Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Electronics in Agriculture

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compag

Wireless Sensor Networks for precision horticulture in Southern Spain

J.A. Lpez Riquelme a , F. Soto a , J. Suardaz a , P. Snchez a , A. Iborra a, , J.A. Vera b
a
Universidad Politcnica de Cartagena, Divisin de Sistemas e Ingeniera Electrnica, Campus Muralla del Mar, s/n, Cartagena E-30202, Spain
b
Edosoft Factory S.L., Mara Manrique 3, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria E-35011, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In recent years many applications have been proposed for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN). One of these
Received 29 July 2008 is precision agriculture, where WSN can play an important part in the handling and management of
Received in revised form 16 April 2009 water resources for irrigation, in understanding the changes in the crops to assess the optimum point
Accepted 21 April 2009
for harvesting, in estimating fertilizer requirements and to predict crop performance more accurately.
This paper describes our experience during the introduction and deployment of an experimental sensor
Keywords:
network at an ecological horticultural enterprise in the semiarid region of Murcia. It presents the topology
Wireless sensor network
of the deployed network using four types of nodes (Soil Mote, Environmental Mote, Water Mote and
Precision agriculture
Horticulture
Gateway Mote), some of them connected to different sensors distributed in the eld. These sensors can
measure various soil characteristics such us temperature, volumetric moisture content and salinity. For
each node, the overall architecture, hardware and software components are described. The system also
includes a real-time monitoring application operating from a computer placed in the central ofces of the
farm. The testing of the system was done in two phases: the rst in the laboratory, to validate the functional
requirements of the developed devices, the networking solution and the motes power management; the
second on the farm, to asses the functional performance of the devices, such as range, robustness and
exibility. The system was successfully implemented on a crop of ecological cabbage (Brassica oleracea).
The result was a low cost, highly reliable and simple infrastructure for the collection of agronomical data
over a distributed area in horticultural environments.
2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction been put to different uses to implement wireless sensors in preci-

The concept of precision agriculture has been around for some
time now. Blackmore (1994) dened it as a comprehensive system
designed to optimize agricultural production by carefully tailoring soil
and crop management to correspond to the unique condition found in
each eld while maintaining environmental quality. Nowadays, it is
possible to say that precision agriculture (Zhang et al., 2002) is a
method for estimating, assessing and understanding the changes
that take place in crops in order to be able to determine irri-
gation and fertilizer requirements, product growth and ripening
phases, optimum points of sowing and harvesting, etc. as exactly
as possiblein other words, adequately predict the various stages
in crop production. To that end it is important to gather as much
information as possible on the water, soil, plants and environ-
ment. Precision agriculture, then, utilizes numerous technologies
and infrastructures: data instrumentation and gathering systems,
geographic information systems (GIS), global positioning systems
(GPS), microelectronics, wireless technologies and so forth (Chiti
et al., 2005; Tang et al., 2002). Many wireless technologies have
sion agriculture (Wang et al., 2006; Camilli et al., 2007; Vellidis et
al., 2008; Siuli Roy and Bandyopadhyays, 2008; Pierce and Elliot,
2008)from simple infra-red-based devices (IrDAs) for very short
distances to long-range systems based on mobile telephony, such
as GSM/GPRS. In between there are WPANs (Wireless Personal Area
Networks) for short distances, such as Bluetooth (10 m) and ZigBee
(70 m), and WLANs (Wireless Local Area Networks) for interme-
diate distances (100 m). Camilli et al. (2007) describe a simulated
application for precision agriculture using a network of wireless
sensors capable of providing eld parameters to end users. Pierce
and Elliot (2008) describe the hardware and software components
developed for regional and on-farm sensor networks and their
implementation in two agricultural applications in Washington
State (USA).
Within the category of WPANs are included the WSNs (Wireless
Sensor Networks) (Akyildiz et al., 2002), a type of autonomous, self-
organized ad hoc network composed of tens, hundreds or thousands
of smart low-rate devices or motes, which are generally battery-
powered. These networks present a number of features that are
particularly useful for precision agriculture:

Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 968 32 56 54; fax: +34 968 32 53 45. The topology of the network need not be xed; the nodes can be
E-mail address: andres.iborra@upct.es (A. Iborra). deployed arbitrarily and adapted to changing needs. For instance,

0168-1699/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compag.2009.04.006
26 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535
sensor nodes can be placed anywhere in a crop eld, in whatever
arrangement is desired. A sensor node can be removed or added
directly without having to recongure all the other nodes.
They are more error-tolerant than other types of networks, since
a failure in one node is automatically compensated by rerouting
through the other nodes thanks to the intrinsic possibilities of
dynamic network reconguration. For example, if a crop is at a
growth stage in which physical access to the mote is complicated,
it is not absolutely essential to replace it.
Energy consumption by nodes is optimized in such a way that
they can be powered solely by batteries or renewable energy-
based systems (solar, wind or hydraulic) (Morais et al., 2008). In
this way, energy supply is assured throughout the lifetime of the
nodeat least one agricultural cycle.
The sensors used in precision agriculture usually have to be
robust, accurate and with high resolution and hence are relatively
costly (over $300/sensor), but the current tendency is to embed
sensors in the motes, which drastically reduces their cost.
Motes normally consist of a processor, a radio module, a power
supply and one or more sensors mounted on the mote itself or
connected to it. The processor controls all the nodes functions
(access to sensors, control of communications, execution of the
state engine, etc.). The radio module transmits and receives through
a communication standard. The standards that best adapt to the
requirements imposed by the development of sensor networks and
that incorporate most of the radio modules used in motes are IEEE
802.15.4 (IEEE, 2006) and ZigBee (Baronti et al., 2007). These stan-
dards are designed for applications where the transfer speed is not
very great, but they make it possible for network nodes to be pow-
ered by battery and to function for weeks or even months without
recharging. The function of the power supply is to supply energy to
the mote from batteries using high-performance power converters.
Finally, some of the nodes in a sensor network may communicate
with a computer or other networks through a gateway.
This article describes experiments conducted for the introduc-
tion of a WSN in a horticultural holding. Other works have recently
demonstrated the success of applying WSN in precision agriculture
(Burrell et al., 2004; Pierce and Elliot, 2008). The farm is located in
the Campo de Cartagena in the Region of Murcia, South-East Spain,
in one of Europes most important horticultural areas. In climatic
terms, this is a semiarid zone with annual rainfall of approximately
400 mm. Despite this, 190,000 ha, 31% of the total crop area, is under
irrigation; of this area, 51,000 ha are devoted to herbaceous crops
and 91,000 to woody crops.
The farm on which the experiment was conducted practises eco-
logical agriculture, also known as biological or organic farming. This
is a way of growing crops and caring for the land that is respectful
of nature and normally excludes the use of chemicals (pesticides,
herbicides, etc.) and genetically modied seeds (known as GMOs).
The principal aim of this kind of farming is to preserve the envi-
ronment, maintain or enhance the fertility of the soil and produce
foods with their own natural properties. This company has a long
tradition of organic farming and has been a pioneer in the growing
of various types of horticultural produce (Rocket, Iceberg, Romaine,
Mixed Salads, etc.). Its biggest market is in the United Kingdom.
The farm is of medium size (1000 ha) with 250 crop elds spread
over the Campo de Cartagena several kilometres apart from one
another. As a specication of the research project 10 motes for mon-
itoring the crop were considered, connected in star topology, with
a Gateway Mote. Moreover, as the Gateway Mote has a stack where
the received messages are stored and later processed using a task,
more than 10 motes connected in star topology can be supported.
Then, the ultimate aim of this work is to provide the farm with the
infrastructure necessary, by crop, to ascertain crop water conditions
in real time and make the appropriate decisions.
A case study was dened with two sensor networks, each moni-
toring different parameters. The rst network gathers temperature,
moisture and salinity readings from the soil, while the second
records the ambient temperature and humidity. In addition, an iso-
lated wireless sensor was placed in a pond to measure the salinity
of the water fed to the crops. These subnetworks and the isolated
wireless sensor all send data via the appropriate gateway motes
to a base station node located at the central farm ofces, where
the strategic decisions about crops are taken. To implement the
different networks, specic, low-cost motes (about 150$ without
sensors) were designed and developed, along with gateways link-
ing the networks and the central ofces. A monitoring application
was also developed to control all the devices and keep a record of
the information received in a relational database, which is used to
make decisions about irrigation.
Following this introduction, Section 2 describes the experimen-
tal scenario in which the sensor networks were deployed. Section
3 gives a detailed description, in terms of hardware and software,
of the devices developed for implementation of the system. Section
4 outlines the possibilities offered by the monitoring software that
was developed. Section 5 details the technological and agronomic
results. And nally, Section 6 presents a summary and future plans
for continuation of this work.
2. Experimental scenario
The agronomic problem as posed was addressed with the
arrangement shown in Fig. 1. This consists of two sensor networks
and one isolated wireless sensor. The rst sensor network consists
of ten nodes called Soil Motes, each of which is connected to two
Stevens Hydra Probe II sensors buried at depths of twenty or forty
centimetres. These sensors can measure various soil characteristics
such as temperature, volumetric moisture content, salinity and so
on. The second network consists of ten nodes, called Environmen-
tal Motes, which measure the ambient temperature and humidity
using Sensirion SHT71 sensors.
In addition to these sensor networks, a wireless sensor, called
the Water Mote, was placed in one of the ponds used to water the
farm. The purpose of this wireless sensor is to measure salinity on
the basis of the electrical conductivity of the water and the tem-
perature in order to determine the quality of the water used to
irrigate the crops. The sensor used in this case is a Stevens EC 250.
A long-range radio module is tted to this sensor to allow direct
communication with the base station 5.5 km away. The hardware
and software implementation of these nodes is described in detail
further below. Table 1 summarizes the principal features of the
sensors.
The two sensor networks are respectively 5.2 and 8.7 km away
from the central computer. To assure wireless coverage of the
system, Gateway Motes were developed incorporating long-range
radio modules with the same technology as in the Water Mote.
The nodes in each of these sensor networks are interconnected via
IEEE 802.15.4. The reasons for the decision to use this standard are
explained in the part of the following section specifying the soft-
ware architecture. When a message reaches the central computer
through the Gateway, it is processed and its source and the infor-
mation it contains are checked. On the basis of this information
the message is stored in a relational database, where a histori-
cal record is kept of the data gathered by the sensors and the
times of the readings. Table 2 summarizes the characteristics of the
various different devices that have been developed and deployed
on the farm. The following sections provide detailed descriptions
of each of the motes that have been developed and the require-
ments and architecture of the monitoring application that was
implemented.
 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535 27

Fig. 1. Illustration of eld implementation of a horticultural crop monitoring network based on sensor networks.

Table 1
Summary of principal features of the sensors used.

Sensor SHT71 EC 250 Hydra Probe II

Measured data Relative humidity and temperature Water electrical conductivity and Moisture, conductivity, salinity and
water temperature temperature

Communication protocol I2C 420 mA SDI-12

Range 0 to 100% RH 0 C to 50 C From completely dry to fully saturated

40 C to 120 C 0 to 10,000 S 0.01 to 1.5 S/m
1 to 78 where 1 = air, 78 = distilled
water

10 to +65 C

Resolution 0.03% RH NA NA
0.01 C T

Accuracy 3.5% RH 0.1 C T 0.03

0.4 C T 1% EC 2%
1.5%
0.6 C

Response time 3s HR 1s NA
15s T

Supply voltage range 2.45.5 VDC 827 VDC 920 VDC

Power 0.5 mA active 30 mA active 30 mA active

0.3 A idle NA idle <1 mA idle

URL http://www.sensirion.com/ http://www.stevenswater.com/ http://www.stevenswater.com/

3. Devices developed
As we saw in the foregoing section, the solution chosen to deal
with the problem as posed was to lay out two sensor networks
with motes (Soil Mote, Environmental Mote, Gateway Mote), one
wireless sensor to measure water quality and two motes in the cen-
tral ofces (a Repeater Mote on the roof and a Base Station Mote
connected to the monitoring computer).
The devices described in this paper were developed in the con-
text of the ESNA (European Sensor Network Architecture) and RIMSI
projects to satisfy the range requirements for network coverage
(up to 10 km) and because there was no mote adapted to standard
SDI-12 (SDI, 2005) available on the agricultural instrument mar-
ket. The chief requirements that were considered when designing
these devices were: (1) a robust radio technology; (2) low-
cost, low-consumption electronic devices; (3) use of long-lasting
28 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535

Table 2
Summary of devices developed for the farm.

Device Function C/O.S. Energy source Communication module (outdoor Sensors

RF line-of-sight range)

Water Mote Instantly measure MSP430F1611 Solar Cell + Rechargeable XStream (16 km) EC 250 (Stevens)
water electrical TinyOS 2 Battery
conductivity and
temperature
Soil Mote Instantly measure MSP430F1611 Rechargeable Battery CC2420 (230 m) Hydra Probe II
soil moisture, TinyOS 2 (Stevens)
conductivity,
salinity, and
temperature
Environmental Instantly measure MSP430F1611 Rechargeable Battery CC2420 (230 m) SHT71 (Sensirion)
Mote relative humidity TinyOS 2
and temperature
Gateway Mote Link Soil and MSP430F1611 Solar Cell + Rechargeable CC2420 (230 m)
Environmental TinyOS 2 Battery XStream (16 km)
Motes with
Repeater Mote
Repeater Mote Link Gateway Motes NA Grid XStream (16 km)
with Base Station
Mote
Base Station Link WSN with NA Grid XStream (16 km)
Mote software
application

energy sources and reduced size (about 2700 mAh); and (4) use of
input/output interfaces (SDI-12, I2C, 420 mA) to connect different
types of external sensors. The hardware architecture, the sensors
used, the functionality of the mote and the software components
developed are detailed below for each of the motes. As result of
the ESNA and RIMSI projects, there is a video online of the devices
developed at http://www.dsie.upct.es/proyectos/projects.html.
3.1. Soil Mote
Fig. 2 shows details of the hardware and software implemen-
tation of the Soil Mote and its placement in the eld. This mote
consists of a microcontroller, a short-range radio transceiver, a SDI-
12 interface, two DC/DC converters and a set of batteries (see Fig. 2a
and b). All elements are contained in a watertight box with an IP67
protection rating.
The microcontroller chosen was the Texas Instruments
Msp430F1611, which was programmed with TinyOS version 2 (Tiny,
2008) (Hill et al., 2000). The same microcontroller is used in all
the other motes. The short-range radio module is a CC2420 (Chip-
con), also from Texas Instruments. This module exchanges data with
the Gateway Mote via wireless at 2.4 GHz with a bandwidth of 250
Kbps, following standard IEEE 802.15.4. The Gateway Mote acts as
a gateway between the sensor network and the ofces. The power
supply consists of three AA NiMH 2700 mAh rechargeable batter-
ies connected to a second DC/DC converter. This converter supplies
2.5 VDC for all the mote components. As we shall see in Section 5,
these batteries last around 7 months, which is more than enough
time for a normal farming season.
Each mote is connected to two Stevens Hydra Probe II (HP2)
sensors (see Fig. 2c) by way of the SDI-12 interface. SDI-12 stands
for Serial Data Interface at 1200 baud. This is a standard for inter-
facing battery-powered data recorders with microprocessor-based
sensors designed for environmental data acquisition. The HP2 is an
in situ soil sensing system that measures 22 different soil parame-
ters simultaneously with digital output. It instantly calculates soil
moisture, electrical conductivity/salinity and temperature.
The Soil Mote monitors four parameters (soil temperature in C,
soil salinity in g/l of ClNa, volumetric percentage of moisture in
the soil and soil conductivity with temperature correction in S/m)
from the HP2 sensors; the sampling period can be congured by the
user from the receiver PC, within a range of 30 min to about 48 h.
Because sampling is normally hourly, it was decided to send the data
read in each reading cycle, thus combining real-time data availabil-
ity with reasonable power consumption. The device also monitors
the battery levels and sends a signal when these reach critical
level.
This mote was programmed using the TinyOS 2.0 operating sys-
tem and the associated nesC programming language (Gay et al.,
2003), which are specic to the WSN domain. TinyOS is an operating
environment designed to run on distributed embedded Wireless
Sensor Networks. nesC is built as an extension to the C programming
language with components wired together to run applications
on TinyOS. Components are connected to each other using inter-
faces. TinyOS provides interfaces and components for common
abstractions such as packet communication, routing, sensing, actu-
ation and storage. TinyOS is a well-known alternative for the
development of new WSN applications and also provides reusable
components to assure reliable communications following standard
IEEE 802.15.4 and supports a lot of hardware (microcontrollers,
transceivers, sensors). Moreover, there is an implementation of Zig-
Bee (Open-ZB) written in nesC. In the beginning the authors do not
know whether or not a Multi-Hop protocol will could be needed. For
this, and other reasons, such as: (1) TinyOS is an open source code,
(2) allows application software to access hardware directly when
required, (3) the support for many hardware platforms, TinyOS was
chosen to develop the software of motes applications.
If an application strictly needs to communicate in a point-to-
point or a point-to-multipoint fashion, 802.15.4 will be able to
handle all the communications between the devices and it will
be simpler to implement than trying to use a module with Zig-
Bee to accomplish the same goal. ZigBee is necessary if the system
needs to have repeating or mesh networking functionalities. In our
case, IEEE 802.15.4 was chosen for communication between the Soil
Motes and the Gateway Mote because Multi-Hop communication
was unnecessary thanks to the arrangement on the farm and the
coverage provided by the radio modules.
Fig. 2e shows a diagram of the components used to implement
the mote using nesC. Note the different instances of the compo-
nents and the different interfaces to the principal HP2C component.
The HP2C component was developed to meet the functionality
described above. All the other components are reused from the
infrastructure supplied by TinyOS for access to timers, access to
input/output ports, radio module, etc. Every time a component is
 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535 29

Fig. 2. Various perspectives of the Soil Mote and Hydra Probe II sensor.

reused, one or more instances of it are created and distinguished
from one another by aliases.
The entry-point to the programme is provided by the MainC
component through the predened Boot interface. Various different
nesC components need to be instantiated for the programme to
function:
TimerMilliC. To read the HP2 sensors, the operator must send
a rst start-reading command (timing set by Timer2) then wait
for the response from the sensor, which will indicate when the
data will be available. Once that time passes (Timer1), the data
can be measured by sending a new read command (timing set
by Timer3). In response to that command, the sensor sends the
data that have been congured for reading and waits for a time
(Timer0) before repeating the cycle.
AMSenderC. This component supplies the interfaces necessary to
send radio messages to the Gateway Mote. The instances of this
component, called SendData and SendAlarm, are used respec-
tively to send the data readings and warn of a critical battery
level.
CC2420ActiveMessageC. The sole instance of this component
is used to enable/disable the radio module. It also pro-
vides the functionality necessary to work in low-consumption
mode.
AMReceiver. This instance is used to receive messages
from the Gateway Mote and modify the mote sampling
period.
HplMsp430GeneralIOC. This instance provides access to the
microcontroller ports in order to control the sensors and the
DC/DC converter.
30 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535
HplMsp430InterruptC. This instance facilitates handling of inter-
ruptions from the DC/DC converter in order to know when the
battery level falls below the established threshold.
Msp430Uart1C. This is used to manage communications with the
HP2 sensor by means of the SDI-12 protocol.
LedsC. The instance of this component encapsulates the hard-
ware for the Motes LEDs; it is used to debug the application and
ascertain its running status.
Fig. 2d shows the mote in place on the farm with the characteristics
mentioned.
3.2. Environmental Mote
For ease of reading, hereafter we have left out those aspects that
the other motes have in common with the Soil Mote and have only
included details of new components and functionalities.
The Environmental Motes (see Fig. 3) record the ambient tem-
perature and humidity parameters for a crop. As we can see in Fig. 3a
and b, the motes architecture is similar to that of the Soil Mote,
except for the interface with the external sensors.
Each mote is connected via the I2C interface to a Sensirion SHT71
sensor (see Fig. 3c), which is placed inside a solar protection shield
a metre and a half off the ground. These kinds of motes take read-
ings of the cited parameters with a maximum parameterizable
frequency of 2 readings/hour. The Environmental Motes are located
within a radius of roughly one hundred metres around the Gate-
way Mote. The initial arrangement for this network consists of ten
motes. Again, this mote was programmed using TinyOS. The Sensiri-
onSht11C component was used to meet the functionality described
above. Besides, the Msp430ADC0C was used to sample the micro-
controlers ADC0 analogical/digital converter in order to determine
when the battery levels falls below a given threshold and send a
low-batery alert.
Fig. 3. Various perspectives of the Environmental Mote.
3.3. Water Mote
The Water Mote (see Fig. 4) measures the temperature and salin-
ity of the water supplied to the crop from an irrigation pond. In this
case the mote is connected directly with the ofces by way of a
long-range radio module (XStream X24-019PKI-RA radio modem)
with an 8dBi omni-directional antenna for outdoor use. The rest of
the architecture is very similar to that of the previous motes (see
Fig. 4a and b). A Stevens EC 250 sensor is submerged in the pond.
The two sensor outputs (temperature and salinity) are supplied in
the form of a 420 mA signal; they are read by the microcontrollers
ADC0 and ADC1 converters after the current loop is passed through
a resistor. These parameters are read with a maximum parameteri-
zable frequency of 2 readings/hour. The mote is powered by a solar
panel and is enclosed in a watertight box placed on the edge of the
pond. Its antenna is located on a mast at a height of approximately
four metres.
The EC250C component was again developed with TinyOS to
meet the functionality described above. In this implementation the
components are as follows:
TimerMilliC. Every time the EC 250 sensor has to be read, a new
reading cycle has to be performed (timer instance) by activating
the DC/DC converter that powers the sensor for ten seconds. At
the end of this time (Timer1) the measurement is transmitted
from the two ADCs to which the sensor outputs are connected.
Once there is a reading from the two ADCs the radio module is
activated and there is a pause (Timer3) before the data are sent. In
each reading cycle, once all the data have been sent (data plus bat-
tery alert if any), the long-range radio module remains activated
for ve seconds (Timer2) to listen for any sample period change
message. At the end of this time the mote reverts to standby status
pending a new reading cycle.
 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535
Fig. 4. Various perspectives of the Water Mote.
Msp430ADC0C and Msp430ADC1C. These afford access to the
analogical/digital converters to which the sensor outputs are con-
nected.
Msp430ADC2C. This instance is connected to the battery voltage
via a resistive divider.
HplMsp430GeneralIOC. This affords access to the microcontroller
ports necessary to control the DC/DC converter and the long-
range radio module.
HplMsp430InterruptC. This generates a low-level pulse to signal
that a radio message has been sent.
PlatformSerialC. Used to manage the input/output with the
microcontroller UART to which the long-range radio module is
connected.
3.4. Gateway, Base Station and Repeater Motes
As we can see in Fig. 1, the device infrastructure required to inter-
connect the two sensor networks and the wireless sensor with the
ofces is as follows: (1) One Gateway Mote for each of the sen-
sor networks, one of them based on Environmental Motes and the
other on Soil Motes; (2) a Repeater Mote located on the ofce build-
ing roof; and (3) a Base Station Mote inside the ofces, physically
connected to the monitoring computer.
Fig. 5a and b shows a detailed image of the Gateway Mote with
a block diagram of the hardware architecture. The microcontroller
communicates with the crop motes via a short-range radio module
and with the Repeater Mote in the ofces via a long-range radio
module. The lifetime of the power supply is enough thanks to the
use of rechargeable solar batteries. The solar panel is the model TPS
102/5 (12 V, 5 W) from Zodiac Solar, which is installed at an angle
of 30 . In the worst case, the average solar irradiance in Cartagena
during the test for that angle was 4600 Wh/m2 . The consumption of
the gateway is 7.8 Wh. Therefore, the panel provided more energy
than the mote consumed. Fig. 5c shows the mote attached to the
mast on the farm.
To ensure that the Base Station Mote has adequate coverage, the
main antenna is located on the ofce roof at a height of roughly
nine metres. Wireless connection between the main antenna and
the base station mote is also achieved via the Repeater Mote. The
Base Station Mote gathers all the information generated by the
sensor network (with the help of the repeater mote) and trans-
mits it to the monitoring application which was developed to
handle that network. Similarly, it broadcasts any order from the
software application over the sensor network. This mote is com-
posed of a long-range radio module (2.4 GHz) connected to a 3dBi
omni-directional antenna, and a RS-232 interface for connection
to the central computer. The Repeater Mote is a commercial radio
31
modem congured in repeater mode, which is connected to an 8dBi
omni-directional antenna. This provides up to 16 km line-of-sight
coverage in the open.
4. Monitoring application
The monitoring application is integrated by: (1) a graphical user
interface (GUI) where the data read by the sensors is shown, and
(2) a program that receives and stores data from the nodes. Both
programs were developed using the Java programming language,
with the Eclipse environment and the MySQL relational database
management system. The essential features of these applications
as developed may be summarized as follows:
1. The GUI includes the placement of devices using the utility sup-
plied by Google Maps. In this way we can identify the exact
geographic position of each node and the crop in which it is
located (see Fig. 6).
2. The data read by the sensors are sent periodically to the base
station and stored within the database (the program waits for
an event indicating data available at the serial port). The GUI
will read these data and visualize them graphically in real time.
In addition, the sampling period can be modied from the user
application.
3. The database includes details about the deployed nodes, their
aggregations into regions, the sensors integrated in every node,
the historic record of the readings, the types of sensors, and
the history of alarms received from the sensors and regions (for
example battery failure, values lower than a threshold, etc.).
A menu bar at the top provides the options noted above (see Fig. 6).
On the right of the screen a Google Map has been used to depict
the geographic position of the deployed nodes. On the left there are
three tables displaying the latest data readings from the sensors for
the three networks shown on the right. Below the tables a graphic
display of the data for a user-selected time interval, or the latest
data gathered is provided.
Both the soil and the environmental motes provide the following
services: changing the sampling period of the sensors and cong-
uring the device to send data from the battery every hour. They also
trigger an alert signal if the battery charge is critically low. More-
over, the soil mote also provides other services, such as: setting the
soil type, conguring the measure data set, setting the water con-
stant and establishing the warm-up time. Note that all the services
are provided by using a special combination of the data sent to set
the sampling period.
32 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535
Fig. 5. Various perspectives of the Gateway Mote.
5. Results
The methodological approach that has been followed to achieve
the objectives proposed consists of two phases, the rst in the
laboratory and the second in the eld. In the rst phase all the sub-
networks were deployed (with only four nodes in the case of the
Soil Mote and Environmental Mote subnetworks) along with the
two Gateway Motes and the Base Station and Repeater Motes. The
main function of this phase was to validate the proposed hardware
and software solutions. The hardware was validated with software
versions that did not use low-consumption techniques. Once proper
functioning was assured, the next step was to review the software
in order to incorporate low-consumption modes in all the motes
except those powered from the mains (Base Station and Repeater
Motes). In this way we achieved sufcient autonomy to ensure
that the motes would function throughout a horticultural cycle (10
weeks).
The object of the second phase, which was conducted in real
conditions on the farm, was to assess the functional performance
of the devices that had been developed, such as range, robustness
and exibility.
To achieve an adequate assessment of the results of imple-
mentation of the system as developed, these were analysed from
the following standpoints: (1) from the standpoint of the devices
developed and the technology used; and (2) from an agricultural
standpoint. Each of these aspects is discussed below, with special
emphasis on the most important points.
5.1. Results as regards devices
After functional validation in the laboratory, the devices that had
been developed were reprogrammed in low-consumption mode as
the mode best suited for operation in the eld. A detailed study of
this mode of operation was therefore necessary to assure autonomy
throughout an agricultural cycle. Presented below is the study that
was carried out for the Soil Mote: The study was the same for all
the other motes.
The Soil Mote has four functional states: rest, radio on standby
for messages, sensor data recording and data transmission. Fig. 7
shows the motes power consumption in each of these states. For
its part Table 3 lists the times and the power consumption of the
mote in each of these states. The worst-case scenario was taken for
 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535 33

Fig. 6. Main view of monitoring application.

Fig. 7. Study of the devices autonomy.

Table 3
Consumption and autonomy of the different devices.

Standby Communication Sensor data Communication Average Battery Estimated

current (mA) module receiving acquisition module transmitting current (mA) (mAH) autonomy (days)

Current (mA) Time (ms) Current (mA) Time (ms) Current (mA) Time (ms)

Soil Mote 0.25 20 15 110 1800 25 125 0.5034 2700 223

Environmental 0.03 20 15 0.5 350 25 125 0.0918 2700 1225
Mote
Water Mote 0.03 80 5000 30 10000 150 1200 0.5188 6500 521
Gateway Mote (Soil 20 80 5000 NA NA 150 1200 26.4444 6500 10
Motes)
Gateway Mote 20 80 5000 NA NA 150 1200 23.2222 6500 11
(Environmental
Motes)
34 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535
average consumption, that is acquisition and transmission of data
from the two sensors every thirty minutes. The ultimate aim of this
study was to determine how much power the mote consumed on
average, so as to relate the resulting gure directly to the capacity
of the batteries and hence determine the devices autonomy. The
motes average power consumption may be determined thus:
Isoil-mote = Istandby + Ireceiv + Iacq + Itrans
where
Istandby = 0.25 mA
3
20 mA 15 10
Ireceiv = 0.03 mA
10
 3

110 mA 1800 10
I acq 2 = 0.22 mA
1800
 
25 mA 125 103
Itrans 2 = 0.0035 mA
1800
Expression (2) indicates the standby consumption. Eq. (3) expresses
the motes average consumption in receiving mode for a 15 ms pulse
every 10 s. Eqs. (4) and (5) reect a similar calculation, only mul-
tiplied by two, which is the number of sensors connected to each
mote. Expression (1) gives the average current consumption of the
Soil Mote, which is approximately 0.5035 mA. Since the soil mote
batteries are 2700 mA/H, their estimated autonomy is 223 days,
enough to assure proper functioning throughout an agricultural or
horticultural season. The consumption studies for the other devices
followed the same process as in the case of the Soil Mote. For a
summary of the results, see Table 3. As for consumption by the
nodes after placement in the eld, over the nine weeks that the
validation tests lasted, no low-battery alert was received from any
of the devices, indicating that the solar panels worked properly and
validating the consumption estimates.
To provide coverage for the devices, the base station mote was
placed inside the ofce with a 3dBi omni-directional antenna.
Because of coverage conditions in the building, a repeater mote had
to be placed on the roof from the outset. This provided coverage of
up to 10 km between the repeater mote and the motes equipped
with XStream (Gateway and Water Motes). All were tted with out-
door 8dBi omni-directional antennas, mounted on four-metre-tall
masts to avoid any obstacles.
Once the Gateway Motes for the sensor networks were posi-
tioned, the maximum coverage was 50 m between the Soil Motes
and the Gateway Mote and 100 m for the Environmental Motes.
The Soil Motes were placed within a horticultural crop, and so the
sensors had to be buried 20 or 40 cm deep because of the profu-
sion of roots. Unlike the Environmental Motes, the Soil Motes are
placed at ground level and hence give poorer coverage. When the
Soil Motes were rst installed, the tops of the crop were barely
above the ground, and so the Motes worked perfectly. However,
they stopped working some months later when the crop started to
grow upwards. This problem was solved by replacing the original
antennas with 3dBi omni-directional versions.
5.2. Agricultural results
The validation tests were conducted on a crop of ecological
pointed cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. var. Capitata) covering an area
of 4 ha, located in the Campo de Cartagena (37 44 26 N, 1 13 38 W)
in the southeast of Spain. The seedlings were transplanted (with
a population density of 7 plants/m2 ) in the last week of February
2008 and the crop was harvested 10 weeks later, in the second
week of May 2008. The soil characteristics of the crop at 40 cm
depth were: clay loam texture, total carbonates 35.4 p.100, P(Olsen)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Fig. 8. Registered data from a 10-week monitoring process.
78.6 ppm, K(Ac-NH4) 487.0 ppm. The drip irrigation system was laid
in between the two rows of crop and 1 l/h emitters were installed
each 0.20 m. Fertilizer was applied to the crop using fertirrigation.
The nodes were deployed in the rst week of March, at which time
the owners of the farm began to gather data from the WSNs. The
soil mote sensors were placed at 20 cm and 40 cm depth. During
this time there was 80 mm cumulative rainfall, moderately strong
winds of up to 65 km/h and mild temperatures (average 15.2 C).
Fig. 8 shows the data (soil moisture and air temperature) collected
throughout a 10-week period. The Hydra Probe sensors provide
accurate soil moisture measurements in units of water fraction by
volume (wfv or m3 m3 ). That is, a percentage of water in the soil
displayed in decimal form. For example, a water content of 0.20 wfv
means that a one litre soil sample contains 200 ml of water. Full sat-
uration (all the soil pore spaces lled with water) occurs typically
between 0.5 and 0.6 wfv and is quite soil dependent. The nodes
were found to function properly. This provides some assurance of
the robustness of the arrangement for similar weather conditions.
Before this technology was introduced, the company monitored
its crops in the traditional way, that is a person visited the crop
and the pond to measure the relevant agronomic parameters with
appropriate portable equipment. Now, with the technology that
has been developed, crop variables can be ascertained in real time,
and as a result the water requirements of the crops can be esti-
mated without anyone having to visit them. The farm team could
monitor in real time that the optimum conditions for the cabbage
growing were preserved (salinity in the range 24 mmhos/cm, tem-
perature between 10 C and 24 C, and relative humidity in the range
6090%).
6. Summary
The wireless sensor network described here offers a real oppor-
tunity for monitoring soil and environment status in a crop.
The system permitted to successfully monitor a crop of ecolog-
ical cabbage for the entire growing season with the required
precision. The farm team is now capable of gathering more com-
prehensive and accurate data in both space and time. Thus, the
agriculture production system have beneted from incorporation of
 J.A. Lpez Riquelme et al. / Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 68 (2009) 2535
technological advances in the eld of communications and infor-
mation technologies.
The capacity of WSN devices to collect measured values in broad
ranges of soil and environmental conditions has been a fundamen-
tal requirement to the design of the system. An obvious advantage
of WSN technology is a signicant reduction and simplication in
wiring and faster deployment, unlimited installation exibility for
sensors, and a better mobility. Despite the great potentials of this
technology some obstacles have been detected (lack of experienced
staff for troubleshooting, high cost for the sensors, power supply as
a great concern, etc.).
The good results obtained serve as stimuli to adapt the deployed
infrastructure to other contexts, incorporating new soil and envi-
ronment parameters, and to different sort of horticultural crops.
The main effort needed to reuse the infrastructure in different con-
texts has to do with the maximum distance allowed between the
farm ofces and gateways (up to 10 km).
For the medium term it is intended to develop an expert sys-
tem to assist irrigation management incorporating the climate (ET)
and soil water balance models necessary to estimate crop water
requirements, optimized irrigation programming and capacity to
manipulate the irrigation devices remotely.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the Ministry of Industry, Edosoft
Factory S.L., projects RIMSI (FIT-330100-2006-173) and ESNA
(ITEA 2006), Fundacin Sneca of the Murcia Region (refs.
ID-02998/PI/05, 08754/PI/08) and the CICYT MEDWSA (ref.
TIN1006-15175-C05-02), Ministry of Education and Science, Spain,
for supporting this work. The authors are also grateful to the anony-
mous reviewers for their valuable feedback.
References
Akyildiz, I.F., Su, W., Sankarasubramaniam, Y., Cayirci, E., 2002. Wireless sensor net-
works: a survey. Comput. Networks 38, 393422.
35
Baronti, P., Pillai, P., Chook, V.W., Chessa, S., Gotta, A., Fu, Y.F., 2007. Wireless Sensor
Networks: a survey on the state of the art and the 802.15.4 and ZigBee standards.
Comput. Commun. 30, 16551695.
Blackmore, S., 1994. Precision farming: and introduction. Outlook Agr. 23, 275280.
Burrell, J., Brooke, T., Beckwith, R., 2004. Vineyard computing: sensor networks in
agricultural production. IEEE Pervas. Comput. 3, 3845.
Camilli, A., Cugnasca, C.E., Saraiva, A.M., Hirakawa, A.R., Corra, L.P., 2007. From wire-
less sensor to eld mapping: Anatomy of an application for precision agriculture.
Comput. Electron. Agr. 58, 2536.
Chiti, F., De Cristofaro, A., Fantacci, R., Tarchi, D., Collodo, G., Giorgetti, G., Manes, A.,
2005. Energy efcient routing algorithms for application to agro-food wireless
sensor networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Commu-
nications (ICC2005), Seoul, Korea, pp. 30633067.
Gay, D., Levis, P., von Behren, R., Welsh, M., Brewer, E., Culler, D., 2003. The nesC lan-
guage: a holistic approach to network embedded systems. In: Proceedings of the
ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementa-
tion, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 111.
Hill, J., Szewczyk, R., Woo, A., Hollar, S., Culler, D., Pister, K., 2000. System architecture
directions for networked sensors. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 35, 93104.
IEEE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2006. IEEE Standard for
Information technology-Telecomunications and information exchange between
systems Local and metropolitan area networks Specic requirements Part
15.4: Wireless Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Speci-
cations for Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs). IEEE Standard
802.15.4-2006, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York.
Morais, R., Fernandes, M.A., Matos, S.G., Serodio, C., Ferreira, P.J.S.G., Reis, M.J.C.S.,
2008. A ZigBee multi-powered wireless acquisition device for remote sensing
applications in precision viticulture. Comput. Electron. Agr. 62, 94106.
Pierce, F.J., Elliot, T.V., 2008. Regional and on-farm wireless sensor networks for
agricultural systems in Eastern Washington. Comput. Electron. Agr. 61, 3243.
SDI, 2005. A SerialDigital Interface Standard for Microprocessor-Based Sensors, Ver-
sion 1.3. July 18, 2005. Prepared By SDI-12 Support Group (Technical Committee),
USA. <http://www.sdi-12.org> (accessed 16.04.09).
Siuli Roy, A.D., Bandyopadhyays, S., 2008. Agro-sense: Precision agriculture using
sensor-based wireless mesh networks. Innovations in NGN: Future Network and
Services. In: Proceedings of the First ITU-T Kaleidoscope Academic Conference
(K-INGN 2008), Geneva, Italy, pp. 383388.
Tang, S., Zhu, Q., Zhou, X., Liu, S., Wu, M., 2002. A conception of digital agricul-
ture. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Symposium (IGARSS02), Toronto, Canada, pp. 30263028.
Tiny, 2008. Tiny-OS 2.0 Home Page. <http://www.tinyos.net/> (accessed 16.04.09).
Vellidis, G., Tucker, M., Perry, C., Kvien, C., Bednarz, C., 2008. A real-time wireless
smart sensor array for scheduling irrigation. Comput. Electron. Agr. 61, 4450.
Wang, N., Zhang, N., Wang, M., 2006. Wireless sensors in agriculture and food
industryrecent development and future perspective. Comput. Electron. Agr.
50, 114.
Zhang, N., Wang, M., Wang, N., 2002. Precision agriculturea worldwide overview.
Comput. Electron. Agr. 36, 113132.