| Literature DB >> 22163966 |
Angela Ribeiro1, Juan Ranz, Xavier P Burgos-Artizzu, Gonzalo Pajares, Maria J Sanchez del Arco, Luis Navarrete.
Abstract
Determination of the soil coverage by crop residues after ploughing is a fundamental element of Conservation Agriculture. This paper presents the application of genetic algorithms employed during the fine tuning of the segmentation process of a digital image with the aim of automatically quantifying the residue coverage. In other words, the objective is to achieve a segmentation that would permit the discrimination of the texture of the residue so that the output of the segmentation process is a binary image in which residue zones are isolated from the rest. The RGB images used come from a sample of images in which sections of terrain were photographed with a conventional camera positioned in zenith orientation atop a tripod. The images were taken outdoors under uncontrolled lighting conditions. Up to 92% similarity was achieved between the images obtained by the segmentation process proposed in this paper and the templates made by an elaborate manual tracing process. In addition to the proposed segmentation procedure and the fine tuning procedure that was developed, a global quantification of the soil coverage by residues for the sampled area was achieved that differed by only 0.85% from the quantification obtained using template images. Moreover, the proposed method does not depend on the type of residue present in the image. The study was conducted at the experimental farm "El Encín" in Alcalá de Henares (Madrid, Spain).Entities:
Keywords: computer vision; conservation agriculture; estimation of coverage by crop residue; genetic algorithms; texture segmentation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22163966 PMCID: PMC3231416 DOI: 10.3390/s110606480
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.Examples of images taken at different sampling locations.
Figure 2.Images of sampled locations and binary template images manually produced by a specialist.
Figure 3.Original and binary images of weeds.
Final values of the segmentation parameters for a training set of 20 images selected at random.
| −8.3675 | |
| 0.7128 | |
| 8.9926 | |
| 93.316 |
Figure 4.The first row shows negatives of the template images produced manually. The second row shows images obtained from the finely-tuned segmentation method.
Figure 5.Plot of the percentages of coverage obtained from the template images (green) and from the computed images (pink).
Figure 6.Plot of the differences in percentage of coverage between the template images and the computed images.