Integrating IOTA’s Tangle with the Internet of Things for Sustainable Agriculture: A Proof-of-Concept Study on Rice Cultivation
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Data Security: Ensuring data integrity and safeguarding against malicious tampering is paramount.
- Data Privacy: Stakeholders’ rights and preferences necessitate stringent measures against unauthorized data access or disclosure.
- Data Scalability: As farms grow and technology adoption surges, systems must accommodate an increasing influx of data from sensors and devices.
- Data Interoperability: Seamless data exchange is crucial, especially when devices and systems employ diverse formats and standards.
- Data Cost: Efficient data transmission and storage are vital, particularly for frequent or low-value transactions.
2. Background and Related Works
2.1. Background
2.2. Related Work
2.2.1. Traditional Monitoring Systems in Agriculture
- Wang et al. developed a low-cost, real-time remote environmental monitoring system combining wireless equipment and mobile phones that was powered by solar energy. This system was effective in collecting real-time information and fulfilling online acquisition needs [7].
- Dan et al. implemented a Greenhouse Environment Monitoring System using ZigBee technology, wireless sensors, and control nodes. This system focused on controlling environmental data for enhanced greenhouse management [8].
- Hashim et al. reviewed using an Arduino device for temperature and soil moisture control, managed via an Android smartphone. This study contributed to designing smart monitoring systems using an embedded micro-web server and IP connectivity, aiming to aid the agriculture sector in achieving quality production [9].
- Karim et al. developed an application for precision farming based on a wireless sensor network and IoT cloud. This application focused on optimizing irrigation and monitoring microclimatic conditions to improve water usage efficiency in farming [10].
2.2.2. Blockchain Technology and Sustainable Agriculture
- Lin et al. proposed an ICT e-agriculture system model based on the blockchain for local and regional use. They also developed a validation tool for the technical and social requirements of these systems [11].
- Patil et al. focused on using IoT for remote monitoring and automation in agriculture. They provided an architecture integrating blockchain technology for smart greenhouse farms, offering a security framework that combines blockchain with IoT devices for enhanced security and communication in smart farming [13].
- Munir et al. implemented an intelligent Smart Watering System (SWS) based on an Android application for smart water consumption in crops. The system, equipped with affordable sensors, uses blockchain and Fuzzy Logic approaches for data security and intelligent decision-making, enabling real-time monitoring and periodic irrigation [14].
- Baralla et al. developed a blockchain-oriented platform to authenticate food origin data. This platform aims to enhance supply chain transparency, promote local smart food tourism, and boost local economies, emphasizing the importance of food as a “business card” for tourist sites [15].
- Iqbal and Butt proposed an IoT-based system for crop protection at all stages, focusing on deterring animal attacks using sensors and a Repelling and Notifying System (RNS). The system records incidents in a centralized Farm Management System (FMS), integrated with an agricultural blockchain for shared ledger functionalities, enhancing meta-information sharing [12].
- Cocco et al. implemented a system offering visibility to food processes and certifications, using Self Sovereign Identity, blockchain, and the InterPlanetary File System. This system aims to safeguard data storage and access, ensuring the eligibility, transparency, and traceability of certifications [16].
2.2.3. IOTA Applied in Agriculture
- Flores et al. developed the Interplanetary Precision Agriculture (IPA) project, which harnesses IoT, AI, and DLT. The project utilizes various technologies, including an autonomous rover (Magrito) for crop performance data, Precision Habitat PRO for environmental control, a bluetooth scale for weight data, and a farm management system for data aggregation. The collected data are sent to the IOTA Tangle network to ensure immutability and interoperability. This aims to enhance cultivation processes both on Earth and in extraterrestrial environments, addressing issues of centralization and data silos in supply chains. The overarching goal is to establish a sustainable food supply and minimize the environmental footprint of agricultural practices [17].
- Lamtzidis et al. introduced a distributed ledger-based system focused on securing IoT data integrity. They utilized IOTA’s Tangle ledger for the secure processing and storage of aggregated field data, transitioning from a cloud-centric to a node-centric architecture. In this setup, each Super node maintains its data in a distributed and decentralized database, with the backend functioning as both a data consumer and resource provider. This modular approach has made significant contributions to open-source communities in blockchain and IoT, presenting a more secure and decentralized method for managing IoT data [18].
3. Design of the Study
- Local: Involves structuring, programming, and assembling a Raspberry Pi and its sensors.
- Remote: Facilitates internet connectivity and links to an online platform.
- Cloud-based server: Serves as the primary project hub.
3.1. IOTA
3.2. Raspberry Pi 4
Sensors
- The DHT11 is a temperature and humidity sensor with a digital output, allowing communication with a Raspberry Pi up to 20 m away. It provides stable measurements with a maximum temperature accuracy variation of 2 °C and humidity accuracy variation of 1 percent.
- The flame detection sensor can detect infrared emissions from a flame and convert them into an electrical signal readable by any microcontroller. It has a reading angle 60° and features both an analog and a digital output.
- The rain sensor detects the presence and concentration of water. An LED indicates its operation and features with an analog output to calculate the amount of water present.
- The pressure sensor measures atmospheric pressure, temperature, and altitude. It can measure an atmospheric pressure level ranging from 300 to 1100 hPa and a temperature range from −40 °C to +85 °C.
- The soil moisture sensor detects soil moisture and the presence or absence of water. It has a digital output that indicates the level of humidity. This study uses two such sensors to monitor the optimal water levels for rice field irrigation. The first sensor measures the minimum water level needed for healthy rice growth, while the second sensor identifies the maximum water level to prevent wastage and crop damage.
3.3. Sensor–Raspberry Pi communication
3.4. MQTT and EMQX
3.5. IOTA Dashboard
MongoDB Atlas
4. Results
- Section 1 showcases a menu that remains visible while scrolling the page. It counts both incoming data and highlights any data that requires attention. These particular data points are also tallied in the alerts.
- Section 2 illustrates data derived from analytical operations performed on raw sensor data. Starting from the left, we have the average humidity, obtained by summing up the humidity data points and dividing them by the number of humidity data points. Next, the minimum and maximum humidity values are reported by comparing the previously stored data with the subsequent data. Depending on the result, the old data may be overwritten. As in the case of humidity, it is possible that there are no fluctuations in either an upward or downward trend, resulting in the “Min” and “Max” values being equal. “Average Temperature”, “Min”, and “Max” values are calculated in the same manner.
- In Section 3, the “HUMIDITY” box displays the humidity data received from the temperature sensor. Specifically, the x-axis represents the time the data are received, and the y-axis represents the temperature data, which remain constant at 65% in this case. Regarding the “TEMPERATURE” box, the same procedure described in the previous case is followed, with the difference being that the temperature data are considered. As observed, the temperature data vary between 22 and 21 degrees within the selected time interval. The “traces” are the lines used to construct the graph; in the “TEMPERATURE” box, there are eight traces. Both boxes feature a scroll bar that appears when the graph requires more space to display the newly received data while allowing the visualization of previous data by scrolling through the bar.
- Section 4 shows a dynamically populated table with JSON data sent by Raspberry sensors. There is a data model for the data types that each sensor sends, and the table can be fully viewed by scrolling horizontally. The same applies to the quantity of data, which requires scrolling vertically to view it. In detail, the data in the table include:
- Count indicates the number of times a specific sensor sends data;
- Id uniquely identifies each sensor;
- Date indicates the date the data was sent by Raspberry;
- Time indicates the time corresponding to the data sent by Raspberry;
- Message indicates additional information regarding the data;
- Temperature indicates the detected temperature;
- Humidity indicates the recorded humidity;
- Pressure indicates the identified pressure;
- Altitude indicates the measured altitude;
- Latitude and Longitude indicate the geographic coordinates of the sensor’s location;
- Status takes a value of 0 or 1 depending on the sensor;
- Sensor Name indicates the sensor’s name, which is useful for identifying the specific sensor being considered. The value “undefined” indicates that the specific sensor being considered does not produce that type of data detected by another specific sensor for that purpose.
- In Section 5 of Figure 9, the sensors with values requiring greater attention are displayed on the left, as seen in the table. Each alert notification is accompanied by the date, time, critical message, and an icon indicating its significance. At the top, the total number of alert messages received is shown. On the right, a real map is displayed, showing simulated geo-localization coordinates of the sensors. These data can either be pre-set or dynamically passed and plotted.
5. Discussion
5.1. DLTs in Agriculture—IOTA and Traditional Blockchains
- Efficiency in Resource Utilization: This study shows that integrating IoT and IOTA can significantly reduce resource consumption. Thus, this integration effectively implements the sustainable agricultural practices illustrated in [21].
- Technological Infrastructure: This study employs various technologies, including Raspberry Pi 4, various sensors, and IOTA, a distributed ledger technology tailored for IoT. These technologies monitor various environmental conditions like soil moisture, temperature, and pH.
- Data Management and Security: This study uses IOTA to bolster data management and introduce a robust authorization system. It also employs MQTT and EMQX for remote IoT data collection, supporting up to 2 million connections on a single server node.
- Environmental Impact: IoT has the potential to mitigate the environmental footprint of agriculture by reducing water and energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and fertilizer runoff.
- Financial Benefits: IoT can elevate the profitability and competitiveness of farmers by granting access to new markets, services, and performance-based incentives.
- Real-Time Monitoring: The IOTA dashboard provides real-time insights into various parameters like soil moisture, temperature, and pH levels, enabling informed decision-making for sustainable agriculture.
- Technological Toolkit: This study uses a diverse set of technologies, including Raspberry and its sensors, EMQX (MQTT), VPN and Ubuntu, Docker, IOTA, and MongoDB, and is programmed in Python, NodeJs, Javascript, HTML, and CSS.
- Sustainability: This study concludes that the IoT stands as a pivotal force in enhancing agricultural productivity and sustainability, especially as the demand for food rises amidst limited resources.
5.1.1. Traceability in the Agrifood Supply Chain
5.1.2. Blockchains vs. IOTA DLT in the Agrifood Supply Chain
5.1.3. Real-Time Monitoring of Cultivation Practices
5.1.4. Complementarity: Technology and Business Perspective
5.2. Reapplicability of Our Model
- Database Management System Flexibility: While our study leverages the capabilities of MongoDB, the architecture of our model is not limited to this particular DBMS. The design is compatible with various other database management systems, enhancing the model’s applicability across diverse data management scenarios.
- Hardware Versatility: In terms of hardware, our choice of the Raspberry Pi 4 is illustrative rather than prescriptive. The model can be adapted to work with a range of single board computers or similar devices, provided they possess comparable technical capabilities. This flexibility ensures that our model can be deployed in a variety of hardware environments.
- Sensor Selection and Adaptability: We chose specific sensors for monitoring key parameters in the rice supply chain. However, this selection is not rigid. Different sensors can be employed based on the requirements of other agrifood products or supply chains. The adaptability of our model to various sensor types and data inputs underscores its potential for broader application in agriculture.
- Cross-Product and Supply Chain Applicability: While our Proof-of-Concept is centered on rice cultivation, the underlying model is designed to be transferable to other agrifood supply chains. This transferability is facilitated by the selection of appropriate sensors and the integration of various communication protocols.
- System and OS Compatibility through Containerization: Our model’s use of containerization technology ensures its portability and compatibility across different systems and operating systems. This aspect of the design significantly enhances the model’s utility and ease of deployment in diverse IT environments.
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
DAG | Directed Acyclic Graph |
DBMS | Database Management System |
DLT | Distributed Ledger Technology |
ICT | Information and Communication Technology |
IA | Artificial Intelligence |
IoT | Internet of Things |
References
- Cullen, A.; Ferraro, P.; Sanders, W.; Vigneri, L.; Shorten, R. Access Control for Distributed Ledgers in the Internet of Things: A Networking Approach. IEEE Internet Things J. 2022, 9, 2277–2292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, S.; Penzkofer, A.; Polyanskii, N.; Theis, J.; Sanders, W.; Moog, H. Tangle 2.0 Leaderless Nakamoto Consensus on the Heaviest DAG. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 105807–105842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKinsey Company. McKinsey IoT 2030 Forecast: MachineFi Economy Explosion is Coming. McKinsey Insights, 16 November 2023. [Google Scholar]
- Nawaz, A.; Rehman, A.U.; Rehman, A.; Ahmad, S.; Siddique, K.H.; Farooq, M. Increasing sustainability for rice production systems. J. Cereal Sci. 2022, 103, 103400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sunyaev, A.; Sunyaev, A. Distributed ledger technology. In Internet Computing: Principles of Distributed Systems and Emerging Internet-Based Technologies; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 265–299. [Google Scholar]
- Garriga, M.; Palma, S.D.; Arias, M.; Renzis, A.D.; Pareschi, R.; Tamburri, D.A. Blockchain and cryptocurrencies: A classification and comparison of architecture drivers. Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp. 2021, 33, 5992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Zhao, C.; Zhang, H.; Fan, H. Real-time remote monitoring and warning system in general agriculture environment. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference of Information Technology, Computer Engineering and Management Sciences, Nanjing, China, 24–25 September 2011; Volume 3, pp. 160–163. [Google Scholar]
- Dan, L.; Xin, C.; Chongwei, H.; Liangliang, J. Intelligent agriculture greenhouse environment monitoring system based on IOT technology. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Intelligent Transportation, Big Data and Smart City, Halong Bay, Vietnam, 19–20 December 2015; pp. 487–490. [Google Scholar]
- Hashim, N.; Mazlan, S.; Aziz, M.; Salleh, A.; Jaafar, A.; Mohamad, N. Agriculture monitoring system: A study. J. Teknol. 2015, 77, 53–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karim, F.; Karim, F. Monitoring system using web of things in precision agriculture. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2017, 110, 402–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, Y.P.; Petway, J.R.; Anthony, J.; Mukhtar, H.; Liao, S.W.; Chou, C.F.; Ho, Y.F. Blockchain: The evolutionary next step for ICT e-agriculture. Environments 2017, 4, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iqbal, R.; Butt, T.A. Safe farming as a service of blockchain-based supply chain management for improved transparency. CLuster Comput. 2020, 23, 2139–2150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patil, A.S.; Tama, B.A.; Park, Y.; Rhee, K.H. A framework for blockchain based secure smart green house farming. In Proceedings of the Advances in Computer Science and Ubiquitous Computing: CSA-CUTE 17, Taichung, Taiwan, 18–20 December 2018; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 1162–1167. [Google Scholar]
- Munir, M.S.; Bajwa, I.S.; Cheema, S.M. An intelligent and secure smart watering system using fuzzy logic and blockchain. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2019, 77, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baralla, G.; Ibba, S.; Marchesi, M.; Tonelli, R.; Missineo, S. A blockchain based system to ensure transparency and reliability in food supply chain. In Proceedings of the Euro-Par 2018: Parallel Processing Workshops: Euro-Par 2018 International Workshops, Turin, Italy, 27–28 August 2018; Revised Selected Papers 24. Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 379–391. [Google Scholar]
- Cocco, L.; Tonelli, R.; Marchesi, M. Blockchain and self sovereign identity to support quality in the food supply chain. Future Internet 2021, 13, 301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flores, A.; Morales, A.; Campos, G.; Gelso, J. Energy Efficiency Using IOTA Tangle for Greenhouse Agriculture. In Proceedings of the Annual International Conference on Information Management and Big Data, Virtual Event, 1–3 December 2021; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 122–138. [Google Scholar]
- Lamtzidis, O.; Pettas, D.; Gialelis, J. A novel combination of distributed ledger technologies on internet of things: Use case on precision agriculture. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2019, 2, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prem Kumar, G.E.; Lydia, M. Impact of Internet of Things in Agriculture. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Data Science and Applications, Kolkata, India, 10–11 April 2021; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 209–219. [Google Scholar]
- Farooq, M.S.; Riaz, S.; Abid, A.; Umer, T.; Zikria, Y.B. Role of IoT Technology in Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review. Electronics 2020, 9, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mboyerwa, P.A.; Kibret, K.; Mtakwa, P.; Aschalew, A. Greenhouse gas emissions in irrigated paddy rice as influenced by crop management practices and nitrogen fertilization rates in eastern Tanzania. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2022, 6, 868479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shabandri, B.; Maheshwari, P. Enhancing IoT Security and Privacy Using Distributed Ledgers with IOTA and the Tangle. In Proceedings of the 2019 6th International Conference on Signal Processing and Integrated Networks (SPIN), Noida, India, 7–8 March 2019; pp. 1069–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palma, S.D.; Pareschi, R.; Zappone, F. What is your Distributed (Hyper)Ledger? In Proceedings of the 4th IEEE/ACM International Workshop on Emerging Trends in Software Engineering for Blockchain, WETSEB@ICSE 2021, IEEE, Madrid, Spain, 31 May 2021; pp. 27–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cocco, L.; Mannaro, K.; Tonelli, R.; Mariani, L.; Lodi, M.B.; Melis, A.; Simone, M.; Fanti, A. A Blockchain-Based Traceability System in Agri-Food SME: Case Study of a Traditional Bakery. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 62899–62915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marchesi, L.; Mannaro, K.; Marchesi, M.; Tonelli, R. Automatic Generation of Ethereum-Based Smart Contracts for Agri-Food Traceability System. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 50363–50383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panarello, A.; Tapas, N.; Merlino, G.; Longo, F.; Puliafito, A. Blockchain and IOT integration: A systematic survey. Sensors 2018, 18, 2575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tran, N.K.; Babar, M.A.; Boan, J. Integrating blockchain and Internet of Things systems: A systematic review on objectives and designs. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2021, 173, 102844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barboni, M.; Morichetta, A.; Polini, A. Smart contract testing: Challenges and opportunities. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Emerging Trends in Software Engineering for Blockchain, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 19 May 2022; pp. 21–24. [Google Scholar]
- Popov, S.; Lu, Q. IOTA: Feeless and free. IEEE Blockchain Tech. Briefs 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Bottoni, P.; Gessa, N.; Massa, G.; Pareschi, R.; Selim, H.; Arcuri, E. Intelligent Smart Contracts for Innovative Supply Chain Management. Front. Blockchain 2020, 3, 535787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bottoni, P.; Di Ciccio, C.; Pareschi, R.; Tortola, D.; Gessa, N.; Massa, G. Blockchain-as-a-Service and Blockchain-as-a-Partner: Implementation options for supply chain optimization. Blockchain Res. Appl. 2023, 4, 100119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salzano, F.; Pareschi, R.; Marchesi, L.; Tonelli, R. Blockchain-based Information Ecosystems. In Proceedings of the Fifth Distributed Ledger Technology Workshop (DLT 2023), Bologna, Italy, 25–26 May 2023; CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org). Mori, P., Visconti, I., Bistarelli, S., Eds.; CEUR: Aachen, Germany, 2023; Volume 3460. [Google Scholar]
Port Number | Description |
---|---|
1883 | MQTT/TCP protocol port |
11883 | Internal port of MQTT/TCP protocol, used only for the local client connection |
8883 | MQTT/SSL protocol port |
8083 | MQTT/WS protocol port |
8084 | MQTT/WSS protocol port |
Capability | Ethereum | Hyperledger Fabric | IOTA |
---|---|---|---|
Traceability | Yes | Yes | Limited |
Real-Time Monitoring | Limited | Limited | Yes |
Transaction Fees | Yes | No | No |
Scalability | Moderate | High | High |
Data Integrity | High | High | High |
Privacy | Limited | High | Moderate |
Smart Contracts | Yes | Yes | Yes (limited) |
Interoperability | Moderate | High | Moderate |
Regulatory Compliance | Moderate | High | Moderate |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pullo, S.; Pareschi, R.; Piantadosi, V.; Salzano, F.; Carlini, R. Integrating IOTA’s Tangle with the Internet of Things for Sustainable Agriculture: A Proof-of-Concept Study on Rice Cultivation. Informatics 2024, 11, 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11010003
Pullo S, Pareschi R, Piantadosi V, Salzano F, Carlini R. Integrating IOTA’s Tangle with the Internet of Things for Sustainable Agriculture: A Proof-of-Concept Study on Rice Cultivation. Informatics. 2024; 11(1):3. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11010003
Chicago/Turabian StylePullo, Sandro, Remo Pareschi, Valentina Piantadosi, Francesco Salzano, and Roberto Carlini. 2024. "Integrating IOTA’s Tangle with the Internet of Things for Sustainable Agriculture: A Proof-of-Concept Study on Rice Cultivation" Informatics 11, no. 1: 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11010003
APA StylePullo, S., Pareschi, R., Piantadosi, V., Salzano, F., & Carlini, R. (2024). Integrating IOTA’s Tangle with the Internet of Things for Sustainable Agriculture: A Proof-of-Concept Study on Rice Cultivation. Informatics, 11(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11010003