Abstract
Recently, the area of passive remote sensing in agricultural fields has been developing fast. The prices of RPAS (remotely piloted aircraft system) equipment has gone down, new suitable sensors are coming into markets while simultaneously new and free relevant satellite data has become available. One of the most used applications for these methodologies is to calculate the relative biomass as a basis for additional nitrogen fertilization. In this work, we study the difference of biomass estimations based on Sentinel-2 imagery, tractor implemented commercial measurement system, a low-cost RPAS equipment with commercial software and a hyperspectral imaging system implemented in a professional RPAS system in the fertilization planning. There was a 23% spatial variation in our malt barley yield. Different relative biomass estimations produced similar and sufficient results and the observation time or the used methodology was not very critical. Also none of the methodologies were remarkably better. When we generated the nitrogen fertilization application tasks, different reasonable parameters conducted very different application tasks. This means that in our case, the relative biomass does not provide sufficient information for nitrogen shortage variation. Knowledge of the local conditions is essential.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Raun, W., et al.: Optical sensor based algorithm for crop nitrogen fertilization. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 36, 2759–2781 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620500303988
Lukina, E., et al.: Nitrogen fertilization optimization algorithm based on in-season estimates of yield and plant nitrogen uptake. J. Plant Nutr. 24, 885–898 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1081/PLN-100103780
Söderström, M., Stadig, H., Martinsson, J., Piikki, K., Stenberg, M.: CropSAT – a public satellite-based decision support system for variable-rate nitrogen fertilization in Scandinavia. In: 13th International Conference on Precision Agriculture (ICPA)At, St Louis, MI, USA (2016). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.13250.99520
Pena-Yewtukhiw, E., Grove, J., Schwab, G.: Fertilizer nitrogen rate prescription, interpretational algorithms, and individual sensor performance in an array. Agron. J. 107, 1691–1700 (2015). https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj14.0573
Křížová, K., Kumhálová, J.: Comparison of selected remote sensing sensors for crop yield variability estimation. Agron. Res. 15(4) (2017). http://dx.doi.org/10.15159/ar.17.016
Rasmussen, J., Ntakos, G., Nielson, J., Svensgaard, J., Poulsen, R.N., Christensen, S.: Are vegetation indices derived from consumer-grade cameras mounted on UAVs sufficiently reliable for assessing experimental plots? Eur. J. Agron. 74, 75–92 (2016)
Dong, T., Meng, J., Shang, J., Liu, J., Wu, B.: Evaluation of chlorophyll-related vegetation indices using simulated Sentinel-2 data for estimation of crop fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote. Sens. 8(8), 4049–4059 (2015)
Hunt, E., et al.: Monitoring nitrogen status of potatoes using small unmanned aerial vehicles. Precis. Agric., 1–20 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-017-9518-5
Bareth, G., et al.: Low-weight and UAV-based hyperspectral full-frame cameras for monitoring crops: spectral comparison with portable spectroradiometer measurements. Photogramm. - Fernerkund. - Geoinformation PFG 2015(1), 69–79 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1127/pfg/2015/0256
Raun, W., Solie, J., Stone, M.: Independence of yield potential and crop nitrogen response. Precis. Agric. 12(4), 508–518 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-010-9196-z
Honkavaara, E., et al.: Processing and assessment of spectrometric, stereoscopic imagery collected using a lightweight UAV spectral camera for precision agriculture. Remote. Sens. 5(10), 5006–5039 (2013)
Pölönen, I., Saari, H., Kaivosoja, J., Honkavaara, E., Pesonen, L.: Hyperspectral imaging based biomass and nitrogen content estimations from light-weight UAV. In: Proceedings of SPIE 2013, vol. 8887, p. 88870J (2013)
Kaivosoja, J., et al.: A case study of a precision fertilizer application task generation for wheat based on classified hyperspectral data from UAV combined with farm history data. In: Proceedings of SPIE 2013, vol. 8887, p. 88870H (2013)
Varco, J.: Sensor Based Fertilizer Nitrogen Management. Crop Management Seminar, Memphis, TN, USA, 9–11 November 2010
Nissen, K.: Yara N-Sensor – sensible sensing, testing and certification of agricultural machinery, Riga, Latvia, 16–18 October 2012. Bjugstad, N., Nilsson, E., Birzietis, G. (eds.) NJF Report 8 6: 69-70 (2012)
Bendig, J., Bolten, A., Bareth, G.: UAV-based imaging for multi-temporal, very high resolution crop surface models to monitor crop growth variability. Photogramm. - Fernerkund. - Geoinformation 2013(6), 551–562 (2013)
Li, W., Niu, Z., Chen, H., Li, D., Wu, M., Zhao, W.: Remote estimation of canopy height and aboveground biomass of maize using high-resolution stereo images from a low-cost unmanned aerial vehicle system. Ecol. Indic. 67, 637–648 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.03.036
Näsi, R., Viljanen, N., Kaivosoja, J., Alhonoja, K., Markelin, L., Honkavaara, E.: Estimating biomass and nitrogen amount of barley and grass using UAV and aircraft based spectral and photogrammetric 3D features. Remote. Sens. 10(7), 1082 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10071082
Shanahan, J., Kitchen, N., Raun, W., Schepers, J.: Responsive in-season nitrogen management for cereals. Comput. Electron. Agric. 61, 51–62 (2008)
Van Evert, F., et al.: Using crop reflectance to determine side dress N rate in potato saves N and maintains yield. Eur. J. Agron. 43, 58–67 (2012)
Rouse, J., Hass, R., Deering, D., Sehell, J.: Monitoring the vernal advancement and retrogradation (Green wave effect) of natural vegetation. Texas A&M university. Type I progress report-number 7 (1974)
Hardisky, M., Klemas, V., Smart, R.: The influence of soil salinity, growth form, and leaf moisture on-the spectral radiance of partina alterniflora canopies. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 49, 77–83 (1983)
Huete, A.: A soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI). Remote Sens. Environ. 25(3), 259–309 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4257(88)90106-x
Gitelson, A., Kaufman, Y., Stark, R., Rundquist, D.: Novel algorithms for remote estimation of vegetation fraction. Remote Sens. Environ. 80, 76–87 (2002)
Microimages TNTGIS, Surface modeling tutorial. http://www.microimages.com/documentation/Tutorials/surfmodl.pdf. Accessed 21 Nov 2016 (2013)
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge ESA (ESRIN/Contract No. 4000117401/16/I-NB) and Business Finland (1617/31/2016) for funding the project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kaivosoja, J., Näsi, R., Hakala, T., Viljanen, N., Honkavaara, E. (2019). Different Remote Sensing Data in Relative Biomass Determination and in Precision Fertilization Task Generation for Cereal Crops. In: Salampasis, M., Bournaris, T. (eds) Information and Communication Technologies in Modern Agricultural Development. HAICTA 2017. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 953. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12998-9_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12998-9_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12997-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12998-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)