D. Fita, C. Rubio, B. Franch, S. Castiñeira-Ibáñez, D. Tarrazó-Serrano, A. San Bautista
{"title":"Improving harvester yield maps postprocessing leveraging remote sensing data in rice crop","authors":"D. Fita, C. Rubio, B. Franch, S. Castiñeira-Ibáñez, D. Tarrazó-Serrano, A. San Bautista","doi":"10.1007/s11119-025-10219-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Precision Agriculture relies significantly on yield data obtained from combine harvesters, which constitutes a pivotal tool for optimizing crop productivity. Despite its potential, challenges in data accuracy persist, necessitating the development of novel automated postprocessing protocols for yield data refinement. In this paper, different automatic postprocessing protocols were evaluated using remote sensing data, specifically Sentinel-2 satellite imagery. Various automatic postprocessing protocols were applied to a dataset spanning 946 hectares over a four-year period. Commercial sensors on combine harvesters acquired the yield data. The analysis included global (field-level) adjustments and local adjustments at a finer scale (40 × 40 m² level), employing interval mean ± n·(standard deviation) calculations. Three n values (1, 1.5, and 2.5) were tested, resulting in thirteen distinct postprocessing variations. Finally, a mean filter was also applied. The results demonstrated that the yield correlation with satellite data increased with the reduction of yield variability at the pixel level (10 m). The best results were obtained using <i>n</i> = 1 with a 3 × 3 mean filter, where Sentinel-2 pixels remained unaffected, and the average Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) during validation was 0.572 t·ha⁻¹. In addition, the geostatistical parameters (coefficient of variation, semivariance, and range within a 10 m pixel) reached optimal values. Finally, the postprocessing uncertainty was determined to be 0.200 t·ha<sup>−1</sup>. These results validate the efficacy of a novel postprocessing protocol for refining yield data in rice crops. The integration of pixel-level data from combine harvesters with Sentinel-2 imagery emerges as a promising approach for optimizing crop management, offering valuable insights for the advancement of Precision Agriculture.</p>","PeriodicalId":20423,"journal":{"name":"Precision Agriculture","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Precision Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-025-10219-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Precision Agriculture relies significantly on yield data obtained from combine harvesters, which constitutes a pivotal tool for optimizing crop productivity. Despite its potential, challenges in data accuracy persist, necessitating the development of novel automated postprocessing protocols for yield data refinement. In this paper, different automatic postprocessing protocols were evaluated using remote sensing data, specifically Sentinel-2 satellite imagery. Various automatic postprocessing protocols were applied to a dataset spanning 946 hectares over a four-year period. Commercial sensors on combine harvesters acquired the yield data. The analysis included global (field-level) adjustments and local adjustments at a finer scale (40 × 40 m² level), employing interval mean ± n·(standard deviation) calculations. Three n values (1, 1.5, and 2.5) were tested, resulting in thirteen distinct postprocessing variations. Finally, a mean filter was also applied. The results demonstrated that the yield correlation with satellite data increased with the reduction of yield variability at the pixel level (10 m). The best results were obtained using n = 1 with a 3 × 3 mean filter, where Sentinel-2 pixels remained unaffected, and the average Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) during validation was 0.572 t·ha⁻¹. In addition, the geostatistical parameters (coefficient of variation, semivariance, and range within a 10 m pixel) reached optimal values. Finally, the postprocessing uncertainty was determined to be 0.200 t·ha−1. These results validate the efficacy of a novel postprocessing protocol for refining yield data in rice crops. The integration of pixel-level data from combine harvesters with Sentinel-2 imagery emerges as a promising approach for optimizing crop management, offering valuable insights for the advancement of Precision Agriculture.
期刊介绍:
Precision Agriculture promotes the most innovative results coming from the research in the field of precision agriculture. It provides an effective forum for disseminating original and fundamental research and experience in the rapidly advancing area of precision farming.
There are many topics in the field of precision agriculture; therefore, the topics that are addressed include, but are not limited to:
Natural Resources Variability: Soil and landscape variability, digital elevation models, soil mapping, geostatistics, geographic information systems, microclimate, weather forecasting, remote sensing, management units, scale, etc.
Managing Variability: Sampling techniques, site-specific nutrient and crop protection chemical recommendation, crop quality, tillage, seed density, seed variety, yield mapping, remote sensing, record keeping systems, data interpretation and use, crops (corn, wheat, sugar beets, potatoes, peanut, cotton, vegetables, etc.), management scale, etc.
Engineering Technology: Computers, positioning systems, DGPS, machinery, tillage, planting, nutrient and crop protection implements, manure, irrigation, fertigation, yield monitor and mapping, soil physical and chemical characteristic sensors, weed/pest mapping, etc.
Profitability: MEY, net returns, BMPs, optimum recommendations, crop quality, technology cost, sustainability, social impacts, marketing, cooperatives, farm scale, crop type, etc.
Environment: Nutrient, crop protection chemicals, sediments, leaching, runoff, practices, field, watershed, on/off farm, artificial drainage, ground water, surface water, etc.
Technology Transfer: Skill needs, education, training, outreach, methods, surveys, agri-business, producers, distance education, Internet, simulations models, decision support systems, expert systems, on-farm experimentation, partnerships, quality of rural life, etc.