COMPARISON OF FIELD AND LABORATORY VNIR SPECTROSCOPY FOR PROFILE SOIL PROPERTY ESTIMATION

In-field, in-situ data collection with soil sensors has potential to improve the efficiency and accuracy of soil property estimates. Optical diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS) has been used to estimate important soil properties, such as soil carbon, nitrogen, water content, and texture. Most previous work has focused on laboratory-based visible and nearinfrared (VNIR) spectroscopy using dried soil. The objective of this research was to compare estimates of laboratory-measured soil properties from a laboratory DRS spectrometer and an in-situ profile DRS spectrometer. Soil cores were obtained to approximately 1 m depth from treatment blocks representing variability in topsoil depth located at the South Farm Research Center of the University of Missouri. Soil cores were split by horizon, and samples were scanned with the laboratory DRS spectrometer in both field-moist and oven-dried conditions. In-situ profile DRS spectrometer scans were obtained at the same sampling locations. Soil properties measured in the laboratory from the cores were bulk density, total organic carbon (TOC), total nitrogen (TN), particulate organic matter carbon and nitrogen (POM-C and POM-N), water content, and texture fractions. The best estimates of TOC, TN, and bulk density were from the laboratory DRS spectra on dry soil (R-2 -0.94, 0.91, and 0.71, respectively). Estimation errors with the field DRS system were at most 25% higher for these soil properties. For POM-C and POM-N, the field system provided estimates of similar accuracy to the best (dry soil) laboratory measurements. Clay and silt texture fraction estimates were most accurate from laboratory DRS spectra on field-moist soil (R-2 - 0.91 and 0.93, respectively). Estimation errors for clay and silt were almost doubled with the field DRS system. Considering the efficiency advantages, in-field, in-situ DRS appears to be a viable alternative to laboratory DRS for TOC, TN, POM-C, POM-N, and bulk density estimates, but perhaps not for soil texture estimates.