
Mackey, 1988). For example, in a typical eld under furrow
irrigation, it is very difcult to identify one furrow that is
representative of the entire eld. Therefore, any eld evaluation of inltration characteristics based on measurements
from only a single furrow is unlikely to give an accurate
estimation of irrigation performance (Schwankl et al., 2000;
Langat et al., 2008; Gillies, 2008).
Well-designed and managed precision surface irrigation

systems thus have the potential to address both spatial and
temporal variations in soil inltration through the appropriate
use of simulation, optimization, and adaptation, that is,
through real-time control.
Simulation
Software packages for simulating surface irrigation hydraulics
have been developed to accurately simulate the depth of water
applied over the eld. The two most commonly used models
to date are SIRMOD (Walker, 1989) and WinSRFR (Bautista
et al., 2009) largely because of their ready availability. Other
similar models that have been reported include BORDEV and
FURDEV (Zerihun and Feyen, 1996) and that of Mailhol and
Gonzalez (1993).
The software is typically based on a numerical solution of
the full hydrodynamic (St. Venant) equations (see Walker and
Skogerboe, 1989), or, in the case of WinSRFR, of a reduced
form of these equations (the zero-inertia approximation). In
all cases their accuracy is limited only by the accuracy of the
input parameters, in particular the soil inltration parameters
and the resistance provided by the surface roughness of the
furrow or bay (represented by the Mannings n parameter
(Limerinos, 1970)).
Depths of inltration can be calculated at a ne spacing
along the length of a furrow or bay. Across the eld the scale is
determined by the width of the irrigation unit (furrow or bay).
In either case, the prediction scale is ner than the scale at
which applications can be controlled or managed. Therefore,
typically an average inltration characteristic for the entire
furrow or bay is used, and this may lead to inltration being
under- and overestimated in many parts of the eld (Emilio
et al., 1997) due to small-scale variations in the inltration
characteristics. The parameters are usually estimated from
measurements (inow, advance, ow depth, and runoff) taken
during an irrigation event. Methods of estimation range from
direct solution as in the two-point method of Elliott and
Walker (1982) to more data intensive but robust methods
involving error minimization techniques as in the volume
balance-based Inltration PARameter Model (IPARM) (Gillies
and Smith, 2005; Gillies et al., 2007) or the multilevel method
of Walker (2005).
The analytical irrigation model of Austin and Prendergast
(1997) differs from the other simulation models in that it
employs an analytic solution of the kinematic equations and a
simple linear inltration function. However, its use is limited
to bay irrigation of cracking clay soils, and its accuracy is inevitably limited in some eld situations.
An example of simulation in the improvement of surface
irrigation performance is the use of the IRRIMATETM suite of
tools (Raine and Walker, 1998; Smith et al., 2005), which is
now an accepted practice in the Australian cotton industry.
IRRIMATE is a process of eld measurement, evaluation,
simulation, and optimization that uses data from a measured
irrigation to evaluate the performance of that irrigation and to
provide advice on the best management of future irrigation
events (which in any case could be occurring under different
soil conditions). The IRRIMATE system currently employs
IPARM (Gillies and Smith, 2005; Gillies et al., 2007) to
381
determine the inltration parameters from measurements of

the irrigation advance and runoff. These parameters are then
used in the simulation model SIRMOD in which the optimization (selection of the best or preferred irrigation ow rate
and/or time to cut off) is a manual trial and error process.
These are two signicant limitations of the system.
The recently developed Surface Irrigation Simulation Calibration and Optimization (SISCO) model, which was applied
in an evaluation of bay irrigation in the Goulburn Murray
Irrigation District of Southern Australia by Smith et al. (2009)
and Gillies et al. (2010), removes these limitations. As with
earlier models, it employs a solution of the full hydrodynamic
equations to simulate the irrigation advance and recession and
provides an estimate of the irrigation performance. However, it
is also self-calibrating in that it performs the inverse solution
for the inltration parameters from any of a wide selection of
measured data including the irrigation advance, runoff, recession, and depth data; and optimizes the irrigation against
user-dened objectives that involve some combination of the
usual performance measures.
Understanding and accommodating spatial and temporal
variability of inltration in furrow irrigation is another unique
feature of the SISCO model. Given some knowledge of the
variation in the inltration characteristics across a group of
furrows or across a number of irrigation events (e.g., Gillies
et al., 2008, 2011), the model allows selection of the ow rate
and time to cut off that give the best overall irrigation performance for the entire group of furrows.
Automation and control of surface irrigation

Automation and adaptive real-time control has been proposed
for the management of temporal variability of inltration
characteristics (e.g., Emilio et al., 1997; Mailhol and Gonzalez,
1993; Khatri and Smith, 2006). It can provide an even higher
level of irrigation performance than the traditional evaluation
(as demonstrated by Raine et al., 1997; Smith et al., 2005;
Khatri and Smith, 2007) along with substantial labor savings.
Control systems used in surface irrigation can be implemented at diverse levels of sophistication and can be manual
or automatic. Automation is not essential to the achievement
of efcient surface irrigation; however, it does provide convenience, reduced labor requirements, and greater certainty
over the control of irrigation durations.
The use of irrigation evaluations to modify future irrigations (e.g., the IRRIMATE process) is essentially an example
of temporally separate feedback control where data from one
event are used to control the next or future events. Real-time
control as applied to surface irrigation implies that measurements taken during an irrigation event are processed and used
for the modication and optimization of the same irrigation
event. The real-time control system monitors the advance
of water along the furrow or bay, and through a simulation
process modies the management variables (ow rate and
time to cut off) accordingly before the end of that particular
irrigation event. If the management variables are continually
and automatically varied it is a form adaptive control.
Adaptive or real-time control of furrow irrigation potentially leads to higher irrigation efciencies and hence substantial water savings by better matching the irrigation to the
prevailing soil conditions.
382
Figure 4 Rubicon farm channel actuator (left) and bay inlet actuator (right). Photos: Rubicon Water.
Automated feedback control systems have been attempted

for various congurations of surface irrigation (e.g., Clemmens,
1992; Hibbs et al., 1992; Humpherys, 1995ac; Niblack and
Sanchez, 2008; Uniwater, 2008). In these cases the response
being sensed was the water advance down the eld, where
the sensing was by contact (Humpherys and Fisher, 1995)
or noncontact (Lam et al., 2007) means. In most cases, the
control systems were able to deliver better irrigation performance (typically measured by higher application efciencies)
than the conventionally managed systems. Furrow irrigation
has seen little automatic control compared with other
surface irrigation techniques. Humpherys (1969) observed that
border and basin irrigation systems are generally better suited
to automation and control than furrow because the inow into
the bay is more easily controlled. Some previous attempts at
furrow irrigation automation and control include surge ow
irrigation systems (Walker, 1989; Mostafazadeh-Fard et al.,
2006), and conventional continuous ow (Hibbs et al., 1992;
Lam et al., 2007).
A signicant challenge in controlling surface irrigation is to
obtain the data needed by the control system in sufcient time
to control the irrigation. An example of this is provided by
Hibbs et al. (1992), who developed an adaptive control system
based on measurements of the outow at the downstream end
of the furrow. However, the system is impractical because in
most surface irrigation systems the control decisions need to
be made long before the occurrence of any outow.
All these cases can be considered a form of adaptive control
where the response being sensed is the water advance down
the eld and the output is the depth of water applied and the
usual performance measures of efciency and uniformity (rather than a crop response). Systems such as these account for
the temporal variation in soil moisture decits and soil
hydraulic properties. Varying the management to accommodate spatial variations in the soil inltration characteristic is
usually not considered. Despite the published research, few if

any of these systems have been commercialized.
Recently, Khatri and Smith (2006, 2007) established the
basis for the practical real-time control of furrow irrigation,
involving the following:
continuous measurement of that inow through inference

from measurements of pressure in the supply system;
measurement of the advance down the furrows at a single
point about midway through each irrigation;
real-time estimation of the soil moisture decit and the
current inltration parameters from that observation of the
irrigation advance; and
real-time simulation and optimization of the irrigation for
selection of the time to cut off that will give maximum
performance for that irrigation.
Preliminary trials of this system, Koech (2012) show that

the irrigation cutoff times predicted were shorter than those
used by the farmer in irrigating the remainder of the eld. This
translated to reduced runoff, deep percolation, and higher
application efciencies as a direct result of real-time optimization. The system proposed has been kept simple, by using
a xed inow and varying only cutoff time, to encourage implementation of the system. Although the real-time optimization can be operated as a manual system the greatest
benets occur when it is integrated with automation. The
current phase of development of this system is the integration
with the Rubicon Water FarmConnects system (Figure 4). The
FarmConnects system combines short-range radio telemetry,
solar power, mobile telecommunications, and cloud software
on the internet to automate and remotely control surface
irrigation.
In all these systems, the focus is on the control of the individual irrigation event. Although this is an important aspect
to improve precision of surface irrigation delivery it is not
383
Figure 5 Uniform center pivot irrigation on a sugarcane crop (left) (Photo: J. Knox), and variable rate center pivot irrigation for dairy pasture
(right). Photo: C.B. Hedley.
sufcient. These systems require comprehensive decision

support to provide the seasonal water management that will
deliver maximum water use efciency.
Sprinkler Systems
Sprinkler or overhead irrigation systems deliver water to the
plant from above, and may be solid set, motorized with a
boom with sprinklers attached, or hand moved, for example,
rain guns. In comparison to surface irrigation systems, these
systems commonly require a power source to move, and
provide greater control of the applied water depths and position (see Figures 5 and 6).
Sprinkler pattern simulation

Prediction of how adjacent sprinklers overlap to give the pattern of application is essential to the design of effective
sprinkler irrigation systems. In its simplest form it involves the
overlapping of known patterns such as in the package SpacePro (Cape, 1998) to select the nozzle size and spacing for a
given application. Here the objective is to maximize the uniformity of applied depths. It relies on knowledge of the
sprinkler patterns for the given nozzle, pressure, and height
above ground. Wind effects are typically ignored and the answer is relatively insensitive to uncertainties in the individual
sprinkler pattern used in the analysis (Christiansen, 1941).
Simulation of sprinkler distribution patterns can not only
provide input data for use in models such as SpacePro but also
the basis for decision-support models for sprinkler systems in
the development and application of optimum irrigation
management strategies. Central to an accurate simulation of
sprinkler distribution patterns is the prediction of the impact
of wind (speed and direction) on the overlapped pattern. In
general, higher wind speeds lengthen the sprinkler distribution
pattern downwind, shorten the distribution pattern upwind,
and narrow the distribution pattern normal to the wind direction (Figure 7; Shull and Dylla, 1976). Greater overlap of
adjacent sprinkler patterns is thus required to obtain
acceptable uniformity.
Figure 6 Overhead irrigation on onions using a mobile hosereel

tted with a boom. These methods are used on high value crops on
light soils where small, frequent applications help to avoid soil and
crop damage. Photo: J. Knox.
Simulation of sprinkler irrigation distribution patterns in

windy conditions has evolved signicantly over the past two
decades. Two major approaches have been used: a deterministic approach, which applies traditional ballistic theory to
calculate the ight trajectories of individual water droplets;
and empirical methods, which involve extrapolation from
measured sprinkler distribution patterns for various wind
speeds and directions for the same nozzle, pressure, and
trajectory angle.
An example of the empirical approach is the work of
Richards and Weatherhead (1993) and Al-Naeem (1993),
both of whom used measured wind-affected patterns to determine six empirical factors that are then used to adjust any
no-wind pattern for that sprinkler to deal with the effects of
wind. This same approach was extended in the TRAVGUN
model of Smith et al. (2008), which used eld-measured
transects of applied depths from passes of a traveling irrigator
rst to calculate the no-wind sprinkler pattern and second to
determine the six factors (Figure 8). Output from the model is
384
mm hr1
47.5
14
37.5
47
710
27.5 17.5
1013
7.5
2.5
1316
12.5
1619
22.5
1922
32.5
2225
42.5
(a)
mm hr
14
47
710
1013
1316
1619
1922
2225
47.5
47.5
37.5
37.5
27.5
27.5
17.5
17.5
7.5
7.5
2.5
2.5
12.5
12.5
22.5
22.5
32.5
32.5
42.5
42.5
47.5
37.5
27.5
17.5
7.5
2.5
12.5
22.5
32.5
42.5
(b)
Figure 7 (a) Measured spray pattern for a rain gun sprinkler with a wind speed of 3.58 m s 1 (left) and (b) predicted spray pattern for a rain
gun sprinkler with a wind speed of 3.58 m s 1. Reproduced from Smith, R.J., Gillies, M.H., Newell, G., Foley, J.P., 2008. A decision support
model for travelling gun irrigation machines. Biosystems Engineering 100 (1), 126136.
45
Measured data (scaled)
Predicted transect
40
No wind
35
Depth (mm)
30
25
20
15
10
0
60
40
20
20
40
60
Distance from travel lane (m)

Figure 8 Fit of the TRAVGUN model to a wind affected transect, following calibration. Reproduced from Smith, R.J., Gillies, M.H., Newell, G.,
Foley, J.P., 2008. A decision support model for travelling gun irrigation machines. Biosystems Engineering 100 (1), 126136.
an estimate of the uniformity of applications for any selected

wetted sector angle, lane spacing, travel direction, and wind
speed and direction. The user can change the various operating
parameters such as the lane spacing and sector angle to identify the optimum values for those parameters.
An advance on this notion was reported by Ghinassi
(2010), where the performance of a traveling gun sprinkler is
maximized by real-time variation of pressure, travel speed,
wetting angle, and speed of rotation.
The SIRIAS model (Carrion et al., 2001; Montero et al.,
2001) reects the latest thinking in simulation using
sprinkler droplet ballistics. To simulate the wind-affected
pattern for a single sprinkler, SIRIAS requires a radial leg
pattern measured in still air (for the given sprinkler, nozzle
height, and pressure). The model uses an inverse solution to
determine the droplet size distribution that would give that
sprinkler pattern and then uses that distribution in the prediction of the wind-affected pattern. It has been validated for
a wide range of nozzles and congurations (e.g., Montero
et al., 2001). The patterns predicted by SIRIAS can then be
used in packages such as SpacePro to determine the overlap
patterns for whole systems.
For the large mobile center pivot and lateral move systems,
models that predict sprinkler patterns to estimate the uniformity of applications along the machine provide an alternative simpler method to eld trials using large numbers of
catch cans. However, eld trials add value as they also assess
machine maintenance issues, such as blocked sprinklers and
hoses. Examples of this type of model are those of Smith
(1989) and Thompson et al. (2000). Both used a similar
statistical description of the droplet size distribution and
combined the ballistic model with the overlap along the machine and aggregation of the pattern in the travel direction. An
alternative approach was used in the mBOSS model of Foley
(2011), who applied the overlap and aggregation to windaffected patterns imported from SIRIAS.
Ballistic models typically assume that the jet from the
nozzle breaks up into the assumed drop size distribution
instantaneously or at some dened distance from the nozzle.
In either case drag coefcients are modied in a calibration
process designed to make the measured and predicted
sprinkler patterns match. In an attempt to overcome this deciency, Grose et al. (1998) used a three-dimensional twophase plume, which consisted of modeling the interaction of
the jet with the surrounding air, simulating the separation of
the jet into individual droplets. However, this approach has
not gained any acceptance.
Unless the break-up of the stream can be predicted from
the fundamental uid mechanics as attempted by Grose et al.
(1998), any ballistic model requires a droplet size distribution
for the particular nozzle type and size, and pressure to be used
in the simulation. Obtaining these data is still relatively difcult, time consuming, and expensive.
In all the above models, the usual purpose is estimation of
the uniformity of applications and the selection of appropriate
nozzles and nozzle spacing. Although their accuracy is limited
primarily by the accuracy of the ballistic models (including the
use of time and vertically averaged wind speeds and directions), they are sufciently accurate for research and design
purposes. However, none are sufciently accurate to predict
385
applications at particular points in an irrigated eld with

condence; hence they are not suitable for use in a farming
decision support system for precision irrigation.
To counter the adverse effect of wind on sprinkler patterns,
Ozaki (1999) developed a prototype robotic self-traveling
sprinkler system that controls the nozzle sector and trajectory
angles and the water supply instantaneously in response to
windy conditions to minimize the distortion of the sprinkler
pattern by wind and the amount of wasted water.
Spatially varied applications Center Pivot and Lateral

Move Machines
The development of mobile sprinkler systems has provided a
level of convenience and efciency as well as the greatest potential for uniform applications, although they need to be well
designed and maintained to achieve this potential. For example, in a study of 39 machines, Foley (2011) showed that
less than one-third were operating to specication. In addition
these machines are readily adaptable to deliver spatially varied
applications.
The ultimate performance from these types of machine
occurs through the adoption of low-energy precision application (LEPA) technology (Lyle and Bordovsky, 1981, 1983).
The LEPA system involves the use of very low pressure sprays
or bubblers located just above the soil surface on the end of
long drop tubes. Efciency is improved through the reduction
of spray drift and canopy interception and evaporation. Spatial
uniformity is also higher than for machines tted with conventional sprinklers.
Research into precision irrigation sprinkler systems was
initiated in the USA in the early 1990s. Initially this work
focused on the modication of center pivot and lateral move
irrigation machines to apply spatially varied applications of
water and nitrogen (Evans et al., 1996; Duke et al., 1997;
Heermann et al., 1997; Sadler et al., 1997, 2000; Camp and
Sadler, 1998; Camp et al., 1998; King and Wall, 1998), with
the system control often based on stored databases of spatially
referenced data. Readers are referred to Camp et al. (2006) and
Evans and King (2012) for comprehensive reviews of research
undertaken in this eld. More recently, the emphasis has
shifted to the purpose and performance of spatially varied irrigations. Examples of this work include King et al. (2005),
Sadler et al. (2005), Camp et al. (2006), Chavez et al. (2006),
and Dukes and Perry (2006). Perry et al. (2003) showed
substantial amounts of water conservation for center pivots,
and later Han et al. (2009) developed and tested equipment
and software for variable rate irrigation (VRI) application of
water using a lateral move irrigation system.
An interesting use of a system designed for spatially varied
applications was provided by Chavez et al. (2010). In this case,
the spatially variable capacity was used to compensate for
nonuniformity inherent in the irrigation applications from the
machine by providing greater uniformity.
Various technologies have been used to deliver VRI applications, including
multiple discrete xed-rate application devices operated in

combination to provide a range of application depths (see
McCann et al., 1997; Camp and Sadler, 1994);
386
Node
Node
Node
Node
Node
GPS
Figure 9 Schematic diagram of individual sprinkler control on a center pivot using GPS and wireless node technology (Available at: www.
precisionirrigation.co.nz).
(a)
(b)
Figure 10 (a) Drip irrigation used for pasture establishment in South Australia. (b) Taps control water supply to the drip tape installed at 0.2 m
depth, with pressure compensating emitters at 0.4 m spacing releasing water at 1 l h 1. Photos: L. Finger.
ow interruption to xed-rate devices to provide a range of

application depths that depend on pulse frequency (see
Evans and Harting, 1999); or
variable-aperture sprinklers with time-proportional control
(see King and Kincaid, 2004; King et al., 1997).
Research to date has resulted in the development of

prototype systems for variable rate application, with increasing
commercial uptake of these products in the past few years.
Appropriate decision-support systems, particularly those that
incorporate the outputs from real-time monitoring technologies have not reached an equivalent stage of development.
Evans et al. (1996) acknowledged that the greatest difculty
faced in the implementation of spatially varied irrigation
is associated with determining appropriate prescriptions for
the application of water and nutrients. This issue is discussed
further in Section Technological Advances In Irrigation
Management.
Examples of commercial systems for control of variable
applications from center pivot machines are the Farmscan
7000 VRI system developed in Australia and a similar system
developed in New Zealand by Precision Irrigation (Precision
Irrigation, 2014). The New Zealand system was released into

the market in 2008, and incorporates individual sprinkler
control using wireless nodes and GPS technology (Figure 9).
Microirrigation Systems
Microirrigation systems are typically designed to wet only the
soil zone occupied by plant roots and to maintain this at or
near an optimum moisture level, using emitters spaced along
drip lines. The obvious advantages of microirrigation include a
smaller wetted surface area, reduced evaporation from the soil
surface, reduced weed growth, and potentially improved water
application uniformity within the crop root zone by better
control over the location and volume of application (see e.g.,
Figure 10).
A particular benet of microirrigation (also known as drip
or trickle) is the ability to apply small amounts of water at
short intervals. This provides scope to maintain the soil at a
specied moisture content for part or all of the season and
hence the opportunity for increased effectiveness of rainfall
during the irrigation season. However, the low soil moisture
387
Drip dried vine fruit

16
Number of irrigators
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
50
5
5
55
6
0
60
6
5
65
7
0
70
7
5
75
8
0
80
8
5
85
9
0
90
9
95 5
1
00
45
5
40
4
35
4
30
3
25
3
Application efficiency (%)

Experience
Gypsum block
Evaporation
Capacitance
Tensiometer
Figure 11 Application efciencies varying with the method of scheduling irrigations for drip-irrigated vines in the Sunraysia region of Victoria,
Australia. Reproduced from Schache, M., 2011. Identifying best management practice through irrigation benchmarking: Would you like probes with
your drippers? In: Irrigation Australia, 2011 Irrigation & Drainage Conference, Launceston, Tasmania. Mascot, NSW, Sydney: Irrigation Australia
Limited.
decits maintained under such systems also limit opportunities for any excess rainfall to be stored in the soil. This can
reduce the amount of effective rainfall and exacerbate runoff
and nutrient leaching.
The potential efciency of microirrigation systems is often
quoted as being greater than 90%. Losses of water in microirrigation systems occur principally through evaporation from
the soil surface, surface runoff, and deep drainage. Evaporation
losses are generally small due to the limited wetted surface
area and the absence of ponded surface water due to the low
discharge rates. The application of water usually occurs beneath the crop canopy, either directly onto or beneath the soil
surface, further reducing the potential for evaporative loss.
Runoff losses are also usually small due to the low application
rates. However, as with all irrigation systems, the ability to
achieve high levels of efciency is more a function of the
management of the system rather than some inherent property
of the system. For example, Shannon et al. (1996) found that
drip irrigation application efciencies under commercial conditions in the Bundaberg area ranged from 30% to 90%. Given
the nature of the system, these losses were most likely from
overirrigation and deep percolation. Similarly, Schache (2011)
found application efciencies of drip-irrigated vineyards in the
Sunraysia region of Southern Australia to range from 25% to
100% (Figure 11). In this case, the identied causal factor was
the method used for irrigation scheduling, with grower experience (subjective approaches) faring worst when compared
with more scientic (objective) methods. Similar experiences
were also observed in drip-irrigated crops under supplemental
irrigation conditions (Knox and Weatherhead, 2005).
Placement of the drip lines is an important consideration

in achieving high efciencies. For example, Henderson et al.
(2008) demonstrated a 25% gain in efciency when drip lines
were placed adjacent to each row of broccoli rather than between every second row.
Dominant causes of nonuniform applications under
microirrigation systems are pressure variations along the lateral
pipelines, variability in the emitters occurring during manufacture, and blockage of the emitters. Extensive evaluations of
the uniformities of applications from microirrigation systems
have been conducted in the USA (e.g., Hanson et al., 1995)
using mobile eld laboratories. These have shown that emission
uniformities are less than desirable with commercial systems
commonly operating with an emission uniformity (Eu) of less
than 80%. This is supported by Australian data from McClymont et al. (2009) and Hornbuckle et al. (2009), who reported
distribution uniformities as low as 32% from a sample of dripirrigated vineyards in Southern Australia. These observations
highlight the need for improved design and in-eld evaluation,
diagnosis, and correction of microirrigation systems if their
potential for precision irrigation is to be realized.
Systems for recording and reporting the results of performance evaluations of microirrigation systems are available,
for example, Hornbuckle et al. (2009). However, these do not
provide diagnostic capability and cannot be readily integrated
with the software used for system management.
Microirrigation systems also have greater potential for accurate irrigation delivery than other systems. They are easily
controlled and are commonly automated on a time, soil
moisture, or timetemperature basis (e.g., Phene and Howell,
388
1984; Meron et al., 1996; Dukes and Scholberg, 2004; Wanjura

et al., 2004; Evett et al., 2006). They also lend themselves to
adaptive control and have the potential to apply spatially
variable applications at a range of scales from individual laterals to individual emitters. Variable rate-controllers that respond to real-time sensing and decision making are
particularly applicable to microirrigation systems. They have
not been used to apply water variably down an individual
lateral or drip line, and would require additional modication
for this to occur.
Research into precision irrigation for microirrigation systems has been undertaken primarily in horticultural crops
including viticulture (Ooi et al., 2008; Capraro et al., 2008a,b)
and fruit tree orchards (Coates et al., 2004; Uniwater, 2008;
Adhikari et al., 2008).
Capraro et al. (2008a,b) utilized closed-loop irrigation
control systems with moisture measurements in the root zones
to maintain the soil moisture level around a set value. Regulated decit irrigation (RDI) strategies were incorporated
within the irrigation control system to achieve particular
quality targets, that is, the enological quality of the grapes.
Coates et al. (2004, 2005, 2006) focused their efforts on the
development of a spatially variable microsprinkler system that
would allow for management of individual trees in an orchard. More specically, the objective was to supply water and
dissolved chemical fertilizers differentially to one or more individual trees fed by a single microsprinkler drip line.
Preliminary results show that spatially variable management at this scale is possible. Another example of sensor-based
control of spatially varied applications from a microsprinkler
system is provided by Torre-Neto et al. (2000).
More recently, Ooi et al. (2008) developed and tested an
automated irrigation system for microirrigation. Two irrigation
controllers a soil-moisture-based controller and an ET-based
controller were integrated into a wirelessly networked irrigation control system in an apple orchard and a commercial
vineyard. Results have shown that automated irrigation using
closed-loop control systems improved water productivity by
73% compared with manual irrigation (Uniwater, 2008).
These results demonstrate the potential of closed-loop irrigation control for irrigators at the lower end of the spectrum to
leapfrog rapidly to the upper end of the efciency spectrum.
For those irrigators already at the upper end of the spectrum,
adoption of the technology would lead to substantial labor
and time savings.
Technological Advances in Irrigation Management

Section Overview
This section covers the following aspects:
advances in irrigation scheduling,

soil moisture mapping,
wireless sensor networks (WSNs), and
precision irrigation management.
The technological advances in irrigation systems described

in Section Technological Advances in Irrigation Application
Methods must be accompanied by state-of-the-art decision
support tools to determine when to turn on the irrigator and

how much irrigation to apply; aiming to maximize any benets
gained from the investment in new technology. Decisionsupport tools either evolve alongside equipment development
because the new equipment provides new and enabling methods for optimizing irrigation timing, placement, and amounts,
or they may develop independently and be appropriate for
use with a range of different types of irrigation systems.
Advanced irrigation scheduling (Section Section Overview)
therefore aims for accurate placement of optimized amounts
of irrigation at critical times. This, in turn, is primarily determined by crop water demand and soil moisture supply;
and new sensor technologies are being used to dene crop
demand and soil moisture supply at high spatial and temporal
resolution (Greenwood et al., 2010). Knowledge of daily
crop water demand is useful, but monitoring soil moisture
supply to crop provides a predictive tool for scheduling.
Section Advances in Irrigation Scheduling discusses these latest
developments in soil moisture mapping; Section Soil Moisture
Mapping describes methods to update static maps at regular
time intervals.
Recent WSN technological advances and their commercial
availability provide the means for site-specic monitoring to
inform irrigation management decisions. These technological
advances include smart integration of sensors, wireless nodes
(for communication), internet- and cellular-enabled transfer,
and processing and reporting protocols. A specic example,
the sensor web enablement (SWE), an initiative of the Open
Geospatial Consortium (OGC) will be discussed in Section
Wireless Sensor Networks.
The term precision irrigation reects the precision agriculture concept, applying GPS with sensors to prescribe inputs
in the right place, at the right time, and in the right amount.
Precision agriculture addresses in-eld variability, largely ignored until the 1980s, and new GPS-enabled technologies are
enabling precise irrigation management tools, which will be
discussed in Section Wireless Sensor Networks.
Advances in Irrigation Scheduling

Designers typically plan for the peak ow rate of a new irrigation system to meet the seasonal crop water requirements
for the area to be irrigated plus any freshwater allocation requirements. Once in place, appropriate scheduling tools are
then used to assess seasonal changes to daily evapotranspiration (ET) demands from specic crops, and irrigation is then
scheduled accordingly.
Advanced technologies for assessing regional ET losses
include remote sensing by satellite or airborne scanners
(e.g., Gonzalez-Dugo et al., 2006). Multispectral satellites,
such as advanced very high resolution radiometer, moderate
resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS), and Landsat TM (Thematic Mapper), have been used since the 1970s
to estimate ET. These systems are generally limited by their
spatial (30 m1 km pixel) and spectral (536 band) resolutions. However, maturation of imaging spectrometry
technology combined with greater availability of airborne
imaging spectrometer data present new opportunities for
improved accuracy of ET estimates by airborne remote

sensing. These researchers tested the gold standard of airborne imaging spectroscopy, NASAs airborne visible/infrared imaging spectrometer, which has 224 spectral bands at
10-nm intervals, and concluded that imaging spectrometers
are suitable for determining ET and understanding associated physiological processes, although they are limited by
spatial extent, and at present are most appropriate for regional estimates rather than site (eld)-based estimates.
Site-specic irrigation scheduling is frequently based on
soil water balance models that determine a daily soil moisture
decit using soil, crop, climate, and latitude inputs (Allen
et al., 1998), with a modeled daily ET value. A critical soil
moisture decit is used for timing irrigation events. Such
traditional modeling tools are very useful but do not easily
address commonly encountered within-eld variability, and
cannot easily account for factors such as ponding due to soil
compaction, high water tables, variable crop growth due to
shading, etc. Advanced scheduling tools need to address
within-site variability due to these factors, that is, topographic
relief, short-range changes in soil depth, texture and moisture
storage capability and management effects including tillage,
fertility, pests, and various irrigation system characteristics
(Sadler et al., 2005; Green et al., 2006; De Jonge et al., 2007;
Evans et al., 2012) and technologies are emerging to address
the challenge (e.g., Peters and Evett, 2007, 2008).
Site-specic crop stress measurements (Green et al., 2006;
Peters and Evett, 2007, 2008) have been trialed for improved
irrigation scheduling. Peters and Evett (2008) used a temperature-time-threshold method. Crop leaf temperature is
used as an indicator of crop stress, which is measured on a
fully automated center-pivot irrigation system, where infrared
thermocouple thermometers are attached to the trusses of the
pivot. A eld datalogger is accessed once a day to assess
whether canopy temperature is above threshold level. Another
novel method determines time for irrigation from crop stress
assessed indirectly through soil moisture measurements. Onset
of crop stress is indicated by a reduced apparent daily crop
water uptake (Thompson et al., 2007).
Soil moisture monitoring tools for triggering irrigation are
perhaps the most widely used and most important tools for
irrigation scheduling (Fang et al., 2007) and a range of new
improved sensors for monitoring soil water are now available
(Cardenas-Lailhacar et al., 2010). Improved accuracy of soil
moisture sensors is obtained by site-specic calibration and
ensuring good soil contact on installation (Greenwood et al.,
2010). Recent advances have been made to link soil moisture
monitoring sites automatically to software decision tools
linked to irrigation systems. Blonquist et al. (2006) installed
a soil moisture sensor (time domain transmission) to log
volumetric soil water content compared with an irrigation
threshold, and connected this to a solenoid valve on the irrigation line supplying water to the irrigation system. This system applied 53% less water than under the conventional
method. Kim et al. (2009) also linked soil moisture monitoring equipment to software control of a site-specic precision linear-move sprinkler irrigation system.
Other technologies have been developed for other methods
of irrigation application. In surface irrigation schemes, where
farmers receive a xed amount of water during a xed period,
site-specic scheduling is limited. Here regional scheduling
389
tools become important; and GIS-integrated tools have been

developed for equitable irrigation supply to account for variability in soil and crop conditions, unreliable intake of water
into the main canal, absence of storage reservoirs, and uneven
distributions of water into tertiary canals (Rowshon et al.,
2009). The GIS tool links eld irrigation demand predictions
and then simulates and recommends optimal irrigation supply
strategies in the Tanjung Karang Irrigation Scheme for rice
growers in Malaysia.
Australian researchers have developed an integrated model
for simulating border-check irrigation of dairy pastures that
combines a biophysical model of the soilplantclimate
interaction with a hydraulic irrigation model, which models
inltration and movement of water through the soil matrix
(Douglas et al., 2010). This model was used to assess how
pasture production varied with irrigation management, such as
irrigation duration, to improve overall scheduling of irrigation
within the scheme.
An Australian review of software tools for on-farm water
management (Inman-Bamber and Attard, 2005) lists a number
of irrigation scheduling software packages that are increasingly
being integrated into irrigation control via web and cellular
control systems. Hornbuckle et al. (2009) describes a remote
sensing method for assessing within-eld crop health variations
(using NDVI) and links this to reference ET values from nearby
weather stations to provide eld-specic scheduling information. This crop coefcient derivation process uses a short
message service (SMS) to provide information through a simple
mobile phone text message service to irrigators on a daily basis.
Such technologies enable real-time adaptive control systems for
irrigation application (Smith et al., 2010). Adaptive control
means that scheduling parameters are based on feedback from
the process (Fig. Smith et al., 2010, p. 62) aiming for continued
system improvements.
These scheduling methods assess crop and soil status, as
well as other management effects regional and some site
specic to improve scheduling tools. Site-specic measurements are obviously preferable and the next section explains
how mapping tools can be combined with site-specic measurements to (1) optimize positioning of the sensors and (2)
provide a map of soil or crop condition to add further renement to decision support tools and technologies for irrigation scheduling.
Soil Moisture Mapping

Recent technological advances in GPS-enabled proximal
(ground-based) sensing methods are providing rapid affordable mapping methods of land, soil, and crops to inform irrigation management decisions. For example, electromagnetic
induction (EM) surveys typically use very accurate positioning
equipment (e.g., real-time kinematic differential GPS, RTKDGPS), quantifying soil spatial variability at resolutions of
o10 m, and simultaneously providing a digital elevation map
(DEM) with an accuracy of o0.1 m.
The EM sensor measures soil apparent electrical conductivity (EC) which is inuenced by soil texture and moisture in
nonsaline soils (e.g., Sudduth et al., 2005; Brevik et al., 2006).
Soil EM maps provide the basis for targeted soil sampling
390
ECa (mS m1)

12.5 13.1
13.5 13.7
mm in Root zone
13.8 14
(a)
64 115
85144
0
50 100
200 m
Contour (m)
(b)
16 44
45 63
6784
14.4 14.6
Contour (m)
mm
N
3666
14.1 14.3
14.7 16.4
Soil water
status
AWC
13.2 13.4
50 100
200 m
Contour (m)
50 100
200 m
(c)
Figure 12 (a) Soil EC map, (b) available water-holding capacity map, and (c) derived soil water status map. Reproduced from Hedley, C.B., Yule,
I.J., 2011. Soil water status maps for variable rate irrigation. In: Clay, D., Shanahan, J., Pierce, F. (Eds.), GIS Applications in Agriculture Nutrient
Management for Improved Energy Efciency. Third Book in CRC GIS in Agriculture Series. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 173190.
strategies to sample the full range of likely soils encountered in

the area of interest. An area of 50 ha can easily be mapped in
one day, by pulling the sensor behind an all-terrain vehicle,
with on-board GPS, datalogger, and eld computer.
Topographic features that are likely to inuence irrigation
efciency (e.g., slope, aspect, and slope angle) can be derived
from the DEM, and used in conjunction with EC to derive
optimal sampling and monitoring positions (Minasny and
McBratney, 2006).
The EM map is not only used to select soil moisture
monitoring sites, but can also be used to calibrate soil EC
values against soil available water-holding properties (Waine
et al., 2000; Godwin and Miller, 2003; Hedley and Yule, 2008;
Hedley and Yule, 2009) so that a soil available water-holding
capacity map can be produced, for spatial irrigation scheduling
(Figure 12). Hezarjaribi and Sourell (2007) also used EM
mapping to dene zones for targeted soil sampling to assess
soil AWC.
Triantalis et al. (2009) describe how EM surveys employing root-zone sensing Geonics EM38 and vadose-zone
sensing Geonics EM31 sensors are related to subsurface soil
properties such as texture, moisture, and depth to water table;
and are used to dene management classes for precision
management. Sherlock and McDonnell (2003) found that
EM38 data could explain 470% of gravimetrically determined
soil moisture variance.
Primary terrain attributes derived from the DEM, collected
as part of the EM survey, or by other means, include surface
derivatives such as slope, aspect, and curvature (Bishop and
Minansy, 2006). Secondary terrain attributes are calculated
from a combination of two or more primary terrain attributes
to model spatial variation of processes across a landscape, the
most commonly used being the topographic wetness index,
which is dened by Moore et al. (1991) as the natural
logarithm of specic catchment area divided by the tangent of

the slope, and another being the SAGA wetness index (Olaya
and Conrad, 2009).
Other methods that show promise for mapping soil moisture
over large areas include airborne and spaceborne remote sensing
by passive microwave radiometry or active radar instruments.
However, both methods are highly sensitive to surface roughness
and their effectiveness is limited to at and bare ground studies
(Jonard et al., 2011; Kseneman et al., 2012), despite the advantage that they are not inuenced by cloud cover.
Ground-based versions of these sensors (ground penetrating
radar and L-band radiometer) are required for site-specic irrigation management, and these sensors are available, and have
been tested on a vehicle for mapping soil moisture in a eld.
Differences observed between the two methods were related to
different sensitivities to surface roughness, and different exploration depths; these technologies require further development before becoming commercially viable. The sensor data
were calibrated against TDR-derived soil moisture measurements at each position, and 20% of the reference TDR data was
required to produce a good roughness calibration model for the
entire eld, to correct the sensor data.
Other methods for mapping spatial heterogeneity of soil
moisture include electrical resistivity tomography (Kelly et al.,
2011). While a strength of this method is its excellent vertical
resolution, a weakness is that electrode arrays are inserted into
the ground for imaging and the method cannot be mobilized.
However, Kelly et al. (2011) used it to delineate zones of excessive water loss due to deep drainage, and this technology is
therefore an advanced irrigation management technology.
Kelly et al. (2011) used the information to position monitoring sensors to assist irrigation scheduling.
Soil moisture mapping aids advanced irrigation scheduling
because this scheduling directly measures the amount of
Web server
WSN
Internet
Gateway
391
Data base
Farm PC
Figure 13 Schematic diagram for a wireless sensor network (WSN) suitable for irrigation control. Adapted from Ruiz-Garcia, L., Lunadei, L.,
Barreiro, P., Robla, J.I., 2009. A review of wireless sensor technologies and applications in agriculture and food industry: State of the art and
current trends. Sensors 9, 47284750.
available water left in a soil prole at any one time, and the
rate at which it is being used by the crop. It therefore directly
monitors crop water use (Thompson et al., 2007) and soil
water storage under any irrigation system, and provides information in a digital form and can be used for open-loop or
closed-loop decision support tools.
Recent technological advances in WSNs provide the tool for
real-time high-resolution soil moisture monitoring within
each management zone dened by the EM survey so that soil
moisture maps can be updated on a daily basis and used either
for direct control of irrigation systems or for informing land
managers.
Wireless Sensor Networks

The high spatial resolution provided by GPS-enabled sensing
methods (Section Advances in Irrigation Scheduling) can be
further rened by smart WSN technologies, and these technologies are rapidly developing from off-line sensors using
eld loggers with manual downloading to wireless on-line
sensor networks, within interoperable and autonomous
sensor webs (see Figure 13). The sensor web concept is based
on the SWE framework of the OGC. Within this framework,
standard protocols, interfaces and web services to discover,
task, exchange, and process data from different sensors
and sensor networks have been dened (Thessler et al., 2011).
Irrigation benets from the resulting high temporal measuring
resolution with real-time data transfer from spatially optimized management zones, and spatiotemporal models can be
produced to update static maps, on a daily basis, for improved
irrigation scheduling (Hedley et al., 2013).
These recent innovations in low-voltage sensor and wireless
technologies combined with advances in internet and cellular
communication technologies offer opportunities for development and application of real-time management systems for
agriculture (Evans et al., 2012; Pierce and Elliott, 2008;
OShaughnessy and Evett, 2010; Coates and Delwiche, 2009).
Ruiz-Garcia et al. (2009) reported that wireless sensor
technologies are entering a new phase as a consequence of
decreasing costs, increasingly smaller sensing devices, and
achievements in frequency technology and digital circuits.
Nodes, each with sensors attached, wirelessly form the most
efcient communication network to send data to a base station where they are stored and can be accessed remotely.
Alternatively, the data are transmitted via internet or cellular

means to a secure database for storage, manipulation, and
informing irrigation schedules. Owing to a large number of
sensors and differing accompanying protocols, a coherent infrastructure is required to treat sensors in an interoperable,
platform-independent and uniform way. Standardized access
to sensor observations and sensor metadata provided by the
OGC compliant Sensor Observation Service (Broring et al.,
2011) acts as a mediator between a client and a sensor data
archive or a real-time sensor system.
WSN technologies have signicant potential to monitor inherent soil variability present in elds with more accuracy than
existing systems. Thus, the benet for the producers is a better
decision support system that allows maximized productivity
while saving water. Installation of WSNs is easier than the
existing wired systems and sensors can be more densely deployed to provide local, detailed data; rather than irrigating an
entire eld in response to broad sensor data, each section could
be activated based on local sensors.
Vellidis et al. (2008) developed a prototype of smart sensor
array for scheduling irrigation in cotton. The system integrates
moisture sensors, thermocouples, and radio frequency identication (RFID) tags. Qian et al. (2007) designed a new
groundwater-monitoring instrument based on WSN that
monitors groundwater table and temperature through a sensor. An embedded single chip processes the monitoring data
and a GSM data module transfers the data wirelessly. Bogena
et al. (2007) evaluated a low-cost soil water content sensor in a
wireless network application, and Kim et al. (2009) developed
an in-eld WSN for implementing site-specic irrigation control in a linear move irrigation system. Communication signals
from the sensor network and irrigation controller to the base
station were successfully interfaced using low-cost bluetooth
wireless radio communication. Hedley et al. (2013) used a
wireless soil moisture sensor network optimally positioned
into EM-dened management zones to inform a precision irrigation scheduling tool (Figure 14). The WSN monitored soil
moisture and depth to water table, the latter providing a
means of calculating the contribution of a high water table for
subirrigating the crop.
Underground systems for monitoring soil conditions, such as
water and mineral content, to provide data for appropriate irrigation and fertilization are emerging (Akyildiz and Stuntebeck,
2006) and these systems can also be used for monitoring the
392
(a) Wireless in-field nodes with
(b) Base station at pivot
sensors attached
Modem
Base
station
(d) Pivot control - soil zones
Web
server
(c) Standard web browser
Figure 14 Flowchart to show WSN for precision irrigation scheduling. Reproduced from Hedley, C.B., Roudier, P., Yule, I.J., Ekanayake, J.,
Bradbury, S., 2013. Soil water status and water table modelling using electromagnetic surveys for precision irrigation scheduling. Geoderma 199,
2229.
presence and concentration of various toxic substances in soils

near rivers and aquifers, where chemical runoff could contaminate drinking water supplies. Another application can be
landslide prediction by monitoring soil movement.
Further recent WSN technological advances for irrigation
scheduling include
energy-efciency gains using adaptive decentralized reclustering protocols for node communications (Bajaber and
Awan, 2011; Nesa Sudha et al., 2011);
algorithm development for handling orphaned nodes for
optimal restoration into the network (Maheswararajah
et al., 2011);
inclusion of wireless lysimeters for real-time online soil
drainage monitoring (Kim et al., 2011); and
incorporation of bluetooth and RFID technologies for
automated data capture and identication applications
(Kim et al., 2009; Ruiz-Garcia et al., 2009).
Precision Irrigation Management

Available water supplies for irrigation are becoming increasingly limited globally and this will force major changes to the
design and management of water delivery for on-farm irrigation management, as discussed elsewhere in the article
(Section Simulation). Section Simulation discusses a technology that will potentially play an important role in future irrigation management of limited water supplies: site-specic
variable-rate sprinkler irrigation or precision irrigation
modication of self-propelled center-pivot and linear-move
systems (Hedley and Yule, 2009; Evans and King, 2012) (see
Figure 15). These systems are particularly suited to site-specic
management approaches because of their current level of
automation and large area coverage with a single lateral pipe.
Where sprinklers are modied for site-specic control, new
opportunities arise to conserve water, reduce plant stress at
localized positions, and reduce nutrient leaching and drainage.
Trials in New Zealand have shown that water savings are
typically between 10% and 25% where variable soils occur
under one system, and further savings are made by excluding
irrigation from tracks, waterways, yards, sheds, and other unproductive areas (Hedley and Yule, 2011).
Management systems being developed alongside these
precision irrigation systems include EM mapping to derive
management zones with real-time soil moisture monitoring
within each zone. The Valley VRI system uses CropMetrics, a
system that derives EM and landscape change layer to identify

water-holding capacity variability across the eld. These data
layers are delivered through a Virtual Agronomist, where the
degree of eld variability is used to decide on irrigation
management strategies. The amount of variability relates to the
amount of opportunity present, that is, the higher the variability the greater the opportunity for variable rate to benet.
Varying application rates increase input efciency and improve
yield production.
Findings from a modeling study by Hedley and Yule (2009)
at ve case-study sites in New Zealand found that where soil
available water-holding capacity varied by 50 mm under one
irrigation system then the potential water savings were approximately 10%, and variation by 4100 mm gave a potential
water saving of Z15%. Savings are potentially greater in humid
temperate regions (where some rainfall occurs during the irrigation season) in comparison with arid regions, where the main
benet of VRI for variable soils is a staggered start to irrigation at
the beginning of the irrigation season, plus different watering
strategies for soils of contrasting textural and drainage properties. Research has also been conducted to introduce wireless
soil moisture sensor networks into EM and landscape-derived
management zones for provision of real-time digital soil
393
moisture information to the VRI controller. VRI control is established on-site or remotely through a software package with
internet or cellular connection.
Smart phone applications are being derived for irrigation
control and management, which is often more suited to operational farmer use, than a computer sitting back in the farm
ofce. The WaterBee system has been developed in Europe
independently from a VRI system, and is the result of a project
undertaken by a team of 10 partners from eight European
countries targeting a sustainable solution to contribute to reducing freshwater use by the agricultural sector. WSNs send
readings to a soil-moisture model that automatically adapts
irrigation requirements to different irrigation installations, and
it is suggested that this WaterBee system will achieve real water
savings while enhancing crop quality.
The importance of scale in precision irrigation

One of the most important areas that may be ignored or
oversimplied in precision irrigation is in choosing an appropriate scale at which variable rate (or other) technologies
should be implemented. It is quite feasible to map spatial soil
variabilities and crop canopy differences at high resolution,
and to engineer an application system to apply water variably.
However, it is much more difcult to explain scientically the
reasons for underlying heterogeneity in crop growth and link
this with condence to decisions on variable water application. Deciding on the appropriate scale for applying water
needs to be informed by a thorough understanding of the
consequences of soil and crop variability on yield. Advances in
precision agriculture thus need to be integrated with equivalent knowledge in precision irrigation to identify the appropriate scale(s) for system implementation. Although it may be
technically and practically possible to apply water variably, it
may not be economically benecial or agronomically sensible
(see Table 1).
Other Advanced Irrigation Developments

Figure 15 Variable rate irrigator, with sprinklers switched off as the
irrigator crosses a farm track, saves water and reduces lameness risk
in dairy cows. Photo: C.B. Hedley.
Table 1
Section Overview
This section provides an introduction to a selection of other
advanced irrigation technologies including the modernization
Spatial scales of common irrigation systems
System
Spatial unit
Order of magnitude of spatial scale (m2)
Surface furrow
Surface furrow
Surface bay
Sprinkler solid set
Center pivot, lateral move
LEPAa bubbler
Traveling irrigator
Drip
Microspray
Single furrow
Set of furrows
Bay
Wetted area of
Wetted area of
Furrow dyke
Wetted area of
Wetted area of
Wetted area of
1000
50 000
10 00050 000
100
100
1
5000
110
20
single sprinkler
single sprinkler
single sprinkler
an emitter
a single spray
Abbreviation: LEPA, low-energy precision application.

Source: Smith, R.J., Raine, S.R., McCarthy, A.C., Hancock, N.H., 2009. Managing spatial and temporal variability in irrigated agriculture through adaptive control, Australian Journal
of Multi-Disciplinary Engineering 7 (1), 7990.
394
of irrigation district networks and the use of smart meters to

improve the monitoring of water usage at the farm and eld
levels. Selected on-farm irrigation technologies to improve
crop water productivity using partial root zone drying (PRD)
and decit irrigation strategies, vision sensing of crop responses for irrigation management, and the application of
fertigation and chemigation are also discussed.
This section covers the following aspects:
modernization of irrigation district networks,

smart water metering,
PRD and RDI,
applied machine vision of plants for irrigation management, and
fertigation and chemigation.
Modernization of Irrigation District Networks

The modernization of irrigation districts often involves converting the water distribution network from intermittent to
on-demand water supply for farmers. On-demand irrigation
schemes supply water to the farm via either gravity-fed channels or pressurized pipe networks. The conveyance efciency of
pressurized pipe networks are normally signicantly greater
(of order 30%) than for channel systems. Pressurized water at
the farm gate also provides farmers with an incentive to convert existing on-farm surface irrigation systems to potentially
more efcient sprinkler or microirrigation systems.
The change from intermittent to on-demand water supply has
implications not only for water use efciency but also for irrigated crop productivity and energy usage. For example, although
modernization of irrigation districts in Southern Spain has reduced the amount of water diverted to farms for irrigation,
consumptive water use has increased, mainly due to a change in
crop rotation (Rodriguez-Diaz et al., 2011). However, in this area,
the costs for system operation and maintenance have increased
dramatically (B400%), primarily due to increasing energy consumption for pumping (Rodriguez-Diaz et al., 2011).
In Southern Australia, Jackson et al. (2010) found that
conversion to pressurized irrigation methods reduced energy
consumption in regions where groundwater is used, the result
of an increase in efciency of water use. They also suggested
that conversion of on-demand gravity-fed systems into pressurized networks is generally not appropriate where surface
water supply is available. In these cases, regional investments
should focus on improving the volumetric efciency of the
channel network and avoid increased energy requirements
(Jackson et al., 2010). However, in the Harvey Irrigation district in Western Australia (Harvey Water, 2012), the availability of elevated surface water dams close to lower elevation
farms has provided the opportunity to convert a channel distribution system into a pressurized piped network that does
not require pumping. Here, increased volumetric distribution
efciencies have provided water for alternative uses, whereas
the delivery of low-cost pressurized water on farm has enabled
the conversion of irrigation application systems and the establishment of higher value horticultural crops.
The service performance of water supply schemes is a
function of the scheme and component capacities as well as the
irrigation demand. Perez-Urrestarazu et al. (2009) observed that
on-demand systems should be designed to deliver water with

ow rates and pressures required by on-farm irrigation systems,
taking into account the time, duration, and frequency as dened by the farmers. However, due to the probabilistic nature
of users irrigating simultaneously (Anwar et al., 2006) these
systems are often designed with excessive distribution capacity,
making them more expensive than intermittent systems
(Planells-Alandi et al., 2001). Similarly, pump-pressurized, ondemand systems are commonly designed and operated to
supply the target pressure in each component of the pipe network irrespective of the water supplied. Sectoring, where farmers
are organized to use water in turns, has been shown (Carrillo
Cobo et al., 2011) to be one of the most effective methods of
reducing energy consumption in pressurized, on-demand irrigation networks. Computational tools involving integrated
geographic information systems, real-time monitoring, and
modeling of hydraulic data with decision support systems are
also being used (e.g., Perez-Urrestarazu et al., 2012) to improve
the operational performance of pressured irrigation networks.
An alternative approach has been taken in the modernization of the open-channel delivery systems in Southern
Australia. Here the decision was made to retain the open
earthen channels and to seek the efciency gains through
automation along with rationalization of the network involving retirement of some smaller channels and some limited
gravity pipelining and channel lining to reduce seepage losses.
The classical ideas from system identication and control are
used to automate the channels to provide a near on-demand
system (Mareels et al., 2003, 2005; Cantoni et al., 2007). This
system has been implemented under the name of Total
Channel Controls and has resulted in distribution efciencies
in excess of 90% compared with the efciencies of 7075%
typically achieved under manual control (see Figure 16).
Smart Water Metering

Knowing the amount of water being used and where it is used
are important elements associated with practicing efcient irrigation. Typical pressurized irrigation farms are characterized
by complex hydraulics due to numerous pipe xtures and
modications that occur over time, and variable irrigation
block ow delivery due to poor design and setup. Where ow
monitoring occurs, it is often conducted by manual readings of
a water meter at irregular intervals.
Smart irrigation metering involves the assessment of
unique hydraulic characteristics at the source of a delivery
system with multiple outlets (Pezzaniti, 2009). This requires
an ability to record and automate analysis of high-frequency
ow and pressure sensor data and allows not only for the
continuous monitoring of water consumption but also for the
identication of individual irrigation valve operation. Smart
water meters have the following attributes (Giurco et al.,
2008): real-time monitoring, high-resolution interval metering
(Z10 s), automated data transfer (e.g., drive by, GPRS, and
3G), and access to data via the internet or SMS. Most modern
mechanical and electronic water meters and pressure sensors
have features (e.g., pulse output) that allow ow to be
monitored or logged. Hence, the implementation of smart
water meters for monitoring on-farm irrigation typically
(a)
395
(b)
Figure 16 Modernization of open-channel delivery in Australia provides a near on-demand system. Photos: Michael Kai courtesy Rubicon Water.
involves the addition of a datalogger and communications to a

traditional water meter and pressure sensor.
Coupling the identication of valve operation with the
measured meter ows makes it possible to disaggregate the
water ow so that any component within an irrigation system
can be identied. This enables the ow and total volume applied to each irrigation block within the system to be recorded,
providing comparative data for both the assessment of irrigation efciency and the identication of maintenance and
operating issues (e.g., pump wear, lter blockages, pipeline
leaks, and emitter variations). The water use information obtained may be used to improve irrigation design and practice.
Similarly, the subsequent analysis of smart water meter data
can be automated and integrated with controllers to optimize
water, energy, and maintenance requirements.
Partial Root Zone Drying and Regulated Decit Irrigation

PRD and RDI strategies involve manipulating the placement
of irrigation water and moisture decit within the root zone
to increase crop water use efciency. The major differences
between PRD and RDI are associated with the nature of the
localized soil moisture and plant water status conditions
(Ruiz-Sanchez et al., 2010). Both hydraulic and biochemical
signals are involved in regulating stomatal and plant growth
rates in response to changes in the abiotic environment
(Chalmers et al., 1981; Davies and Zhang, 1991). PRD involves creating alternate drying and wetting of subsections of
the plant root zone (Figure 17) to elevate biochemical
signaling while maintaining plant water status (Loveys et al.,

2000; Stoll et al., 2000; Dodd et al., 2006). Hence, PRD
strategies maintain plant water status and create a favorable
physiological response through elevated biochemical signaling. RDI involves reducing the moisture availability throughout the entire plant root zone resulting in a reduced plant
water status (Kriedemann and Goodwin, 2003). RDI improves
crop WUE by maintaining plant water status within the prescribed limits of decit with respect to maximum water potential (Kriedemann and Goodwin, 2003).
PRD strategies attempt to maintain water availability and
plant water status simultaneously while elevating the biochemical signaling (increasing ABA levels and alkalization of
sap pH) within the plant. The elevated ABA has been found
(Loveys et al., 2000; Stoll et al., 2000) to coincide with a partial
reduction in stomatal conductance and a differential effect on
vegetative and reproductive production (Davies et al., 2000),
both of which lead to an improvement in crop water use efciency for fruiting crops.
Practical limitations in the successful application of PRD
and RDI are related to the soil hydraulic properties, volume,
and frequency of irrigation water applications, and the occurrence of in-season rainfall. PRD and RDI strategies are
difcult to apply in furrow irrigation systems and PRD is also
difcult to implement under sprinkler irrigation systems.
However, both PRD and RDI may be implemented using drip
irrigation and precision applicators on large mobile irrigation
machines. White and Raine (2009) suggested that the creation
of a soil moisture gradient across the plant root zone large
enough to trigger a PRD response is most likely to be achieved
396
Figure 17 PRD in grapevines. Subsurface drip lines supply water to one side or the other of the vine. In this diagram water is supplied through
two irrigation cycles to the right hand line. The water content of the soil at various depths is shown as output from Enviroscan sensors. Although
the soil around the right hand sensor wets and dries in response to the irrigation, the soil on the left hand side of the vine continues to dry.
Reproduced from Loveys, B.R., Grant, W.J.R., Dry, P.R., McCarthy, M.G., 1997. Progress in the development of partial root-zone drying. Australian
Grapegrower and Winemaker 403, 1820.
on light-textured soils located in semiarid regions that experience minimal in-season rainfall events.
RDI is particularly useful in controlling vegetative growth
and increasing fruiting in indeterminate crops (e.g., cotton).
For example, White (2006) found RDI (79% of predicted ET)
of cotton under eld conditions produced a 31.5% improvement in crop water use productivity over commercial practice
(i.e., applying 100% of predicted ET). However, the largest
benets derived from decit irrigation were associated with the
management of crop agronomy (i.e., vegetative growth, fruit
retention rate, and crop earliness) and the increased utilization
of in-season rainfall.
Applied Machine Vision of Plants for Irrigation Management

The automated visual assessment of plant condition, specically foliage wilting, reectance, and growth parameters, using
machine vision has potential use as input for real-time VRI and
fertigation systems in precision agriculture. Crop-sensing tasks
that have been successfully demonstrated using machine
vision in outdoor conditions include automated identication
of weed species (Slaughter et al., 2008), nitrogen status (Noh
et al., 2005), plant size (Shrestha and Steward, 2005), and

multispectral properties using narrow band imaging (e.g.,
Carter and Miller, 1994). McCarthy et al. (2010) have reviewed
the use of applied machine vision for plant sensing in irrigation applications.
Farm managers typically include visual assessment of crop
condition to inform management decisions (e.g., irrigation
timing) and treat the whole eld uniformly based on their
manual observations. For example, internode length measurement (i.e., the distance between branch junctions, Figure 18) is
part of a plant-based water stress monitoring regime for cotton
suggested for growers (Milroy et al., 2002). A machine vision
system with access to a large proportion of the eld potentially
enables automatic condition assessment for different plants at
high spatial frequency in the eld. Such sensing capability, in
conjunction with the implementation of appropriate variablerate application hardware, enables agricultural elds to be
treated as a conglomerate of control units for operations such as
irrigation and fertigation (e.g., Smith et al., 2009).
The design of a vision system for the measurement of plant
attributes is affected by many factors, including the scale of the
plant measurement (i.e., leaf- or canopy-level) and the measurement environment (e.g., a laboratory or in the eld).
Direction of enclosure
movement (across row)
Camera
enclosure
Camera
397
Transparent
window
2
Plant
specimen
3
Internode
length
4
0.9 m
6
7
(a)
(b)
Figure 18 (a) Moving image capture apparatus; and (b) stylized sample image from apparatus, with main stem nodes numbered. Reproduced
from McCarthy, C.L., Hancock, N.H., Raine, S.R., 2009. Automated internode length measurement of cotton plants under eld conditions.
Transactions of the ASABE 52 (6), 20932103; Cotton plant graphic adapted from University of Hamburg, 1998. Virtual Plants. Available at: http://
www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/virtualplants/ipivp.html (accessed 19.10.12).
Automated machine vision sensing of individual plants in the

eld is presently limited to early stage crops (where neighboring plants are too small to touch or overlap), or, for more
mature canopies, to whole-plant characteristics such as plant
biomass. The use of near-infrared (NIR) imaging, background
boards, and shade structures with articial illumination reduces the complexity of the segmentation process but adds
extra components and potentially physical bulk to the overall
measurement system. In the indoor environment, a monocular vision system can identify small canopy changes for
irrigation scheduling purposes.
Identication of plant structure using stereo vision enjoys
greater success for smaller plants. Applications in the outdoor
environment typically provide overall canopy geometry, which
is useful for monitoring crop growth in areas of a eld or
identifying plant height changes, for example, between different species (i.e., weed and crop). Determination of leaf
and branching structure of individual plants is currently limited, even in indoor environments, and relies on the image
having a plain background. Knowledge of plant growth
patterns (e.g., phyllotaxis) potentially assists measurement by
image analysis.
The sensing and image analysis task may be simplied by
imaging only in that part of the electromagnetic spectrum that
accentuates features of interest more effectively than the broad
visible bands provided by standard RGB cameras. Sensing of
different regions of the electromagnetic spectrum potentially
enables discrimination of plant materials based on color
(visible), cellular structure (NIR), thermal (mid-infrared), or
hardness (X-ray) properties.
Machine vision systems for eld use must be designed to be
robust to sunlight variations (Slaughter et al., 2008). Active
sensing systems are less susceptible to ambient sunlight than
passive sensing systems. However, low-cost (passive sensor)
cameras with simple imposed illumination may also have reduced dependency on sunlight (e.g., Edan et al., 2000).
Attaching a machine vision system to the gantry of a center

pivot or lateral move irrigation machine potentially enables
crop condition to be measured in real-time as the irrigation
machine moves across the eld (e.g., Colaizzi et al., 2003;
McCarthy et al., 2009). Alternatively, tractor-mounting of the
system may be desirable, so assessments can be made as the
tractor moves alongside the eld. On-the-go in-eld sensing of
geometric crop plant parameters is currently limited to leaf
shape identication and biomass estimation in the foliage of
small plants, or plant height and biomass estimation in fully
developed canopies. To measure plant leaf-level attributes
(e.g., internode length and leaf shape) in maturing eld plants
requires the design of a robust outdoor machine vision system
that achieves a detailed structure sensing. These systems have
so far only been reported for automated laboratory or greenhouse systems on a limited number of crops under controlled
lighting and environmental conditions.
Fertigation and chemigation

Efcient nutrient and chemical use in agriculture involves accurate spatial and temporal placement of the applied fertilizer
or chemical. Fertigation involves supplying dissolved fertilizer
to crops through an irrigation system (Bar-Yosef, 1999). Although fertigation has the advantage of being able to accurately apply fertilizer, liquid application of ammoniacal
fertilizers can lead to deleterious drops in soil pH (Stork et al.,
2003), because roots release hydrogen ions to take up ammonium ions, and this should be considered when fertigating
with these compounds. Fertigation is commonly applied using
both surface and pressurized irrigation application systems.
When combined with an efcient irrigation system, both nutrients and water can be manipulated and managed to maximize marketable yield and nutrient efciency (New South
Wales Dept of Primary Industries (NSW DPI), 2000). Soluble
398
inorganic nutrients are normally used for fertigation but the

application of humic substances via fertigation systems has
also been found (Selim and Mosa, 2012) to increase root zone
moisture holding capacity in sandy soils and increase crop
productivity.
Chemigation in broad-acre crops is most commonly applied by large mobile irrigation machines (i.e., center pivots or
linear moves). Herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides may be
injected into the main irrigation water pipe for distribution
through the irrigation emitters (e.g., Quad-Spray, Senninger
Irrigation Inc., Clermont, FL, USA) with the water. Alternatively, chemigation may be conducted using a separate
system of distribution pipework with spray heads suspended
underneath the irrigation machine truss rods to enable the
application of chemical either with or without irrigation water
(Foley and Raine, 2001).
The efciency of fertigation and chemigation strategies is
highly dependent on the performance (i.e., uniformity) and
management of the irrigation system. Fertigation uniformity in
microirrigation systems is primarily a function of emitter discharge uniformity where the fertilizer is injected during the
middle third or half of the total irrigation time (Hanson et al.,
2006). Fertilizers injected into water applied to furrow
irrigation systems are similarly affected by the nonuniformity
of the applied water, with efciencies often low due to percolation losses at the head end of the eld and tailwater runoff
losses. Simulation models combining the overland water
ow (Saint-Venant equations), solute transport (advection
dispersion), and inltration have been developed (Perea et al.,
2010; Burguete et al., 2009) to evaluate and optimize the application of fertilizers in furrow irrigation systems. Modifying
the water inow hydrograph to improve the uniformity of
water application and reducing tailwater runoff has been
found to improve both nutrient uniformity and efciency
(Moravejalahkami et al., 2012). Similarly, using alternative
furrow irrigation strategies has also been found (Ebrahimian
et al., 2012) to increase lateral water movement, reducing
water and nitrate losses via runoff and deep percolation.
Decision support systems are increasingly being used (e.g.,
Incocci et al., 2012) to identify optimal fertigation requirements based on crop growth and environmental conditions.
Site-specic fertigation of zones within conventional pressurized irrigation systems may be achieved by the installation and
control of separate injection facilities for each zone. However,
implementation of separate systems to date has been limited
because of the expense and control complexity (Coates et al.,
2012). Where a centralized injection facility is used, the selection of the optimum injection strategy will be a function of
the crop needs, scheduling limitations, and system design
parameters including emitter type, uid distribution system
travel time, and eld slope (Coates et al., 2012).
Future Directions Emerging Risks, Technical

Challenges, and Future Developments
Section Overview
Despite concerns regarding international food security, and the
drive to support sustainable intensication, agriculture still
faces a number of challenges that are likely to hamper any

widespread uptake of advanced technologies, including precision irrigation. This section identies the emerging risks and
drivers for change, highlights the environmental and technical challenges constraining innovation in precision irrigation,
and briey considers selected novel technologies on the horizon that will support the future sustainability of irrigated
agriculture and horticulture.
Emerging Risks
In most countries, agriculture provides signicant societal
benets, by making important contributions to national
economies and underpinning rural employment. Although the
most obvious contribution is probably in the production
of food and nonfood crops, agricultural ecosystems also
provide other services, including regulation of air quality, climate, and water purication. Agricultural land delivers nonmaterial cultural benets such as land for recreation and
valued characteristic landscapes, supporting habitats, wildlife,
biodiversity, and ecosystem services. The importance of agricultural land, including irrigated croplands, therefore goes far
beyond food production the future actions of farmers can
thus have positive or negative effects on these services, all of
which are likely to be affected by climate change.
Climate impacts on irrigated production

Internationally, agriculture is regarded as one of the sectors at
most risk from a changing climate, due to the impact of increased temperatures, reduced rainfall, and increased frequency of extreme events, not only in the tropics but also in
humid and temperate environments (Falloon and Betts, 2010;
Knox et al., 2012). Outdoor rainfed and irrigated crops are
particularly sensitive, both directly from changes in rainfall
and temperature and also indirectly, as any change in climate
will also impact on the agricultural potential of soils by
modifying soil water balances and changing land suitability
for production (Daccache et al., 2012). These changes will in
turn affect the availability of water to plants and impact on
other land management practices (e.g., trafcability for seedbed preparation, spraying, and harvesting) including the demand for irrigation (Daccache et al., 2011). In regions where
rainfed agriculture is dominant, changes in the timing, distribution, and reliability of rainfall may force a gradual switch to
irrigated production, to maintain crop yields. Here precision
irrigation could become important, particularly for supplemental irrigation. By combining better weather forecasting
techniques to make better use of effective rainfall with, for
example, VRI, the negative impacts of agroclimate uncertainty
on crop yield and quality could be reduced.
Farmers also face a range of nonclimate risks that potentially represent a more immediate threat to sustainable food
production than climate change. Most notable is the increasing
burden of environmental protection and its consequent impacts on water resources (both supply and allocation) for
irrigated agriculture (Knox et al., 2010). However, investment
in advanced precision irrigation technologies still requires
consistent and reliable supplies of water.
399
Demands for greater environmental protection

Governments and society are seeking greater levels of environmental protection. In irrigated agriculture, probably the
greatest short-term risks relate to the impacts of new water
regulation. For example, in Europe, a number of new directives
have recently been enforced, including the Water Framework
Directive (WFD 2000/60/E). Despite its title, the WFD is as
much about land management as it is about water management. It is the most substantial legislation produced by the
European Commission and provides the major driver for
sustainable management of water across Europe. By 2015, it
requires that all inland and coastal waters within dened river
basins reach at least good status and denes how this should
be achieved through the establishment of environmental objectives and ecological targets for surface waters. The WFD
applies to all waters to tackle diffuse source pollution, ranging
from fertilizer and pesticide applications on rainfed and irrigated land to urban runoff. In agriculture, the dependence on
fertilizers and pesticides means that many farms may be subjected to much greater levels of surveillance to ensure that
diffuse pollution from cropped areas is not contributing
to water quality degradation. Irrigated agriculture is widely
viewed as a key target for improvement. Similar pressures on
irrigated farming are known to exist in other continents including the US and Australasia.
However, the rising costs for fertilizer (and energy for water
pumping) are themselves acting as an industry brake, with
many irrigated farms actively seeking new measures to reduce
fertilizer inputs and water use. Collectively, these may provide
a positive indirect response to water regulation and drive the
uptake of precision irrigation technologies. These could help
reduce nitrate leaching risks, nonbenecial losses of water offfarm, and levels of energy consumption (and hence carbon
footprint) for irrigated production.
Although most environmental regulations are implemented at the river basin or catchment scale, their impact will
be felt at the farm level, particularly when irrigated farms are
located in water-stressed catchments or in proximity to internationally protected habitats or environmentally designated
sites. Under these conditions, precision agriculture practices,
including irrigation, could again help reduce some of the
impacts of agricultural water abstraction on local habitats and
the risks associated with nitrate leaching to the environment.
Finally, farms in the future may be subjected to increasing
levels of monitoring and scrutiny (traceability) to demonstrate
compliance with national and international regulation. Precision irrigation technologies will undoubtedly have an increasing role in demonstrating best practice in irrigation
management. In this context, technologies that target water
applications both spatially and temporally, taking into account heterogeneities in soil moisture, crop development, and
climate, are likely to be viewed positively by environmental
regulators. In parallel, changes in water regulation are exposing
irrigated farms to new water supply risks.
Competition for water resources

Internationally, irrigated agriculture faces rising competition
for access to reliable, low-cost, and high-quality water. In
Northern Europe, for example, farmers are under increasing
regulatory pressure to improve irrigation efciency; indeed,
Figure 19 Overhead irrigation on iceberg lettuces using a modied

mobile hosereel tted with a boom. Before harvest, the sprinklers are
replaced with drop tubes to avoid soil splash impacting on crop
quality. Photo: J. Knox.
demonstrating efcient water use is a prerequisite for

renewing an abstraction license (permit) (Knox et al., 2012). In
Mediterranean Europe, where irrigated agriculture accounts for
approximately 60% of all abstractions (OECD, 2012), production is at risk due to increasing water scarcity and competition for scarce resources (Wriedt et al., 2009). In some
countries, abstraction regimes are in place, but in others new
frameworks for regulation, including those for irrigation control are being implemented. Within these frameworks, higher
levels of water efciency will inevitably be required. Precision
irrigation, often only considered in the form of drip (or trickle)
irrigation, is often seen by water regulators as being good for
the environment. Other forms of precision and VRI will no
doubt be encouraged.
In many catchments where irrigated agriculture is concentrated, rising demand for water between different sectors
(notably, agriculture, public/domestic supply, and industry)
coupled with reduced allocations to meet environmental ows
means that allocations for irrigation are becoming less reliable
and more expensive. The situation is exacerbated by examples
where irrigated agriculture is cited as being the primary cause
of environmental damage and overabstraction, mainly during
the summer months when river and groundwater levels are at
their lowest and irrigation demands peak.
In future, farmers will need to demonstrate more efcient
and sustainable use of water to secure rights (licenses/permits)
for irrigation abstraction. Technical measures such as switching
from sprinkler to micro (drip)-irrigation are often promoted by
industry and the regulator to reduce the environmental impact
of abstractions and increase water efciency. Replacement of
overhead irrigation sprinklers with drop tubes is an example of
system modication to efciently deliver irrigation to the root
zone of a salad crop, also minimizing soil splash onto the plant,
to reduce the amount of washing required during the processing
stage (Figure 19). However, any environmental gain may be
limited if more efcient techniques such a precision irrigation
do not result in a reduction in net water use, but simply support
an increase in irrigation command. Any water saved via precision irrigation could be reallocated to other crops; the
400
environmental impact could thus be negative not positive, due

to reduced return ows from previously inefcient irrigation
(Hedley and Yule, 2008; Perry et al., 2009).
Drivers for Change

Development of innovative approaches to combine better
spatial and temporal knowledge of soil, crop, and equipment
management practices to reduce variability in crop yield and
quality through advanced irrigation technologies is a major
driver for change, whether driven by consumer (market),
regulatory, and public demands for greater environmental
sustainability.
To maintain output, agriculture has intensied and become
much more specialized, and for many farmers, investment in
irrigation has provided the basis to maintain or increase
protability. For example, in high-value cropping, irrigation is
not a marginal activity used to boost yield, but an essential
component of production to deliver premium quality, continuous supplies of produce to processors and retailers. It has
also become a prerequisite for meeting the increasing market
demands for quality and continuity of supply. Despite this
external driver, irrigation of eld crops in many parts of Europe and elsewhere has changed relatively little over the last few
decades. However, with rapidly rising labor and energy costs,
farm businesses are now assessing the impacts of irrigation
variability (nonuniformity) on crop yield and quality much
more proactively (see e.g., Figures 5, 6, 15 and 19). This is
because the quality assurance benets of irrigation can be
substantial and relate to the whole crop, not just to the extra
marginal yield due to irrigation. Quality criteria are increasingly specied as a condition of contract and sale, and failure
to meet quality requirements can lead to large price discounting, and possibly rejection and loss of contract.
Over the past decade, grower or crop assurance schemes
have also played an important part in driving water efciency
in irrigation and supporting uptake of advanced irrigation
technologies. These schemes require growers to audit their irrigation systems and provide traceability and accountability in
support of public health and environmental protection regulation. These schemes have also provided the basis for growers
to comply with industry protocols for food safety and crop
assurance (Monaghan and Hutchison, 2012).
In the future, water cost is likely to become a major driver
for change not necessarily the unit cost for securing access to
a water supply, but more likely the energy costs associated
with conveyance and pressurized delivery of in-eld irrigation.
With increased attention to water conservation during drought
spells, competition from environmental, recreational, public/
domestic use, and regulatory constraints, the current economics of VRI, which are proving a deterrent to investment,
may well change (Sadler et al., 2005; Hedley and Yule, 2009).
Future Developments
Combining wireless technologies with variable rate
application
On most farms, making maximum use of soil moisture and
rainfall, knowing precisely where and when irrigation has to
be applied, and then applying it accurately and uniformly are

the fundamental steps in the pathway to water efciency
(Knox et al., 2012). Although irrigation is an essential component of production to maximize yield in arid and semiarid
regions, there is growing evidence that optimized irrigation
regimes under temperate and humid conditions can also lead
to improved postharvest quality resulting in reduced crop
waste through the food supply chain. However, at present
most farmers are restricted in their ability to match the timing
and frequency of irrigation applications to inherent spatial and
temporal variations in soil moisture and crop growth. They
generally have only limited information on plant water status,
rely on limited in-situ point measurements of soil as a proxy
for eld-scale soil moisture availability, and use conventional
irrigation systems that lack sufcient exibility and technology
(control) for variable water application.
However, developments in crop and soil moisture sensing,
coupled with wireless telecommunications for in-eld soil
moisture monitoring and thermal imaging, now provide opportunities to develop smarter, closed-loop systems capable of
applying water variably both across and along elds. Most
research to date has focused on developing such technologies
for use under sprinkler (center pivot and linear move) irrigation systems. The potential for VRI using individually controlled solenoid valved sprinklers, similar to those used in the
sports turf (golf) industry, is also now being evaluated in high
value horticulture, where sprinkler irrigation is still the preferred method of application.
Digital advances in cloud computing and remote sensing

Alongside innovations in irrigation systems and soil moisture
monitoring, digital advances using the latest cloud computing
technologies are also moving swiftly into precision agriculture.
Put simply, cloud computing involves using networks of remote servers hosted on the internet to store, manage, and
process data, rather than hosting information and data on
local servers. They generally rely on wireless data transfer and
mobile web applications, in combination with other tools and
spatial technologies including GPS and GIS. Cloud technology
is well established within data-intensive industries, but only
recently emerging in agriculture where various applications are
being marketed. For example, in the USA, cloud services provide on-farm support from agribusinesses and consultants, for
agrochemical application management. Other precisionrelated tools are now emerging.
New uses relating to precision irrigation could include
applications for mobile devices operating in the cloud to
spatially monitor soil moisture, crop growth, and irrigation in
real-time via in-eld sensor arrays. Other cloud uses include
providing data to rene planting and harvest operations, by
integrating GPS and GIS data or managing equipment performance (pressures, ow rates, abstractions) at district or
catchment scales. RFID tags, which automatically download
data, are also becoming more widespread in agriculture. For
example, tagging systems have been developed to collect data
on the moisture content of straw bales, weight, and in-eld
position (GPS); in the future, similar cheap, possibly biodegradable, microtags could be deployed across elds to
measure seasonal changes in soil moisture, organic content,
crop canopy development, and canopy stress, or for
monitoring and optimizing energy needs across pressurized

irrigation distribution networks (Carrillo Cobo et al., 2011).
However, data security issues relating to condentiality, integrity, availability, and accountability still need to be resolved
before cloud technology can be fully integrated into precision
irrigation.
There is also increasing potential for new applications
linking the use of high-resolution and -frequency remote
sensing data (e.g., MODIS) to inform on-farm irrigation
management, including mapping croplands, and monitoring
spatial changes in crop cover in support of farm monitoring of
irrigation water use and evapotranspiration (ET) (Thenkabail
et al., 2012). Recent remote sensing developments provide
scope for mapping croplands in a routine, rapid, and consistent way, with sufcient accuracy (Congalton and Green,
2009). There is also potential to use remote sensing to identify
irrigated regions, where improvements in water productivity
should be targeted to reduce yield gaps (Fereres et al., 2011).
By integrating advanced technologies such as cloud computing
with developments in precision irrigation and remote sensing,
there is also broader scope to improve ones understanding of
the links between food production and water scarcity, and the
impacts of climate change on food supplies.
401
tacit knowledge of farmers (McBratney et al., 2005) to assist

improved farm-scale irrigation practice.
The limited opportunity to increase global freshwater allocations for irrigation (OECD, 2012) will require collective
initiatives beyond the farm gate to optimize regional-level
tradeoffs. These include tradeoffs between improved water use
efciency of modern pressurized systems versus their greater
energy consumption; as well as tradeoffs between the best use
of irrigation to meet global food demands and the pressing
need to maintain the multiple ecosystem services that global
freshwater resources provide.
See also: Climate Change: Agricultural Mitigation. Climate Change

and Plant Disease. Climate Change: Cropping System Changes and
Adaptations. Climate Change, Society, and Agriculture: An
Economic and Policy Perspective. Food Security: Food Defense and
Biosecurity. Food Security, Market Processes, and the Role of
Government Policy. Food Security: Postharvest Losses. Food
Security: Yield Gap. Precision Agriculture: Irrigation. Virtual Water
and Water Footprint of Food Production and Processing. Water Use:
Recycling and Desalination for Agriculture. Water: Water Quality and
Challenges from Agriculture. World Water Supply and Use:
Challenges for the Future
Summary
In the future, committed efforts will be needed to implement
advanced irrigation technologies that are appropriate for different types of farming systems to improve both water and
energy efciency while maintaining or improving crop yield
and quality. Considering the demands on natural resources,
precision irrigation is likely to play an increasingly important
role, but a number of factors remain important. These include
the changing economics of irrigation, the rising cost of energy,
the increasing importance of crop assurance, and the role of
retailers (supermarkets) in inuencing consumer attitudes and
behavior toward quality assurance and fresh produce.
The uptake of precision irrigation is likely to be slow and
dependent on appropriate support systems and knowledge
transfer to engage farmer support and trust. Insufcient recognition of eld variability, the lack of a whole-farm approach,
limited knowledge of the links between crop quality and
precision irrigation, and the alignment of crop assurance
schemes with environmental auditing will all need to be
resolved.
The way forward for precision irrigation seems to mirror
observations from precision agriculture. Here the key has been
to keep the farmers perspective central to the objective. Farmer
needs, of course, vary depending on the agricultural system (e.
g., intensive horticulture vs. extensive broad-acre cropping),
the scale of business (e.g., family farm vs. agribusiness),
underlying agroclimatic conditions (e.g., arid vs. humid), and
many other socioeconomic factors (e.g., attitudes to risk, etc.).
The tacit knowledge of farmers is thus critical.
New farm-scale precision equipment assists farmers to netune the existing management procedures, but requires the
accompanying decision support tools to monitor and adapt
this new level of control.
Such technologies can be carefully positioned to ll specic
(and crucial) gaps in the existing irrigation toolkits using the
References
Adhikari, D.D., Goorahoo, D., Cassel, F., Zodolske, D., 2008. Smart irrigation as a
method of freeze prevention: A proposed model. 2008 ASABE Annual
International Meeting. Providence, Rhode Island, Paper No. 085189. St. Joseph,
MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.
Akyildiz, I.F., Stuntebeck, E.P., 2006. Wireless underground sensor networks:
Research challenges. Ad Hoc Networks 4, 669686.
Allen R.G., Periera L.S., Raes D., Smith M., 1998. Crop evapotranspiration.
Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage
Paper 56. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Al-Naeem, M.A.H., 1993. Optimisation of hosereel rain gun irrigation systems in
wind; simulation of the effect of trajectory angle, sector angle, sector position
and lane spacing on water distribution and crop yield. PhD Dissertation, Silsoe
College, Craneld University.
Anwar, A.A., Clarke, D., de Vries, T., 2006. Channel capacity under arranged
demand irrigation. Agricultural Water Management 82, 148160.
Austin, N.R., Prendergast, J.B., 1997. Use of kinematic wave theory to model
irrigation on cracking soil. Irrigation Science 18, 110.
Bajaber, F., Awan, I., 2011. Adaptive decentralized re-clustering protocol for wireless
sensor networks. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 77, 282292.
Bar-Yosef, B., 1999. Advances in fertigation. Advances in Agronomy 65, 177.
Bautista, E., Clemmens, A.J., Strelkoff, T.S., Schlegal, J., 2009. Modern analysis of
surface irrigation systems with WinSRFR. Agricultural Water Management 96,
11461154.
Beddington, J., 2010. Food security: Contributions from science to a new and
greener revolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological
Sciences 365, 6171.
Bishop, T., Minansy, B., 2006. Digital soil-terrain modelling: The predictive potential
and uncertainty. In: Grunwald, S. (Ed.), Environmental Soil-Landscape Modelling.
Geographic Information Technologies and Pedometrics. New York: Taylor and
Francis, pp. 185213.
Blonquist, J.M., Jones, S.B., Robinson, D.A., 2006. Precise irrigation scheduling for
turfgrass using a subsurface electromagnetic soil moisture sensor. Agricultural
Water Management 84, 153165.
Bogena, H.R., Huisman, J.A., Oberdorster, C., Vereecken, H., 2007. Evaluation of a
low-cost soil water content sensor for wireless network applications. Journal of
Hydrology 344, 3242.
Bos, M.G., 1985. Summary of International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage
denitions on irrigation efciency. ICID Bulletin 34, 2831.
402
Brevik, E.C., Fenton, T.E., Lazari, A., 2006. Soil electrical conductivity as a function
of soil water content and implications for soil mapping. Precision Agriculture 7,
393404.
Broring, A., Echterhoff, J., Jirka, S., et al., 2011. New generation sensor web
enablement. Sensors 11, 26522699.
Burguete, J., Zapata, N., Garca-Navarro, P., et al., 2009. Fertigation in furrows and
level furrow systems. II: Field experiments, model calibration, and practical
applications. Journal of Irrigation and Drain Engineering 135 (4), 413420.
Burt, C.M., Clemmens, A.J., Strelkoff, T.S., et al., 1997. Irrigation performance
measured: Efciency and uniformity. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Engineering 123 (6), 423442.
Camp, C.R., Sadler, E.J., 1994. Center pivot irrigation system for site-specic water
and nutrient management. ASAE Paper No 941586. St. Joseph, MI: American
Society of Agricultural Engineers.
Camp, C.R., Sadler, E.J., 1998. Site-specic crop management with a centre pivot.
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 53, 312315.
Camp, C.R., Sadler, E.J., Evans, D.E., Usrey, L.J., Omary, M., 1998. Modied centre
pivot system for precision management of water and nutrients. Applied
Engineering in Agriculture 14 (1), 2331.
Camp, C.R., Sadler, E.J., Evans, R.G., 2006. Precision water management: Current
realities, possibilities and trends. In: Srinivasan, A. (Ed.), Handbook of Precision
Agriculture. Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press, pp. 153183 (Chapter 5).
Cantoni, M., Weyer, E., Li, Y., et al., 2007. Control of large scale irrigation
networks. Proceedings of the IEEE 95 (1), 7591.
Cape, J., 1998. Using software to review sprinkler performance. Irrigation Australia
13 (3), 1820.
Capraro, F., Patino, D., Tosetti, S., Schugurensky, C., 2008a. Neural network-based
irrigation control for precision agriculture. IEEE International Conference on
Networking, Sensing and Control, Sanya, China, April 68, pp. 357362. UK:
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.
Capraro, F., Schugurensky, C., Vita, F., et al., 2008b. Intelligent irrigation in
grapevines: A way to obtain different wine characteristics. In: Proceedings of the
17th World Congress. Seoul, Korea: International Federation of Automatic Control.
Cardenas-Lailhacar, B., Dukes, M.D., Miller, G.L., 2010. Sensor-based automation of
irrigation on bermudagrass during dry weather conditions. Journal of Irrigation
and Drainage Engineering 136 (3), 161223.
Carrillo Cobo, M.T., Rodrguez Daz, J.A., Montesinos, P., Lpez Luque, R.,
Camacho Poyato, E., 2011. Low energy consumption seasonal calendar for
sectoring operation in pressurized irrigation networks. Irrigation Science 29,
157169.
Carrion, P., Tarjuelo, J.M., Montero, J., 2001. Sirias: A simulation model for
sprinkler irrigation 1, Description of the model. Irrigation Science 20 (2),
7384.
Carter, G., Miller, R., 1994. Early detection of plant stress by digital imaging within
narrow stress-sensitive wavebands. Remote Sensing and Environment 50,
295302.
Chalmers, D.J., Mitchell, P.D., Van Heek, L., 1981. Control of peach tree growth
and productivity by regulated water supply, tree density and summer pruning.
Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 106, 307312.
Chavez, J.L., Pierce, F.J., Matthews, G.R., 2006. Performance of a continuous move
irrigation control and monitoring system. 2006 ASABE Annual International
Meeting, Oregon. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological
Engineers.
Chavez, J.L., Pierce, F.J., Evans, R.G., 2010. Compensating inherent linear move
application errors using a variable rate irrigation system. Irrigation Science 28,
203210.
Christiansen, J.E., 1941. Hydraulics of sprinkling systems for irrigation. Transactions
American Society of Civil Engineers 107, 221239.
Clemmens, A.J., 1992. Feedback control of basin irrigation system. Journal of
Irrigation and Drainage Division 118 (3), 480497.
Coates, R., Delwiche, M., Brown, P., 2006. Design of a system for individual
microsprinkler control. Transactions of the ASABE 49 (6), 19631970.
Coates, R.W., Delwiche, M.J., 2009. Wireless mesh network for irrigation control
and sensing. Transactions of the ASABE 52, 971981.
Coates, R.W., Delwiche, M.J., Brown, P.H., 2005. Precision irrigation in orchards:
Development of a spatially varied microsprinkler system. FRUTIC 05, 1216
September, Montpellier, France. Montpellier: Information and Technology for
Sustainable Fruit and Vegetable Production.
Coates, R.W., Delwiche, M.J., Brown, P.H., Shackel, K.A., 2004. Precision irrigation/
fertilization in orchards. 2004 ASAE/CSAE Annual International Meeting.
Coates, R.W., Sahoo, P.K., Schwankl, L.J., Delwiche, M.J., 2012. Fertigation
techniques for use with multiple hydrozones in simultaneous operation. Precision
Agriculture 13, 219235.
Colaizzi, P., Barnes, E., Clarke, T., et al., 2003. Water stress detection under high
frequency sprinkler irrigation with water decit index. Journal of Irrigation and
Drainage Engineering 129 (1), 3643.
Congalton, R.G., Green, K., 2009. Assessing the Accuracy of Remotely Sensed
Data: Principles and Practices, second ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Taylor and
Francis. pp. 183.
Costanza, R., dArge, R., deGroot, R., et al., 1997. The value of the worlds
ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253260.
Daccache, A., Keay, C., Jones, R.J.A., et al., 2012. Climate change and land
suitability for potato production in England and Wales: Impacts and adaptation.
Journal of Agricultural Science 150 (2), 161177.
Daccache, A., Weatherhead, E.K., Stalham, M.A., Knox, J.W., 2011. Impacts of
climate change on irrigated potato production in a humid climate. Agricultural
and Forest Meteorology 151, 16411653.
Davies, W.J., Bacon, M.A., Thompson, D.S., Sobeih, W., Gonzales-Rodriguez, L.,
2000. Regulation of leaf and fruit growth in plants growing in drying soil:
Exploitation of the plants chemical signalling system and hydraulic architecture
to increase the efciency of water use in agriculture. Journal of Experimental
Botany 51, 16171626.
Davies, W.J., Zhang, J., 1991. Root signals and the regulation of growth and
development of plants in drying soil. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and
Plant Molecular Biology 42, 5576.
De Jonge, K.C., Kaleita, A.L., Thorp, K.R., 2007. Simulating the effects of spatially
variable irrigation on corn yields, costs, and revenue in Iowa. Agricultural Water
Management 92, 99109.
Dodd, I.C., Theobald, J.C., Bacon, M.A., Davies, W.J., 2006. Alternation of wet and
dry sides during partial rootzone drying irrigation alters root-to-shoot signalling
of abscisic acid. Functional Plant Biology 33, 10811089.
Douglas, P., Dassanayake, K.B., Chapman, D.F., et al., 2010. An integrated model
for simulation of border-check irrigated dairy pasture production systems.
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 74, 3950.
Duke, H.R., Buchleiter, G.W., Heermann, D.F., Chapman, J.A., 1997. Site specic
management of water and chemicals using self-propelled sprinkler irrigation
systems. In: Stafford, J.V. (Ed.), Precision Agriculture '97, vol. 1, Spatial
Variability in Soil and Crop. Oxford, UK: Bios Scientic Publishers,
pp. 273280.
Dukes, M.D., Perry, C., 2006. Uniformity testing of variable-rate center pivot
irrigation control systems. Precision Agriculture 7, 205218.
Dukes, M.D., Scholberg, J.M., 2004. Automated subsurface drip irrigation based on
soil moisture. ASAE Paper No. 052188. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of
Agricultural Engineers.
Ebrahimian, H., Liaghat, A., Parsinejad, M., Playan, E., 2012. Distribution and loss
of water and nitrate under alternate and conventional furrow fertigation. Spanish
Journal of Agricultural Research 10 (3), 849863.
Edan, Y., Rogozin, D., Flash, T., Miles, G., 2000. Robotic melon harvesting. IEEE
Transactions on Robotics and Automation 16 (6), 831834.
Elliott, R.L., Walker, W.R., 1982. Field evaluation of furrow inltration and advance
functions. Transactions of the ASAE 25 (2), 396400.
Emilio, C., Perez-Lucena, C., Roldan-Canas, J., Miguel, A., 1997. IPE: Model for
management and control of furrow irrigation in real time. Journal of Irrigation
and Drainage Engineering 123 (4), 264269.
Evans, R.G., Han, S., Kroeger, M.W., Schneider, S.M., 1996. Precision centre
pivot irrigation for efcient use of water and nitrogen. Precision Agriculture.
In: Proceedings of the third International Conference, June 2326, pp. 7584.
Minneapolis, MN: ASA/CSSA/SSSA.
Evans, R.G., Harting, G., 1999. Precision irrigation with center pivot systems on
potatoes. In: Proceedings of ASCE 1999 International Water Resources
Engineering Conference. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
Evans, R.G., Iversen, W.M., Kim, Y., 2012. Integrated decision support, sensor
networks, and adaptive control for wireless site-specic sprinkler irrigation.
Applied Engineering in Agriculture 28 (3), 377387.
Evans, R.G., King, B.A., 2012. Site-specic sprinkler irrigation in a water-limited
future. Transactions of the ASABE 55, 493504.
Evett, S.R., Peters, R.T., Howell, T.A., 2006. Controlling water use efciency with
irrigation automation: Cases from drip and center pivot irrigation of corn and
soybean. Southern Conservation Systems Conference, Amarillo, TX.
Falloon, P., Betts, R., 2010. Climate impacts on European agriculture and water
management in the context of adaptation and mitigation The importance of an
integrated approach. Science of the Total Environment 408 (23), 56675687.
doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.05.002.
Fang, Q., Chen, Y., Yu, Q., et al., 2007. Much improved irrigation use efciency in
an intensive wheat-maize double cropping system in the North China Plain.
Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 49 (10), 15171526.
Fereres, E., Orgaz, F., Gonzalez-Dugo, V., 2011. Reections on food security under
water scarcity. Journal of Experimental Botany 62, 40794086.
Fischer, G., Tubiello, F.N., van Velthuizen, H., Wiberg, D.A., 2007. Climate
change impacts on irrigation water requirements: effects of mitigation,
19902080. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 74,
10831107.
Foley, J., 2011. Performance improvement of centre pivots and lateral moves. PhD
Dissertation, Faculty of Engineering and Surveying, University of Southern
Queensland.
Foley, J.P., Raine, S.R., 2001. Centre Pivot and Lateral Move Machines in the
Australian Cotton Industry. University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba:
National Centre for Engineering in Agriculture Publication 1000176/1.
Ghinassi, G., 2010. Advanced technologies applied to hose reel rain-gun machines:
New perspectives towards sustainable sprinkler irrigation. XVIIth World Congress
of the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering
(CIGR), June 1317. Quebec City, Canada: Canadian Society for Bioengineering
(CSBE/SGGAB).
Gillies, M., 2008. Managing the effect of inltration variability on the performance of
surface irrigation. PhD Dissertation, Faculty of Engineering and Surveying,
University of Southern Queensland.
Gillies, M.H., Smith, R.J., 2005. Inltration parameters from surface irrigation
advance and runoff data. Irrigation Science 24 (1), 2535.
Gillies, M.H., Smith, R.J., Raine, S.R., 2007. Accounting for temporal inow
variation in the inverse solution for inltration in surface irrigation. Irrigation
Science 25 (2), 8797.
Gillies, M.H., Smith, R.J., Raine, S.R., 2008. Measurement and management of
furrow irrigation at the eld scale. Irrigation Australia 2008 National
Conference and Exhibition, 2022 May. Melbourne. Mascot, NSW, Sydney:
Irrigation Australia Limited.
Gillies, M.H., Smith, R.J., Raine, S.R., 2011. Evaluating whole eld irrigation
performance using statistical inference of inter-furrow inltration variation.
Biosystems Engineering 110, 134143.
Gillies, M.H., Smith, R.J., Williamson, B., Shanahan, M., 2010. Improving
performance of bay irrigation through higher ow rates. Australian Irrigation
Conference and Exhibition, 810 June 2010. Sydney. Mascot, NSW, Sydney:
Irrigation Australia Limited.
Giurco, D., Carrard, N., McFallan, S., et al., 2008. Residential End-Use Measurement
Guidebook: A Guide to Study Design, Sampling and Technology. Victoria:
Institute for Sustainable Futures, UTS and CSIRO for the Smart Water Fund.
Godwin, R.J., Miller, P.C.H., 2003. A review of the technologies for mapping withineld variability. Biosystems Engineering 84, 393407.
Gonzalez-Dugo, M.P., Moran, M.S., Mateos, L., 2006. Canopy temperature
variability as an indicator of crop water stress severity. Irrigation Science 24,
233240.
Green, S.R., Kirkham, M.B., Clothier, B.E., 2006. Root uptake and transpiration:
From measurements and models to sustainable irrigation. Agricultural Water
Greenwood, D.J., Zhang, K., Hilton, H.W., Thompson, A.J., 2010. Opportunities for
improving irrigation efciency with quantitative models, soil water sensors and
wireless technology. Journal of Agricultural Science 148, 116.
Grose, D.J., Parkin, C.S., Weatherhead, E.K., 1998. Modelling a multi-phase plume
in a cross ow An agricultural application. In: Proceedings of the 14th
International Conference on Liquid Atomization and Sprinkler Systems, July
1998, pp. 487492, UMIST, Manchester.
Han, Y.J., Khalihan, A., Owino, H.J., Frahani, H.J., Moore, S., 2009. Development of
Clemson variable-rate lateral irrigation system. Computers and Electronics in
Hanson, B., OConnell, N., Hopmans, J., Simunek, J., Beede, R., 2006. Fertigation
with Microirrigation. Publication 21620. Oakland, CA: University of California
Agricultural and Natural Resources Communication Services.
Hanson, B.R., Bowers, W., Davidoff, B., et al., 1995. Field performance of microirrigation systems. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Microirrigation
Congress, pp. 769774, St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural
Engineers.
Harvey Water, 2012. Harvey Pipe Project: Saving Water We Already Have A
System Wide Approach with Multiple Benets. Harvey, WA: Harvey Water.
Available at: http://www.harveywater.com.au/userles/HarveyPipeProject1.pdf
(accessed 19.10.12).
Hedley, C.B., Roudier, P., Yule, I.J., Ekanayake, J., Bradbury, S., 2013. Soil water
status and water table modelling using electromagnetic surveys for precision
irrigation scheduling. Geoderma 199, 2229.
Hedley, C.B., Yule, I.J., 2008. Soil water status mapping and two variable-rate
irrigation scenarios. Journal of Precision Agriculture 10, 342355.
403
Hedley, C.B., Yule, I.J., 2009. A method for spatial prediction of daily soil water
status for precise irrigation scheduling. Journal of Agricultural Water
Hedley, C.B., Yule, I.J., 2011. Soil water status maps for variable rate irrigation. In:
Clay, D., Shanahan, J., Pierce, F. (Eds.), GIS Applications in Agriculture
Nutrient Management for Improved Energy Efciency. Third Book in CRC GIS in
Agriculture Series. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 173190.
Heermann, D.F., Buchleiter, G.W., Bausch, W.C., Stahl, K., 1997. Nondifferential
GPS for use on moving irrigation systems. In: Stafford, J.V. (Ed.), Precision
Agriculture '97, vol. 1, Spatial Variability in Soil and Crop. Oxford, UK: Bios
Scientic Publishers, pp. 567574.
Henderson, C.W.L., Yeo, M.B., Finlay, G., 2008. Customising drip irrigation for
protable vegetable production. Irrigation Australia 2008 National Conference
and Exhibition, 2022 May, Melbourne. Sydney: Irrigation Australia Ltd.
Hezarjaribi, A., Sourell, H., 2007. Feasibility study of monitoring the total available
water content using non-invasive electromagnetic induction-based and electrodebased soil electrical conductivity measurements. Irrigation and Drainage 56,
5365.
Hibbs, R.A., James, L.G., Cavalieri, R.P., 1992. A furrow irrigation automation
system utilizing adaptive control. Transactions of the ASAE 35 (3),
10631067.
Hornbuckle, J.W., Car, N.J., Destombes, J., et al., 2009. Measuring, mapping and
communicating the effects of poor drip irrigation distribution uniformity with
satellite remote sensing and web based reporting tools. Presented at the
Irrigation and Drainage Conference 2009, 1821 Oct. Swan Hill, VIC: Irrigation
Australia Ltd.
Humpherys, A.S., 1969. Automation of furrow irrigation systems. Transactions of the
ASAE 14 (3), 460470.
Humpherys, A.S., 1995a. Semi-automation of irrigated basins and borders: I. Single
function turnout gates. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 11 (1), 6774.
Humpherys, A.S., 1995b. Semi-automation of irrigated basins and borders: II. Dualfunction turnout gates. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 11 (1), 7582.
Humpherys, A.S., 1995c. Semi-automation of irrigated basins and borders: III.
Control elements and system operation. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 11
(1), 8391.
Humpherys, A.S., Fisher, H.D., 1995. Water sensor feedback control system for
surface irrigation. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 11 (1), 6165.
IAASTD, 2009. Agriculture at a crossroads: Synthesis report. International
Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Incocci, L., Massa, D., Pardossi, A., et al., 2012. A decision support system to
optimise fertigation management in greenhouse crops. Acta Horticulturae 927,
115122.
Inman-Bamber, G., Attard, S., 2005. Inventory of Australian software tools for onfarm water management. CRC for Irrigation Futures Technical Report No. 02/05,
May 2005, 70p.
Jackson, T.M., Khan, S., Hafeez, M., 2010. A comparative analysis of water
application and energy consumption at the irrigated eld level. Agricultural Water
Jonard, F., Weihermuller, L., Jadoon, K.Z., et al., 2011. Mapping eld-scale soil
moisture with L-band radiometer and ground-penetrating radar over bare soil.
IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 49, 28632875.
Jury, W.A., Vaux, H.J., 2007. The emerging global water crisis: Managing scarcity
and conict between water users. Advances in Agronomy 95, 176.
Kelly, B.F.J., Acworth, R.I., Greve, A.K., 2011. Better placement of soil moisture
point measurements guided by 2D resistivity tomography for improved irrigation
scheduling. Soil Research 49, 504512.
Khatri, K.L., Smith, R.J., 2006. Real-time prediction of soil inltration characteristics
for the management of furrow irrigation. Irrigation Science 25 (1), 3343.
Khatri, K.L., Smith, R.J., 2007. Toward a simple real-time control system for efcient
management of furrow irrigation. Irrigation and Drainage 56 (4), 463475.
Kim, Y., Evans, R.G., Iversen, W.M., 2009. Remote sensing and control of an
irrigation system using a distributed wireless sensor network. IEEE Transactions
on Instrumentation and Measurement 57 (7), 13791387.
Kim, Y., Jabro, J.D., Evans, R.G., 2011. Wireless lysimeters for real-time online soil
water monitoring. Irrigation Science 29, 423430.
King, B.A., Kincaid, D.C., 2004. A variable ow rate sprinkler for site-specic
irrigation management. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 20 (6), 765770.
King, B.A., Wall, R.W., 1998. Supervisory control and data acquisition system for
site-specic centre pivot irrigation. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 14 (2),
135144.
King, B.A., Wall, R.W., Kincaid, D.C., Westermann, D.T., 1997. Field scale
performance of a variable rate sprinkler for variable water and nutrient
404
application. ASAE Paper No 972216. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of

Agricultural Engineers.
King, B.A., Wall, R.W., Kincaid, D.C., Westermann, D.T., 2005. Field testing of a
variable rate sprinkler and control system for site-specic water and nutrient
application. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 21 (5), 847853.
Knox, J.W., Kay, M.G., Weatherhead, E.K., 2012. Water regulation, crop production
and agricultural water management Understanding farmer perspectives on
irrigation efciency. Agricultural Water Management 108, 38.
Knox, J.W., Morris, J., Hess, T.M., 2010. Identifying future risks to UK agricultural
crop production Putting climate change in context. Outlook on Agriculture 39
(4), 249256.
Knox, J.W., Weatherhead, E.K., 2005. The growth of trickle irrigation in England and
Wales; data, regulation and water resource impacts. Irrigation and Drainage 54,
19.
Koech, R., 2012. Automation and real-time control of furrow irrigation. PhD
Dissertation, Faculty of Engineering and Surveying. University of Southern
Queensland, Toowoomba.
Kriedemann, P.E., Goodwin, I., 2003. Regulated Decit Irrigation and Partial
Rootzone Drying. An Overview of Principles and Applications (Edited by Currey,
A.). Irrigation Insights No. 3, Product No. PR 020 382. Canberra, ACT: Land and
Water Australia. ISBN 0642 76089 6.
Kseneman, M., Gleich, D., Potocnik, B., 2012. Soil-moisture estimation from
TerraSAR-X data using neural networks. Machine Vision and Applications 23,
937952.
Lal, R., 2009. Soils and wood food security. Soil Tillage Research 102, 14.
Lam, Y., Slaughter, D.C., Wallender, W.W., Upadhyaya, S.K., 2007. Machine vision
monitoring for control of water advance in furrow irrigation. Transactions of the
ASABE 50 (2), 371378.
Langat, P.K., Smith, R.J., Raine, S.R., 2008. Estimating the furrow inltration
characteristic from a single advance point. Irrigation Science 26 (8), 367374.
Limerinos, J.T., 1970. Determination of the manning coefcient from measured bed
roughness in natural channels. In: Studies of Flow in Alluvial Channels,
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1898B, Prepared in Cooperation with the
California Department of Water Resources. Washington, DC: US Government
Printing Ofce. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/1898b/report.pdf (accessed
29.04.14).
Loveys, B., Dry, P., Stoll, M., McCarthy, C., 2000. Using plant physiology to
improve the water use efciency of horticultural crops. In: Ferreira, M.I., Jones,
H.G. (Eds.), 3rd International Symposium on Irrigation of Horticultural Crops,
pp. 187197 (Acta Horticulturae). Leuven, Belgium: International Society for
Horticultural Science.
Loveys, B.R., Grant, W.J.R., Dry, P.R., McCarthy, M.G., 1997. Progress in the
development of partial root-zone drying. Australian Grapegrower and Winemaker
403, 1820.
Lyle, W.M., Bordovsky, J.P., 1981. Low energy precision application (LEPA)
irrigation system. Transactions of the ASAE 24, 12411245.
Lyle, W.M., Bordovsky, J.P., 1983. LEPA irrigation system evaluation. Transactions
of the ASAE 26, 776781.
Maheswararajah, S., Halgamuge, S.K., Dassanayake, K.B., Chapman, D., 2011.
Management of orphaned-nodes in wireless sensor networks for smart irrigation
systems. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 59 (10), 49094922.
Mailhol, J.C., Gonzalez, J.M., 1993. Furrow irrigation model for real-time
applications on cracking soils. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
119 (5), 768783.
Mareels, I., Weyer, E., Ooi, S.K., 2003. Irrigation networks: A sytems engineering
approach. IEEE Fourth International Conference on Control and Automation,
Montreal, Canada. UK: Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.
Mareels, I., Weyer, E., Ooi, S.K., et al., 2005. Systems engineering for irrigation
systems: Successes and challenges. Annual Reviews in Control 29,
191204.
McBratney, A., Whelan, B., Ancev, T., Bouma, J., 2005. Future directions of
precision agriculture. Precision Agriculture 6 (1), 723.
McCann, I.R., King, B.A., Stark, J.C., 1997. Variable rate water and chemical
application for continuous-move sprinkler irrigation systems. Applied Engineering
in Agriculture 13, 609615.
McCarthy, C.L., Hancock, N.H., Raine, S.R., 2009. Automated internode length
measurement of cotton plants under eld conditions. Transactions of the ASABE
52 (6), 20932103.
McCarthy, C.L., Hancock, N.H., Raine, S.R., 2010. Applied machine vision of plants
A review with implications for eld deployment in automated farming
operations. Intelligent Service Robotics 3 (4), 209217.
McClymont, D.J., Smith, R.J., 1996. Inltration parameters from optimisation on
furrow irrigation advance data. Irrigation Science 17 (1), 1522.
McClymont, L., Goodwin, I., OConnell, M., Whiteld, D., 2009. Optimising water
use efciency A decision framework for on-farm improvements. Irrigation and
Drainage Conference 2009, 1821 Oct. Swan Hill, VIC: Irrigation Australia Ltd.
Meron, M.R., Hallel, R., Shay, G., Feuer, R., 1996. Soil-sensor actuated automatic drip
irrigation of cotton. In: Proceedings International Conference on Evapotranspiration
and Irrigation Scheduling, San Antonio, TX, November, pp. 886892. St. Joseph,
MI: American Society of Agricultural Engineers.
Milroy, S., Goyne, P., Larsen, D., 2002. Cotton information sheet: Irrigation
scheduling of cotton. Technical Report. Narrabri, NSW: Australian Cotton
Cooperative Research Centre.
Minasny, B., McBratney, A., 2006. A conditioned Latin hypercube method for
sampling in the presence of ancillary information. Computers & Geosciences 32
(9), 13781388.
Monaghan, J.M., Daccache, A., Vickers, L., et al., 2013. More crop per drop
Constraints and opportunities for precision irrigation in European agriculture.
Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 93 (5), 977980.
Monaghan, J.M., Hutchison, M.L., 2012. Distribution and decline of human
pathogenic bacteria in soil after application in irrigation water and the potential
for soil-splash mediated dispersal onto fresh produce. Journal of Applied
Microbiology 112, 10071019.
Montero, J., Tarjuelo, J.M., Carrion, P., 2001. Sirias: A simulation model for
sprinkler irrigation 2. Calibration and validation of the model. Irrigation Science
20 (2), 8598.
Moore, I.D., Grayson, R.B., Ladson, A.R., 1991. Digital terrain modeling: A review of
hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydrological
Processes 5, 330.
Moravejalahkami, B., Mostafazadeh-Fard, B., Heidarpour, M., Abbasi, F., 2012. The
effects of different inow hydrograph shapes on furrow irrigation fertigation.
Biosystems Engineering 111, 186194.
Mostafazadeh-Fard, B., Osroosh, Y., Eslamian, S., 2006. Development and evaluation
of an automatic surge ow irrigation system. Journal of Agriculture and Social
Sciences 2 (3), 129132.
Nesa Sudha, M., Valarmathi, M.L., Babu, A.S., 2011. Energy efcient data
transmission in automatic irrigation system using wireless sensor networks.
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 78, 215221.
Niblack, M., Sanchez, C.A., 2008. Automation of surface irrigation by cut-off time or
cut-off distance control. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 24 (5), 611614.
Noh, H., Zhang, Q., Han, S., Shin, B., Reum, D., 2005. Dynamic calibration and
image segmentation methods for multispectral imaging crop nitrogen deciency
sensors. Transactions of the ASAE 48 (1), 393401.
New South Wales Dept of Primary Industries (NSW DPI), 2000. Horticultural
Fertigation Techniques, Equipment and Management. Sydney, Australia: New
South Wales Department of Primary Industries.
OShaughnessy, S.A., Evett, S.R., 2010. Canopy temperature based system effectively
schedules and controls center pivot irrigation of cotton. Agricultural Water
OECD, 2012. OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050: Consequences of Inaction.
OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264122246-en. Available at: http://www.oecd.
org/environment/outlook2050 (accessed 14.01.14).
Olaya, V., Conrad, O., 2009. Geomorphometry in SAGA. In: Hengl, T., Reuter, H.I.
(Eds.), Geomorphometry Concepts, Software, Applications. Developments in
Soil Science, vol. 33. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, pp. 293308.
Ooi, S.K., Mareels, I., Cooley, N., Dunn, G., Thoms, G., 2008. A systems
engineering approach to viticulture on-farm irrigation. In: Proceedings of the 17th
World Congress. Seoul, Korea: The International Federation of Automatic Control.
Ozaki, Y., 1999. Design of a robotic self-travelling sprinkler system. Master of
Science Dissertation, Craneld University at Silsoe, UK.
Perea, H., Strelkoff, T., Adamsen, F., Hunsaker, D., Clemmens, A., 2010.
Nonuniform and unsteady solute transport in furrow irrigation. I: Model
development. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering 136 (6), 365375.
Perez-Urrestarazu, L., Rodriguez-Diaz, J.A., Camacho-Poyato, E., Lopez Luque, R.,
2009. Quality of service in irrigation distribution networks: Case of Palos de la
Frontera irrigation district (Spain). Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
135, 755761.
Perez-Urrestarazu, L., Rodriguez-Diaz, J.A., Camacho-Poyato, E., Lopez-Luque, R.,
Borrego-Jaraba, F.M., 2012. Development of an integrated computational tool to
improve performance of irrigation districts. Journal of Hydroinformatics 14 (3),
716730.
Perry, C., 2007. Efcient irrigation; inefcient communication; awed
recommendations. Irrigation and Drainage 56, 367378.
Perry, C., Pocknee, S., Hansen, O., 2003. A variable rate pivot irrigation control
system. In: Stafford, J., Werner, A. (Eds.), 4th European Conference on Precision
Agriculture, pp. 539544. Berlin, Germany: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Perry, C.J., Steduto, P., Allen, R.G., Burt, C.M., 2009. Increasing productivity in
irrigated agriculture: Agronomic constraints and hydrological realities. Agricultural
Peters, R.T., Evett, S.R., 2007. Spatial and temporal analysis of crop conditions
using multiple canopy temperature maps created with center-pivot-mounted
infrared thermometers. Transactions of the ASABE 50, 919927.
Peters, R.T., Evett, S.R., 2008. Automation of a centre pivot using the temperaturetime-threshold method of irrigation scheduling. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Engineering ASCE 134, 286291.
Pezzaniti, D., 2009. Smart irrigation metering technology: Identifying the potential
benets and uptake issues. Technical Report No. 04/09. Toowoomba, QLD: CRC
for Irrigation Futures.
Phene, C.J., Howell, T.A., 1984. Soil sensor control of high-frequency irrigation
systems. Transactions of the ASAE 27 (2), 392396.
Pierce, F.J., Elliott, T.V., 2008. A modbus RTU, multidrop bus design for precision
irrigation. In: Proceedings 9th International Precision Agriculture Conference,
20 23 July 2008, p. 68. Denver.
Planells-Alandi, P., Tarjuelo-Martin-Benito, J.M., Ortega-Alvarez, J.F., CasanovaMartinez, M.I., 2001. Design of water distribution networks for on-demand
irrigation. Irrigation Science 20, 189201.
Postel, S., 1999. Pillars of Sand. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Precision Irrigation, 2014. Available at: http://www.precisionirrigation.co.nz/
(accessed 14.01.14).
Qian, D., Shi, Y., Zhang, K., 2007. Study of wireless-sensor-based groundwater
monitoring instrument. In: Watershed Management to Meet Water Quality
Standards and TMDLS (Total Maximum Daily Load). San Antonio, TX: ASABE.
Raine, S.R., McClymont, D.J., Smith, R.J., 1997. The development of guidelines for
surface irrigation in areas with variable irrigation. Proceedings of the Australian
Society of Sugar Cane Technology 19, 293301.
Raine, S.R., Walker, W.R., 1998. A decision support tool for the design,
management and evaluation of surface irrigation systems. In: National
Conference. Brisbane: Irrigation Association of Australia.
Richards, P.J., Weatherhead, E.K., 1993. Prediction of raingun application patterns in
windy conditions. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 54, 281291.
Rodriguez-Diaz, J.A., Perez-Urrestarazu, L., Camacho-Poyato, E., Montesinos, P.,
2011. The paradox of irrigation scheme modernization: More efcient water use
linked to higher energy demand. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 9,
10001008.
Rowshon, M.K., Amin, M.S.M., Lee, T.S., Shariff, R.M., 2009. GIS-integrated rice
irrigation management information system for a river-fed scheme. Water
Resources Management 23, 28412866.
Ruiz-Garcia, L., Lunadei, L., Barreiro, P., Robla, J.I., 2009. A review of wireless
sensor technologies and applications in agriculture and food industry: State of
the art and current trends. Sensors 9, 47284750.
Ruiz-Sanchez, M.C., Domingo, R., Castel, J.R., 2010. Review: Decit irrigation in
fruit trees and vines in Spain. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 8 (S2),
S5S20.
Sadler, E.J., Camp, C.R., Evans, D.E., Usrey, L.J., 1997. A site-specic irrigation
system for the southeastern USA coastal plain. In: Stafford, J.V. (Ed.), Precision
Agriculture 97, vol. 1, Spatial Variability in Soil and Crop. Oxford, UK: Bios
Scientic Publishers, pp. 337344.
Sadler, E.J., Evans, R.G., Buchleiter, G.W., King, B.A., Camp, C.R., 2000. Design
considerations for site specic irrigation. Proceedings of the 4th Decennial
National Irrigation Symposium. 304315.
Sadler, E.J., Evans, R.G., Stone, K.C., Camp, C.R., 2005. Opportunities for
conservation with precision irrigation. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 60
(6), 371379.
Schache, M., 2011. Identifying best management practice through irrigation
benchmarking: Would you like probes with your drippers? In: Irrigation Australia,
2011 Irrigation & Drainage Conference, Launceston, Tasmania. Mascot, NSW,
Sydney: Irrigation Australia Limited.
Schwankl, L.J., Raghuwanshi, N.S., Wallender, W.W., 2000. Furrow irrigation
performance under spatially varying conditions. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Engineering 126 (6), 355361.
Seckler, D., Barker, R., Amarasinghe, U., 1999. Water scarcity in the 21st century.
International Journal of Water Resources Development 15, 2942.
Selim, E.M., Mosa, A.A., 2012. Fertigation of humic substances improves yield and
quality of broccoli and nutrient retention in a sandy soil. Journal of Plant
Nutrition and Soil Science 175 (2), 273281.
Shannon, E.L., McDougall, A., Kelsey, K., Hussey, B., 1996. Watercheck A
coordinated extension program for improving irrigation efciency on Australian
cane farms. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technology 18,
113118.
405
Sherlock, M.D., McDonnell, J.J., 2003. A new tool for hillslope hydrologists:
Spatially distributed groundwater level and soilwater content measured using
electromagnetic induction. Hydrological Processes 17, 19651977.
Shrestha, D.S., Steward, B.L., 2005. Shape and size analysis of corn plant canopies
for plant population and spacing sensing. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 21
(2), 295303.
Shull, H., Dylla, A.S., 1976. Wind effects of water application patterns from a large,
single nozzle sprinkler. Transactions of the ASAE 19, 501504.
Slaughter, D.C., Giles, D.K., Downey, D., 2008. Autonomous robotic weed control
systems: A review. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 61, 6378.
Smith, R.J., 1989. Uniformity of applications from lateral move irrigation machines.
CIGR 11th International Congress on Agricultural Engineering, Dublin. Published.
In: Dodd, V., Grace, P. (Eds.), Agricultural Engineering, 1. Land and Water Use.
Rotterdam: AA Balkema.
Smith, R.J., Baillie, J.N., McCarthy, A.C., Raine, S.R., Baillie, C.P., 2010. Review of
precision irrigation technologies and their application. A Report for National
Program for Sustainable Irrigation. NCEA Publication 1003017/1, November
2010. Toowoomba, QLD: University of Southern Queensland, 94 pp.
Smith, R.J., Gillies, M.H., Newell, G., Foley, J.P., 2008. A decision support
model for travelling gun irrigation machines. Biosystems Engineering 100 (1),
126136.
Smith, R.J., Gillies, M.H., Shanahan, M., Campbell, B., Williamson, B., 2009.
Evaluating the performance of bay irrigation in the GMID. In: Irrigation Australia,
2009 Irrigation & Drainage Conference, Swan Hill, VIC, 1821 October. Mascot,
NSW: Irrigation Australia Limited.
Smith, R.J., Raine, S.R., McCarthy, A.C., Hancock, N.H., 2009. Managing spatial
and temporal variability in irrigated agriculture through adaptive control.
Australian Journal of Multi-Disciplinary Engineering 7 (1), 7990.
Smith, R.J., Raine, S.R., Minkovich, J., 2005. Irrigation application efciency and
deep drainage potential under surface irrigated cotton. Agricultural Water
Management 71 (2), 117130.
Stoll, M., Loveys, B., Dry, P.R., 2000. Hormonal changes induced by partial
rootzone drying of irrigated grapevine. Journal of Experimental Botany 51,
16271634.
Stork, P.R., Jerie, P.H., Callinan, A.P.L., 2003. Subsurface drip irrigation in raised
bed tomato production. II. Soil acidication under current commercial practice.
Australian Journal of Soil Research 41, 13051315.
Sudduth, K.A., Kitchen, N.R., Wiebold, W.J., et al., 2005. Relating apparent electrical
conductivity to soil properties across the north-central USA. Computers and
Electronics in Agriculture 46, 263283.
Thenkabail, P.S., Knox, J.W., Ozdogan, M., et al., 2012. Assessing future risks to
agricultural productivity, water resources and food security: How can remote
sensing help? Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 78 (8),
773782.
Thessler, S., Kooistra, L., Teye, F., Huitu, H., Bregt, A.K., 2011. Geosensors to
support crop production: Current applications and user requirements. Sensors
11, 66566684.
Thompson, A.L., Martin, D.L., Kranz, W.L., 2000. Water application distribution
under center pivot systems. In: Proceedings of the 4th Decennial National
Irrigation Symposium, Phoenix, AZ, 1416 November. St. Joseph, MI: American
Society of Agricultural Engineers.
Thompson, R.B., Gallardo, M., Valdez, L.C., Fernandez, M.D., 2007. Determination
of lower limits for irrigation management using in situ assessments of apparent
crop water uptake made with volumetric soil water content sensors. Agricultural
Torre-Neto, A., Schuller, J.K., Haman, D.Z., 2000. Networked sensing and valve
actuation for spatially variable microsprinkler irrigation. ASAE Paper No. 001158.
Triantalis, J., Kerridge, B., Buchanan, S.M., 2009. Digital soil-class mapping from
proximal and remotely sensed data at the eld level. Agronomy Journal 101 (4),
841853.
Trout, T.J., 1990. Furrow inow and inltration variability impacts on irrigation
management. Transactions of the ASAE 33 (4), 11711178.
Trout, T.J., Mackey, B.E., 1988. Furrow Inow and Inltration Variability.
Transactions of the ASAE 31 (2), 531537.
Turral, H., Svendsen, M., Faures, J.M., 2010. Investing in irrigation: Reviewing
the past and looking to the future. Agricultural Water Management 97, 551560.
Uniwater, 2008. Regional and economic benets through smarter irrigation. Final
Report on STI Project, University of Melbourne.
Vellidis, G., Tucker, M., Perry, C., Kvien, C., Bednarz, C., 2008. A real-time wireless
smart sensor array for scheduling irrigation. Computers and Electronics in
Waine, T.W., Blackmore, B.S., Godwin, R.J., 2000. Mapping Available Water Content
and Estimating Soil Textural Class Using Electromagnetic Induction. EurAgEng
406
2000, Paper Number: 00-SW-044. Warwick, UK: European Society of Agricultural

Engineers.
Walker, W.R., 1989. Guidelines for designing and evaluating surface irrigation
systems. FAO Irrigation Drainage Paper 45. Rome: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
Walker, W.R., 2005. Multilevel calibration of furrow inltration and roughness.
Journal of Irrigation and Drain Engineering 131 (2), 129136.
Walker, W.R., Skogerboe, G.V., 1989. Surface Irrigation: Theory and Practice.
Atlantic city, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wallace, J.S., Batchelor, C.H., 1997. Managing water resources for crop production.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences
352, 937947.
Wanjura, D.F., Upchurch, D.R., Mahan, J.R., 2004. Establishing differential irrigation
levels using temperature-time thresholds. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 20
(2), 201206.
White, S.C., 2006. Partial rootzone drying and regulated decit irrigation in cotton
under large mobile irrigation machines. PhD Dissertation. University of Southern
Queensland, Toowoomba.
White, S.C., Raine, S.R., 2009. Physiological response of cotton to a root zone soil
moisture gradient: Implications for partial rootzone drying irrigation. Journal of
Cotton Science 13, 6774.
Wriedt, G., Van der Velde, M., Aloe, A., Bouraoui, F., 2009. Estimating irrigation
water requirements in Europe. Journal of Hydrology 373, 527544.
Zerihun, D., Feyen, J., 1996. BORDEV: BORder Design-Management and Evaluation
Manual & FURDEV: FURrow Design-Management and Evaluation Manual.
Unpublished Manuals, Leuven, Belgium: Institute for Land and Water
Management, Kotholieke Universiteit.

Advanced Irrigaion

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Advanced Irrigaion

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

W

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

Irrigated Areas and Volumes Abstracted

Microirrigation Microirrigation, also known as drip or

after application (Jury and Vaux, 2007). In many developing

Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems, Volume 5

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

Improving Irrigation Efciency

Growth in irrigated area (%)

environmental protection of freshwaters, adding further competition for agricultural demands.

freshwater resources are limited, it is possible that saved water

more uniform application of water (Burt et al., 1997);

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

improvement of irrigation scheduling and water delivery

Technological Advances in Irrigation Application

Figure 3 Surface irrigation of sugarcane in Swaziland. Gravity fed

application system to a desired performance, and account for

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

Well-designed and managed precision surface irrigation

determine the inltration parameters from measurements of

Automation and control of surface irrigation

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

Automated feedback control systems have been attempted

usually not considered. Despite the published research, few if

continuous measurement of that inow through inference

Preliminary trials of this system, Koech (2012) show that

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

sufcient. These systems require comprehensive decision

Sprinkler pattern simulation

Figure 6 Overhead irrigation on onions using a mobile hosereel

Simulation of sprinkler irrigation distribution patterns in

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

Distance from travel lane (m)

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

an estimate of the uniformity of applications for any selected

applications at particular points in an irrigated eld with

Spatially varied applications Center Pivot and Lateral

multiple discrete xed-rate application devices operated in

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

ow interruption to xed-rate devices to provide a range of

Research to date has resulted in the development of

Irrigation, 2014). The New Zealand system was released into

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

Drip dried vine fruit

Application efficiency (%)

Placement of the drip lines is an important consideration

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

1984; Meron et al., 1996; Dukes and Scholberg, 2004; Wanjura

Technological Advances in Irrigation Management

advances in irrigation scheduling,

The technological advances in irrigation systems described

support tools to determine when to turn on the irrigator and

Advances in Irrigation Scheduling

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

tools become important; and GIS-integrated tools have been

Soil Moisture Mapping

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

ECa (mS m1)

strategies to sample the full range of likely soils encountered in

logarithm of specic catchment area divided by the tangent of

Water: Advanced Irrigation Technologies

Wireless Sensor Networks

Alternatively, the data are transmitted via internet or cellular