Table 1 Comparison between EGYPADS and MZs delineation and spatial analysis software applications.
EGYPADS | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IoT-enabled | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ |
Desktop/Web/mobile app interfaces support | ✖/✓/✖ | ✖/✓/✖ | ✓/✖/✖ | ✖/✓/✖ | ✓/✖/✖ | ✖/✓/✖ | ✖/✓/✖ | ✖/✓/✖ |
LSA support | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ |
Import /export data and MZ maps | ✓/✓ | ✓/✓ | ✓/✓ | ✓/✓ | ✓/✓ | ✖/✖ | ✓/✓ | ✓/✓ |
Flexibility in formulating events | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ |
Different types of alerts | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ |
Remote control possibility | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ |
Supporting more than one land at a time | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✓ |
Supporting any land shape and area | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ |
Supporting more than 100 node/land or sample/land | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ |
Supporting more than one crop | ✖ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Heterogeneity and large number of parameters | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ |
Historical data visualization and analysis | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Virtual coordinates 3D spatial analysis | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ |
Real-time monitoring of the field nodes status | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ |
Different users with different authorities and privileges | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ | ✖ |
User-friendly or ease of use | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Extensibility to integrate the latest research development | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Accuracy measures | ||||||||
Spatial information quality | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✖ |
Zoning efficiency | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ | ✓ |
How current is the data | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ | ✖ | ✖ |
Meeting required spatial resolution | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✖ | ✓ |
