% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Rudolph:820901,
author = {Rudolph, S. and Wongleecharoen, C. and Lark, R. M. and
Marchant, B. P. and Garré, S. and Herbst, M. and Vereecken,
H. and Weihermüller, L.},
title = {{S}oil apparent conductivity measurements for planning and
analysis of agricultural experiments: {A} case study from
{W}estern-{T}hailand},
journal = {Geoderma},
volume = {267},
issn = {0016-7061},
address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier Science},
reportid = {FZJ-2016-06165},
pages = {220 - 229},
year = {2016},
abstract = {In experimental trials, the success or failure of
agricultural improvements is commonly evaluated on the
agronomic response of crops, using proper experimental
designs with sufficient statistical power. Since fine-scale
variability of the experimental site can reduce statistical
power, efficiency gains in the experimental design can be
achieved if this variation is known and used to design
blocking, or some proxy variable is used as a covariate.
Near-surface geophysical techniques such as electromagnetic
induction (EMI), which describes subsurface properties
non-invasively by measuring soil apparent conductivity
(ECa), may be one source of this information. The motivation
of our study was to investigate the effectiveness of
EMI-derived ECa measurements for planning and analysis of
agricultural experiments. ECa and plant height measurements
(the response variable) were taken from an agroforestry
experiment in Western Thailand, and their variability was
quantified to simulate multiple realizations of ECa and the
residuals of the response variable from treatment means.
These were combined to produce simulated data from different
experimental designs and treatment effects. The simulated
data were then used to evaluate the statistical power by
detecting three orthogonal contrasts among the treatments in
the original experiment. We considered three experimental
designs, a simple random design (SR), a complete randomized
block design (CRB), and a complete randomized block design
with spatially adjusted blocks on plot means of ECa
(CRBECa). Using analysis of variance (ANOVA), the smallest
effect sizes could be detected with the CRBECa design, which
indicates that ECa measurements could be used in the
planning phase of an experiment to achieve efficiencies by
improved blocking. In contrast, analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA) demonstrated that substantial power improvements
could be gained when ECa was considered as a covariate in
the analysis. We therefore recommend that ECa measurements
should be used to characterize subsurface variability of
experimental sites and to support the statistical analysis
of agricultural experiments.},
cin = {IBG-3},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118},
pnm = {255 - Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction
(POF3-255)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000369473100024},
doi = {10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.12.013},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/820901},
}