| Literature DB >> 29393921 |
Jan Behmann1, Kelvin Acebron2, Dzhaner Emin3, Simon Bennertz4, Shizue Matsubara5, Stefan Thomas6, David Bohnenkamp7, Matheus T Kuska8, Jouni Jussila9, Harri Salo10, Anne-Katrin Mahlein11,12, Uwe Rascher13.
Abstract
Hyperspectral imaging sensors are promising tools for monitoring crop plants or vegetation in different environments. Information on physiology, architecture or biochemistry of plants can be assessed non-invasively and on different scales. For instance, hyperspectral sensors are implemented for stress detection in plant phenotyping processes or in precision agriculture. Up to date, a variety of non-imaging and imaging hyperspectral sensors is available. The measuring process and the handling of most of these sensors is rather complex. Thus, during the last years the demand for sensors with easy user operability arose. The present study introduces the novel hyperspectral camera Specim IQ from Specim (Oulu, Finland). The Specim IQ is a handheld push broom system with integrated operating system and controls. Basic data handling and data analysis processes, such as pre-processing and classification routines are implemented within the camera software. This study provides an introduction into the measurement pipeline of the Specim IQ as well as a radiometric performance comparison with a well-established hyperspectral imager. Case studies for the detection of powdery mildew on barley at the canopy scale and the spectral characterization of Arabidopsis thaliana mutants grown under stressed and non-stressed conditions are presented.Entities:
Keywords: case studies; handheld; hyperspectral camera; sensor evaluation
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29393921 PMCID: PMC5855187 DOI: 10.3390/s18020441
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Vector visualization of the Specim IQ (Specim Ltd., Oulu, Finland) with annotations and dimensions on the left side and RGB renderings on the right side.
Specim IQ technical specification.
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Spectral camera | VNIR 400–1000 nm (CMOS) |
| Viewfinder camera | 5 Mpix |
| Focus camera | 1.3 Mpix |
| User interface | SW Specim |
| Processor | NVIDIA Tegra K1 |
| Storage SD card | max. 32 GB |
| Data format | Specim data set with ENVI compatible data files |
| Battery | 5200 mAh Li-Ion (Type 26650) |
| Operational time | 100 measurements with one SD card and battery |
| Display & keyboard | 4.3” touch screen & 13 physical buttons |
| Camera interface | USB Type-C |
| Connectivity | GPS |
| Size | |
| Weight | 1.3 kg |
| F/number | 1.7 |
| Wavelength range | 400–1000 nm |
| Spectral resolution FWHM | 7 nm |
| Slit length | 42 μm |
| Slit height | 11.7 mm |
| Spatial sampling | 512 px |
| Spectral bands | 204 |
| Image resolution | |
| Data output | 12 bit |
| QE peak | >45% |
| Full well capacity | >32,000 e- |
| Peak SNR | >400:1 |
| Working distance | 150 mm– |
| FOV |
|
| FOV at 1 m distance | 0.55 m × 0.55 m |
| Temperature, operational | 0 °C to +40 °C |
Figure 2The standard workflow of the Specim IQ hyperspectral camera.
Figure 3The mean spectra including the standard deviation of green paper (A) and purple polyethylene (B) as representatives of the observed reference objects of different color in the indoor setting (C).
Figure 4Comparison of spectral reflectance spectra from the outdoor experiment (A–D): paper green, paper dark yellow, Polyethylene purple, Polyethylene blue. Beside the increased reflectance observed by the Specim IQ in the NIR, all spectra reveal a high level of congruence.
Comparative performance parameters of the Specim IQ and Specim V10E observed in the laboratory under artificial light conditions. Mean standard deviation of the homogeneous color cards, the mean absolute distance between the mean spectra, the maximum absolute distance and the mean relative distance in percent.
| Indoor | Std. Specim V10E [-] | Std. Specim IQ [-] | Mean Abs. Distance [-] | Maximum Abs. Distance [-] | Mean Rel. Distance [%] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paper, Yellow | 0.017 | 0.022 | 0.008 | 0.022 | 0.019 |
| Paper, Green | 0.017 | 0.023 | 0.004 | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Paper, Red | 0.015 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.033 | 0.098 |
| Paper, bright Yellow | 0.018 | 0.022 | 0.008 | 0.031 | 0.013 |
| Paper, Pink | 0.017 | 0.018 | 0.006 | 0.023 | 0.011 |
| Polyethylene, Pink | 0.017 | 0.025 | 0.008 | 0.038 | 0.013 |
| Polyethylene, Blue | 0.017 | 0.024 | 0.010 | 0.030 | 0.020 |
| Polyethylene, White | 0.020 | 0.032 | 0.007 | 0.032 | 0.008 |
| Polyethylene, Red | 0.015 | 0.017 | 0.006 | 0.022 | 0.033 |
| Polyethylene, Orange | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.006 | 0.037 | 0.013 |
| Polyethylene, Purple | 0.015 | 0.013 | 0.004 | 0.021 | 0.008 |
| Average | 0.016 | 0.021 | 0.008 | 0.028 | 0.022 |
Comparative performance parameters of the Specim IQ and Specim V10E observed outdoors under natural light conditions. Mean standard deviation of the homogeneous color cards, the mean absolute distance between the mean spectra, the maximum absolute distance and the mean relative distance in percent.
| Outdoor | Std. Specim V10E [-] | Std. Specim IQ [-] | Mean Abs. Distance [-] | Maximum Abs. Distance [-] | Mean Rel. Distance [%] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paper, Yellow | 0.040 | 0.046 | 0.054 | 0.183 | 0.072 |
| Paper, Green | 0.041 | 0.047 | 0.060 | 0.222 | 0.077 |
| Paper, Red | 0.041 | 0.035 | 0.037 | 0.156 | 0.090 |
| Paper, bright Yellow | 0.031 | 0.035 | 0.050 | 0.193 | 0.065 |
| Paper, Pink | 0.036 | 0.045 | 0.051 | 0.237 | 0.065 |
| Paper, White | 0.040 | 0.043 | 0.071 | 0.254 | 0.081 |
| Polyethylene, Pink | 0.020 | 0.017 | 0.024 | 0.138 | 0.043 |
| Polyethylene, Blue | 0.020 | 0.016 | 0.039 | 0.185 | 0.057 |
| Polyethylene, White | 0.023 | 0.022 | 0.023 | 0.145 | 0.025 |
| Polyethylene, Red | 0.018 | 0.014 | 0.041 | 0.171 | 0.130 |
| Polyethylene, Orange | 0.021 | 0.018 | 0.035 | 0.183 | 0.084 |
| Polyethylene, Purple | 0.018 | 0.015 | 0.031 | 0.160 | 0.062 |
| Average | 0.029 | 0.029 | 0.043 | 0.186 | 0.071 |
Figure 5RGB visualization of a reflectance test image to show the line pattern. The highlighted image part in (A) is visualized in zoom view in (B). On the white reference the line pattern is visible, whereas on the plants it is mainly covered by natural variability.
Figure 6Differences observed between non-stress acclimated (NSA) and stress acclimated (SA) Arabidopsis wildtype (Col-0) and NPQ-deficient mutants (npq1 and npq4) as shown by computed spectral ratios. Left panel shows the false-colour images of selected ROIs (A); NDVI (C); REIP (E); and PRI (G) computed from spectral information captured by the Specim IQ camera. Right panel shows the computed means ± standard errors of reflectance values (B); NDVI (D); REIP (F); and PRI (H) from three individual plants randomly distributed in the imaging frame. Different letters indicate significant differences based on LSD ().
Figure 7Classification of powdery mildew using the Spectral Angle Mapper (SAM) and Support Vector Machine (SVM). Powdery mildew detection with the SAM is based on two reference spectra for “symptoms” and two reference spectra for “healthy tissue”. The SVM prediction is based on 15 training samples for each class. The image contains the white reference panel on the left side.
Figure 8Evaluation for the images of inoculated barley plants by a Support Vector Machine classification model (green: healthy, orange: symptom, gray: background): Cultivar (cv.) Milford shows significantly more affected pixels whereas the cv. Tocada shows only a few symptoms in the measured part of the canopy. Percentage of affected pixels is given for inoculated (inoc.) and healthy control (cont.) plants.