# IoT-Enabled Precision Agriculture: Developing an Ecosystem for Optimized Crop Management
## 5 Results Analysis and Discussion
Equation (4) calculates the average hop count for all \(n\) successful packets sent from all \(m\) mobile source nodes to the sink. In these equations, \(PDR\) is defined as the ratio of data packets received by the destination to those generated by the source; it is mathematically defined by Equation (5). \[PDR=\frac{R}{S} \tag{5}\]  
where \(S\) represents the sum of all data packets generated by all sources and \(R\) represents the sum of all correctly received data packets at the sink node. Further, the results consider the common term \"end-to-end delay\", which indicates the average time required for a data packet to be transmitted across the network from the source to the destination, and it is mathematically presented as Equation (6). \[EED=\frac{T}{N} \tag{6}\]  
where \(T\) represents the summation of time spent to deliver all successfully, \(N\) received packets to the sink by all source nodes in the network. In addition, experiments consider network connectivity, which represents the percentage of all nodes that can deliver at least one packet to the sink, and it varies from 100% to 0%. Figure 6 shows the average PDR for different cases. PDR in the static case is always higher than the PDR in the mobile case for different simulation areas. Here, PDR increases while moving from the dense network \(25\times 25\) to a less dense network when the congestion level decreases. Further, the PDR is worse for a spare network (\(100\times 100\). There are no path details from all nodes to the sink, and some nodes become isolated because of the poor graph connectivity, and the poor PDR for mobile nodes \(50\times 50\) and \(75\times 75\) compared to static nodes result from the frequent changes in the network topology with mobile nodes. The RPL route reconfiguration cannot cope with the fast network topology changes that result in connectivity loss and, therefore, the failure in the delivery of the data when mobile sensor nodes move out of the transmission range of the parent nodes. The mobility of sensor nodes in WSNs provided new challenges in packet delivery ratio and energy consumption because the positions of sensor and sink nodes continue to change, resulting in connection failure. Therefore, the node cannot send packets to the parent and is dropped. As shown in Figure 7, experiments map the node to the number of hops; experiments increase the delay with an increase in the number of hops. The delay does not decrease for the nodes at one hop from the sink; however, the delay decreases considerably for nodes on the periphery, especially for those far away from the DAG root. This is a general observation for a very dense network, which is not present in our case. The average number of neighbor node density = the average number of neighbors. Further, the term \"dense networks\" defines networks with many nodes within a small area, and such networks affect network performance. In high-density networks, nodes are required to send many more messages to check the availability of the network where the congestion and collision between packets are very high and result in an increase in the transmission delay; this requires more resources. As shown in Figure 8, the red values represent the percentage of time for which the node stayed in the listening mode and listened to the radio messages exchanged by the other nodes. The average listening percentage is approximately 1.75%. The blue values indicate the percentage of time the node stayed in transmission mode, i.e., when the node sent packets to other nodes. The average transmission rate was approximately 2.5%. The network graph represents links between the sender and sinks nodes, as shown in Table 5.  
In Figure 9, each bar on the Y-axis indicates the average total power composite of the four power elements (LPM, CPU, radio listen, and radio transmit). The link power management (LPM) represents low power, equal to 0.1 mW. The CPU computer programming unit was 0.85 mW, whereas the average radio listening power was 2.75 mW. Further, the average radio transmission power was 3 mW.