| Literature DB >> 27281189 |
Ahmed G Kayad1,2,3, Khalid A Al-Gaadi1,2, ElKamil Tola2, Rangaswamy Madugundu2, Ahmed M Zeyada2, Chariton Kalaitzidis4.
Abstract
Understanding the temporal and spatial variability in a crop yield is viewed as one of the key steps in the implementation of precision agriculture practices. Therefore, a study on a center pivot irrigated 23.5 ha field in Saudi Arabia was conducted to assess the variability in alfalfa yield using Landsat-8 imagery and a hay yield monitor data. In addition, the study was designed to also explore the potential of predicting the alfalfa yield using vegetation indices. A calibrated yield monitor mounted on a large rectangular hay baler was used to measure the actual alfalfa yield for four alfalfa harvests performed in the period from October 2013 to May 2014. A total of 18 Landsat-8 images, representing different crop growth stages, were used to derive different vegetation indices (VIs). Data from the yield monitor was used to generate yield maps, which illustrated a definite spatial variation in alfalfa yield across the experimental field for the four studied harvests as indicated by the high spatial correlation values (0.75 to 0.97) and the low P-values (4.7E-103 to 8.9E-27). The yield monitor-measured alfalfa actual yield was compared to the predicted yield form the Vis. Results of the study showed that there was a correlation between actual and predicted yield. The highest correlations were observed between actual yield and the predicted using NIR reflectance, SAVI and NDVI with maximum correlation coefficients of 0.69, 0.68 and 0.63, respectively.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27281189 PMCID: PMC4900617 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157166
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Dates of satellite images at different crop ages.
Fig 2Image processing flow chart.
Fig 3The hay baler, equipped with a hay yield monitor, at a baling process.
Fig 4Yield monitor data points.
Properties of fitted semivariograms.
| Semivariogram Parameters | Harvest 8 | Harvest 9 | Harvest 10 | Harvest 11 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Count | 1677 | 1977 | 2297 | 2677 |
| Min | 0.00 | 0.19 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Max | 5.86 | 5.97 | 6.68 | 9.96 |
| Mean | 2.32 | 2.45 | 2.86 | 4.01 |
| Std. Dev. | 1.01 | 1.07 | 1.24 | 1.69 |
| Sample variance | 1.03 | 1.14 | 1.55 | 2.85 |
| Skewness (SE) | 0.33(0.06) | 0.33(0.06) | 0.28(0.05) | 0.33(0.05) |
| Kurtosis (SE) | 0.28(0.12) | -0.10(0.11) | -0.17(0.10) | 0.30(0.09) |
| Model | Exponential | Spherical | Spherical | Spherical |
| Nugget | 0.02 | 0.54 | 0.67 | 1.43 |
| Sill (Co+C) | 0.07 | 1.47 | 2.88 | 4.25 |
| Range | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.09 | 0.01 |
| Residual SS (RSS) | 1.24E-05 | 2.04E-03 | 0.0324 | 0.0287 |
| R2 | 0.969 | 0.998 | 0.986 | 0.995 |
| Proportion (C/[Co+C]) | 0.75 | 0.63 | 0.77 | 0.66 |
Alfalfa actual hay yield for the four studied harvests.
| 5 December 2013 | 16 February 2014 | 2 April 2014 | 6 May 2014 | |
| 8.7 (37.02) | 6.7 (28.51) | 4.0 (17.02) | 1.0 (4.26) | |
| 10.7 (45.53) | 10.7 (45.53) | 9.8 (41.70) | 3.4 (14.47) | |
| 4.1(17.45) | 5.8(24.68) | 6.2 (23.38) | 8.2 (34.89) | |
| - | 0.3(1.28) | 3.5 (14.89) | 5.1 (21.70) | |
| - | - | - | 5.8 (24.68) | |
Fig 5Yield monitor estimated alfalfa yield maps for the four studied harvests.
Results of the geospatial analysis of alfalfa yield.
| 0.70 | - | |||
| 0.75 | 0.73 | - | ||
| 0.77 | 0.80 | 0.92 | - | |
| 0.86 | 0.87 | 0.94 | 0.97 | |
| 8.9E-27 | - | |||
| 1.03E-32 | 2.26E-30 | - | ||
| 5.42E-35 | 3.07E-39 | 1.73E-70 | - | |
| 6.08E-53 | 3.05E-55 | 2.66E-83 | 4.7E-103 |
Fig 6Maps of vegetation indices derived from Landsat-8 image acquired on 21 December 2013.
Results of the geospatial analysis of CVIs against alfalfa yield.
| EVI | 0.35 | 0.64 | 0.27 | -0.04 | 0.39 |
| GNDVI | 0.46 | 0.67 | 0.32 | 0.02 | 0.47 |
| GRVI | 0.12 | 0.43 | -0.07 | -0.24 | 0.11 |
| LSWI | 0.33 | 0.57 | 0.23 | -0.05 | 0.33 |
| NDVI | 0.35 | 0.63 | 0.19 | -0.09 | 0.33 |
| NIR | 0.49 | 0.69 | 0.52 | 0.36 | 0.66 |
| SAVI | 0.43 | 0.68 | 0.38 | 0.05 | 0.50 |
| SR | 0.29 | 0.55 | 0.20 | -0.05 | 0.33 |
| EVI | 0.14936 | 0.08540 | 0.59248 | 0.17061 | 0.44747 |
| GNDVI | 0.15741 | 0.43419 | 0.04230 | 0.02848 | 0.06225 |
| GRVI | 0.15606 | 0.60578 | 0.05251 | 0.01194 | 0.09327 |
| LSWI | 0.87059 | 0.38444 | 0.01992 | 0.00091 | 0.00061 |
| NDVI | 0.02400 | 0.51578 | 0.00975 | 0.00124 | 0.00351 |
| NIR | 0.00735 | 0.08982 | 0.01417 | 0.00001 | 0.00002 |
| SAVI | 0.01684 | 0.07119 | 0.02984 | 0.00003 | 0.00060 |
| SR | 0.22959 | 0.27247 | 0.18250 | 0.00067 | 0.17302 |
* Significant at 0.05 level,
** Significant at 0.01 level.
R2 values describing the relationship between NIR, SAVI and NDVI and alfalfa yield.
| Image No. | Date | Crop Age | Phenological Stage | NIR | SAVI | NDVI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03 November 2013 | 14 | Vegetative | 0.195 | 0.192 | 0.174 | |
| 10 November 2013 | 21 | Late bud stage | 0.034 | 0.017 | 0.011 | |
| 26 November 2013 | 37 | 10% bloom | 0.012 | 0.000 | 0.013 | |
| 05 December 2013 | 46 | 50% bloom | 0.057 | 0.016 | 0.004 | |
| 50% bloom | ||||||
| 21 December 2013 | 16 | Vegetative | 0.539 | 0.555 | 0.528 | |
| 28 December 2013 | 23 | Vegetative | 0.466 | 0.391 | 0.159 | |
| 13 January 2014 | 39 | Dormant | 0.324 | 0.120 | 0.008 | |
| 22 January 2014 | 48 | Vegetative | 0.465 | 0.388 | 0.269 | |
| 29 January 2014 | 55 | Early bud stage | 0.224 | 0.110 | 0.014 | |
| 14 February 2014 | 71 | 10% bloom | 0.376 | 0.458 | 0.561 | |
| 10% bloom | ||||||
| 02 March 2014 | 14 | Vegetative | 0.137 | 0.040 | 0.004 | |
| 11 March 2014 | 23 | Early bud stage | 0.248 | 0.154 | 0.018 | |
| 18 March 2014 | 30 | Late bud stage | 0.146 | 0.061 | 0.070 | |
| 27 March 2014 | 39 | 10% bloom | 0.203 | 0.060 | 0.018 | |
| 30% bloom | ||||||
| 12 April 2014 | 10 | Vegetative | 0.105 | 0.018 | 0.004 | |
| 19 April 2014 | 17 | Early bud stage | 0.067 | 0.002 | 0.010 | |
| 28 April 2014 | 26 | Late bud stage | 0.060 | 0.026 | 0.013 | |
| 05 May 2014 | 34 | 10% bloom | 0.097 | 0.040 | 0.017 | |
| 10% bloom |