Журнал

About Editorial Board Information for authors and reviewers Publication ethics Contacts User Account: send / review a manuscript
Archive
Volume 21, 2024
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5
Volume 20, 2023
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 19, 2022
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 18, 2021
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 17, 2020
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 16, 2019
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 15, 2018
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 14, 2017
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 13, 2016
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 12, 2015
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 11, 2014
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 10, 2013
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 9, 2012
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5
Volume 8, 2011
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 7, 2010
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Issue 6, 2009
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 5, 2008
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 4, 2007
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 3, 2006
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 2, 2005
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 1, 2004
Volume 1
Search
Find:
русский
ISSN 2070-7401 (Print), ISSN 2411-0280 (Online)
Sovremennye problemy distantsionnogo zondirovaniya Zemli iz kosmosa
CURRENT PROBLEMS IN REMOTE SENSING OF THE EARTH FROM SPACE

  

Sovremennye problemy distantsionnogo zondirovaniya Zemli iz kosmosa, 2021, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 128-139

The specifics of aerospace image processing to optimize geostatistical approaches to within-field variability estimation in precision agriculture

V.P. Yakushev 1 , V.M. Bure 1, 2 , O.A. Yakushev 1, 2 , E.P. Yakushev 1, 2 , S.Yu. Blokhina 1 
1 Agrophysical Research Institute, Saint Petersburg, Russia
2 Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia
Accepted: 29.06.2021
DOI: 10.21046/2070-7401-2021-18-4-128-139
With the rapid progress in the development of information technologies and methods of remote sensing of the Earth the computational capabilities and the volume of initial information are significantly expanding. As a result, the problem of processing high-resolution aerospace images arises. This problem is associated with data redundancy, when the plot 1 ha corresponds to 4 million pixels. In this regard, it has been proposed to initially reduce and determine the optimal amount of high-resolution image data required to solve the issues of precision agriculture, in order to avoid time-consuming computations and increase the calculation efficiency. The paper presents an approach to assessing the feasibility of the transition to variable-rate agrochemical application technologies. The proposed approach is based on a variogram analysis of the within-field variability of the optical characteristics of plants. The results show, that for the imagery with a resolution of 10 cm per pixel is the most appropriate to take into account only 0.5–1 % of the total number of pixels (with a uniform distribution of points in the imagery). The presented approach can be used in other directions related to the geostatistical analysis of optical indicators calculated from a particular set of pixels depending on the spatial resolution of aerospace images.
Keywords: precision agriculture, geostatistics, within-field variability, image processing, information redundancy, remote sensing, SAGA GIS
Full text

References:

  1. Blokhin Yu. I., Yakushev V. V., Blokhina S. Yu., Petrushin A. F., Mitrofanova O. A., Mitrofanov E. P., Dvirnik A. V., New solutions for the reference data formation to improve the accuracy of the agrophysical soil properties determination from satellite data, Sovremennyie problemy distantsionnogo zondirovaniia Zemli iz kosmosa, 2020, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 164–178 (in Russian), DOI: 10.21046/2070-7401-2020-17-4-164-178.
  2. Bondur V. G., Up-To-Date Approach for Bulky Flows of Hyperspectral Aerospace Data Processing, Issledovanie Zemli iz kosmosa, 2014, No. 1, pp. 4–16 (in Russian).
  3. Yakushev V. P., Zhukovskii E. E., Yakushev V. V., Variogram analysis for motivation of precise agriculture technology, Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii sel’skohozyaistvennykh nauk, 2009, No. 3, pp. 16–20 (in Russian).
  4. Iakushev V. P., Bure V. M., Mitrofanova O. A., Mitrofanov E. P., The use of geostatistical methods to analyze the transition feasibility to the differential application of agrochemicals technologies, Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Prikladnaya matematika. Informatika. Protsessy upravleniya, 2020, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 31–40 (in Russian).
  5. Acevedo-Opazo C., Tisseyre B., Guillaume S., Ojeda H., The potential of high spatial resolution information to define within-vineyard zones related to vine water status, Precision Agriculture, 2008, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 285–302.
  6. Adjorlolo C., Mutanga O., Integrating remote sensing and geostatistics to estimate woody vegetation in an African savanna, J. Spatial Science, 2013, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 305–322.
  7. Arshad M., Zhao D., Khongnawang T., Triantafilis J., A systematic evaluation of multisensor data and multivariate prediction methods for digitally mapping exchangeable cations: A case study in Australian sugarcane field, Geoderma Regional, 2021, Vol. 25, e00400.
  8. Bzdega K., Zarychta A., Urbisz A., Szporak-Wasilewska S., Ludynia M., Fojcik B., Tokarska-Guzik B., Geostatistical models with the use of hyperspectral data and seasonal variation — A new approach for evaluating the risk posed by invasive plants, Ecological Indicators, 2021, Vol. 121(5), 107204.
  9. Cambardella C. A., Moorman T. B., Novak J. M., Parkin T. B., Karlen D. L., Turko R. F., Konopka A. E., Field-scale variability of soil properties in central Iowa soils, Soil Science Society of America J., 1994, Vol. 58, No. 5, pp. 1501–1511.
  10. Castrignano A., Belmonte A., Antelmi I., Quarto R., Quarto F., Shaddad S., Sion V., Muolo M. R., Ranieri N. A., Gadaleta G., Bartoccetti E., Riefolo C., Ruggieri S., Nigro F., A geostatistical fusion approach using UAV data for probabilistic estimation of Xylella fastidiosa subsp. pauca infection in olive trees, Science of the Total Environment, 2021, Vol. 752, 141814.
  11. Eldeiry A. A., Garcia L. A., Comparison of ordinary kriging, regression kriging, and cokriging techniques to estimate soil salinity using LANDSAT images, J. Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 2010, Vol. 136, No. 6, pp. 355–364.
  12. Fairfield S. H., An empirical law describing heterogeneity in the yield of agricultural crops, J. Agricultural Science, 1938, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 1–23.
  13. Herrero-Langreo A., Gorretta N., Tisseyre B., Gowen A., Xu J. L., Chaix G., Roger J. M., Using spatial information for evaluating the quality of prediction maps from hyperspectral images: A geostatistical approach, Analytica Chimica Acta, 2019, Vol. 1077, pp. 116–128.
  14. Ikuemonisan F. E., Ozebo V. C., Olatinsu O. B., Geostatistical evaluation of spatial variability of land subsidence rates in Lagos, Nigeria, Geodesy and Geodynamics, 2020, Vol. 11, pp. 316–327.
  15. Kim J., Kim S., Ju C., Son H. I., Unmanned aerial vehicles in agriculture: a review of perspective of platform, control, and applications, IEEE Access, 2019, Vol. 7, pp. 105100–105115.
  16. Leroux C., Tisseyre B., How to measure and report within-field variability: a review of common indicators and their sensitivity, Precision Agriculture, 2019, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 562–590.
  17. Li Y., Shi Z., Wu C., Li F., Li H., Optimised spatial sampling scheme for soil electrical conductivity based on variance quad-tree (VQT) method, Agricultural Sciences in China, 2007, Vol. 6, Issue 12, pp. 1463–1471.
  18. Matheron G., Principles of geostatistics, Economic Geology, 1963, Vol. 58, No. 8, pp. 1246–1266.
  19. Mercer W. B., Hall A. D., The experimental error of field trials, J. Agricultural Science, 1911, Vol. 4, pp. 107–132.
  20. Moral F. J., Terryn J. M., Da Silva J. M., Delineation of management zones using mobile measurements of soil apparent electrical conductivity and multivariate geostatistical techniques, Soil and Tillage Research, 2010, Vol. 106, No. 2, pp. 335–343.
  21. Oliver M. A., An overview of geostatistics and precision agriculture, In: Geostatistical applications for precision agriculture, Netherlands: Springer, 2010, pp. 1–34.
  22. Park N. W., Kyriakidis P. C., A geostatistical approach to spatial quality assessment of coarse spatial resolution remote sensing products, J. Sensors, 2019, Vol. 2019, 7297593.
  23. Pringle M. J., McBratney A. B., Whelan B. M., Taylor J. A., A preliminary approach to assessing the opportunity for site-specific crop management in a field, using yield monitor data, Agricultural Systems, 2003, Vol. 76, No. 1, pp. 273–292.
  24. Roudier P., Tisseyre B., Poilve H., Roger J. M., Management zone delineation using a modified watershed algorithm, Precision Agriculture, 2008, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 233–250.
  25. Roudier P., Tisseyre B., Poilve H., Roger J. M., A technical opportunity index adapted to zone-specific management, Precision Agriculture, 2011, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 130–145.
  26. Shit P. K., Bhunia G. S., Maiti R., Spatial analysis of soil properties using GIS based geostatistics models, Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 2016, Vol. 2, pp. 107.
  27. Song X., Wang J., Huang W., Liu L., Yan G., Pu R., The delineation of agricultural management zones with high resolution remotely sensed data, Precision Agriculture, 2009, Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 471–487.
  28. Tisseyre B., McBratney A. B., A technical opportunity index based on mathematical morphology for site-specific management: An application to viticulture, Precision Agriculture, 2008, Vol. 9, No. 1–2, pp. 101–113.
  29. Viggiano M., Busetto L., Cimini D., Di Paola F., Geraldi E., Ranghetti L., Ricciardelli E., Romano F., A new spatial modeling and interpolation approach for high-resolution temperature maps combining reanalysis data and ground measurements, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2019, Vol. 276–277, 107590.
  30. Wang Q., Atkinson P. M., Shi W., Indicator cokriging-based subpixel mapping without prior spatial structure information, IEEE Transactions on geoscience and remote sensing, 2015, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 309–323.
  31. Webster R., Oliver M. A., Geostatistics for environmental scientists, Second edition, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd, 2007, 330 p. DOI: 10.1002/9780470517277.
  32. Wu X., Peng J., Shan J. E., Cui W., Evaluation of semivariogram features for object-based image classification, Geo-spatial Information Science, 2015, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 159–170.
  33. Yang B., Tong S. T. Y., Fan R. Sharpening land use maps and predicting the trends of land use change using high resolution airbone image: A geostatistical approach, International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 2019, Vol. 79, pp. 141–152.
  34. Yue A., Zhang C., Yang J., Su W., Yun W. E., Zhu D., Texture extraction for object-oriented classification of high spatial resolution remotely sensed images using a semivariogram, Intern. J. Remote Sensing, 2013, Vol. 34, No. 11, pp. 3736–3759.
  35. Zakeri F., Mariethoz G., A review of geostatistical simulation models applied to satellite remote sensing: Methods and applications, Remote Sensing of Environment, 2021, Vol. 259, 112381.