Table 3. Pros, cons, and an estimated price of SMS highly used for irrigation (adapted from Ling, 2004; Munoz-Carpena, 2004; Maughan et al., 2015; Sample et al., 2016; Labodia Prima, 2019; Sharma, 2019; Singh et al., 2019; Risinger, 2021; Robinson, 2021)
| SMS | Pros | Cons | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tensiometer | Capable of high frequency sampling Salinity buffering Large sensing area (8 - inch diameter) Direct water potential reading for irrigation scheduling Continuous measurements at same location Not affected by salinity Comes in different lengths | Maintenance to replace water in tube could be necessary Might have to be reset frequently in coarse or swelling soils Less intuitive due to negative relationship between volumetric water content and tensiometer reading Requiring periodic service Not useful in drier soil conditions Not suitable for fine soil texture Slow response time to soil water changes Do not withstand cold soil temperatures Manual readings and data collection Should be read daily when crop water use is high to detect false readings due to air bubbles entering the tube Soil temperatures below freezing can also seriously damage the tensiometer. It must be removed from the ground and stored before soil temperatures drop to freezing | $75 - $125 per sensor\n$140 - $155 for transducer |