利用无人机开发大规模牧场方法量化牧场牧草质量

IF 2.4 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Michael T. Page , Humberto L. Perotto-Baldivieso , J. Alfonso Ortega-S , Evan P. Tanner , Jay P. Angerer , Rider C. Combs , Bradley K. Johnston , Melaine Ramirez , Annalysa M. Camacho , Alexandria M. DiMaggio , Dwain Daniels , Tony Kimmet
{"title":"利用无人机开发大规模牧场方法量化牧场牧草质量","authors":"Michael T. Page ,&nbsp;Humberto L. Perotto-Baldivieso ,&nbsp;J. Alfonso Ortega-S ,&nbsp;Evan P. Tanner ,&nbsp;Jay P. Angerer ,&nbsp;Rider C. Combs ,&nbsp;Bradley K. Johnston ,&nbsp;Melaine Ramirez ,&nbsp;Annalysa M. Camacho ,&nbsp;Alexandria M. DiMaggio ,&nbsp;Dwain Daniels ,&nbsp;Tony Kimmet","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2025.03.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The use of drones has increased in recent years for monitoring and managing rangelands. High-resolution cameras and improved sensors provide an opportunity to investigate pasture-scale sampling methodology as an operational approach to estimate forage mass on rangelands using canopy height models derived from drone data. Our objectives were (1) to compare double sampling and vegetation clipping methods with very fine 3D data derived from drone-based imagery, (2) to compare forage mass estimation between methods using different numbers of drone-derived samples, and (3) estimate time efficiency of each one of these methods. To accomplish this, we acquired drone imagery in a 1 060-ha pasture in the South Texas Plains ecoregion in June 2020. We used two different pixel sizes for the drone image acquisition: 1.5 cm (50 m above ground level [AGL]) and 3.0 cm (100 m AGL). We compared six forage mass sampling approaches: double sampling (DS-ground), vegetation clipping (VC-ground), drone-double sampling at 50 m (drone-DS50) and 100 m (drone-DS100) AGL, and drone-vegetation clipping at 50 m (drone-VC50) and 100 m (drone-VC100) AGL. We generated 100 and 500 digital samples per site (total 700 and 3500 digital samples) to compare our estimates. Simple linear regression analyses were used to evaluate relationships between drone derived vegetation volume and the forage mass derived from DS and VC. We compared three sampling sizes: 70 field-based quadrats, 700, and 3,500 digital samples. Drone-VC50 with 700 5818 ± 78 kg · ha<sup>-1</sup>) and 3,500 (5653 ± 34 kg · ha<sup>-1</sup>) samples provided the smallest forage mass estimations at a large-pasture scale. Number of samples.h<sup>-1</sup> increased from 22 to 52 with the DS methods and 1.2 to 38 with the VC methods. Our results suggest that a combination of DS and VC with drone data collection could be a reliable approach for future drone-based forage estimation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"100 ","pages":"Pages 111-120"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing Large-Scale Pasture Approaches to Quantify Forage Mass in Rangelands Using Drones\",\"authors\":\"Michael T. Page ,&nbsp;Humberto L. Perotto-Baldivieso ,&nbsp;J. Alfonso Ortega-S ,&nbsp;Evan P. Tanner ,&nbsp;Jay P. Angerer ,&nbsp;Rider C. Combs ,&nbsp;Bradley K. Johnston ,&nbsp;Melaine Ramirez ,&nbsp;Annalysa M. Camacho ,&nbsp;Alexandria M. DiMaggio ,&nbsp;Dwain Daniels ,&nbsp;Tony Kimmet\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rama.2025.03.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The use of drones has increased in recent years for monitoring and managing rangelands. High-resolution cameras and improved sensors provide an opportunity to investigate pasture-scale sampling methodology as an operational approach to estimate forage mass on rangelands using canopy height models derived from drone data. Our objectives were (1) to compare double sampling and vegetation clipping methods with very fine 3D data derived from drone-based imagery, (2) to compare forage mass estimation between methods using different numbers of drone-derived samples, and (3) estimate time efficiency of each one of these methods. To accomplish this, we acquired drone imagery in a 1 060-ha pasture in the South Texas Plains ecoregion in June 2020. We used two different pixel sizes for the drone image acquisition: 1.5 cm (50 m above ground level [AGL]) and 3.0 cm (100 m AGL). We compared six forage mass sampling approaches: double sampling (DS-ground), vegetation clipping (VC-ground), drone-double sampling at 50 m (drone-DS50) and 100 m (drone-DS100) AGL, and drone-vegetation clipping at 50 m (drone-VC50) and 100 m (drone-VC100) AGL. We generated 100 and 500 digital samples per site (total 700 and 3500 digital samples) to compare our estimates. Simple linear regression analyses were used to evaluate relationships between drone derived vegetation volume and the forage mass derived from DS and VC. We compared three sampling sizes: 70 field-based quadrats, 700, and 3,500 digital samples. Drone-VC50 with 700 5818 ± 78 kg · ha<sup>-1</sup>) and 3,500 (5653 ± 34 kg · ha<sup>-1</sup>) samples provided the smallest forage mass estimations at a large-pasture scale. Number of samples.h<sup>-1</sup> increased from 22 to 52 with the DS methods and 1.2 to 38 with the VC methods. Our results suggest that a combination of DS and VC with drone data collection could be a reliable approach for future drone-based forage estimation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"volume\":\"100 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 111-120\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155074242500034X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155074242500034X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,无人机用于监测和管理牧场的情况有所增加。高分辨率相机和改进的传感器提供了一个机会,研究牧场尺度的采样方法,作为一种可操作的方法,利用无人机数据得出的冠层高度模型来估计牧场上的饲料质量。我们的目标是:(1)比较双重采样和植被裁剪方法与基于无人机图像的非常精细的三维数据,(2)比较使用不同数量的无人机衍生样本的方法之间的牧草质量估计,以及(3)估计每种方法的时间效率。为了实现这一目标,我们于2020年6月在南德克萨斯平原生态区的一个1060公顷的牧场上获得了无人机图像。我们使用两种不同的像素尺寸进行无人机图像采集:1.5 cm(距地面50 m [AGL])和3.0 cm(距地面100 m AGL)。我们比较了六种牧草质量采样方法:双采样(DS-ground)、植被裁剪(VC-ground)、50 m (drone-DS50)和100 m (drone-DS100) AGL的无人机双采样,以及50 m (drone-VC50)和100 m (drone-VC100) AGL的无人机植被裁剪。我们为每个站点生成了100个和500个数字样本(总共700个和3500个数字样本)来比较我们的估计。采用简单的线性回归分析,评价了无人机获得的植被体积与DS和VC获得的牧草质量之间的关系。我们比较了三种采样大小:70个基于现场的样方,700个和3500个数字样本。在大牧场尺度下,700个5818 ± 78 kg·ha-1和3500个(5653 ± 34 kg·ha-1)样品的Drone-VC50提供了最小的牧草质量估算值。采用DS法,h-1的样本数从22个增加到52个,采用VC法,h-1的样本数从1.2个增加到38个。我们的研究结果表明,将DS和VC与无人机数据收集相结合可能是未来基于无人机的饲料估计的可靠方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Developing Large-Scale Pasture Approaches to Quantify Forage Mass in Rangelands Using Drones
The use of drones has increased in recent years for monitoring and managing rangelands. High-resolution cameras and improved sensors provide an opportunity to investigate pasture-scale sampling methodology as an operational approach to estimate forage mass on rangelands using canopy height models derived from drone data. Our objectives were (1) to compare double sampling and vegetation clipping methods with very fine 3D data derived from drone-based imagery, (2) to compare forage mass estimation between methods using different numbers of drone-derived samples, and (3) estimate time efficiency of each one of these methods. To accomplish this, we acquired drone imagery in a 1 060-ha pasture in the South Texas Plains ecoregion in June 2020. We used two different pixel sizes for the drone image acquisition: 1.5 cm (50 m above ground level [AGL]) and 3.0 cm (100 m AGL). We compared six forage mass sampling approaches: double sampling (DS-ground), vegetation clipping (VC-ground), drone-double sampling at 50 m (drone-DS50) and 100 m (drone-DS100) AGL, and drone-vegetation clipping at 50 m (drone-VC50) and 100 m (drone-VC100) AGL. We generated 100 and 500 digital samples per site (total 700 and 3500 digital samples) to compare our estimates. Simple linear regression analyses were used to evaluate relationships between drone derived vegetation volume and the forage mass derived from DS and VC. We compared three sampling sizes: 70 field-based quadrats, 700, and 3,500 digital samples. Drone-VC50 with 700 5818 ± 78 kg · ha-1) and 3,500 (5653 ± 34 kg · ha-1) samples provided the smallest forage mass estimations at a large-pasture scale. Number of samples.h-1 increased from 22 to 52 with the DS methods and 1.2 to 38 with the VC methods. Our results suggest that a combination of DS and VC with drone data collection could be a reliable approach for future drone-based forage estimation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Rangeland Ecology & Management
Rangeland Ecology & Management 农林科学-环境科学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Rangeland Ecology & Management publishes all topics-including ecology, management, socioeconomic and policy-pertaining to global rangelands. The journal''s mission is to inform academics, ecosystem managers and policy makers of science-based information to promote sound rangeland stewardship. Author submissions are published in five manuscript categories: original research papers, high-profile forum topics, concept syntheses, as well as research and technical notes. Rangelands represent approximately 50% of the Earth''s land area and provision multiple ecosystem services for large human populations. This expansive and diverse land area functions as coupled human-ecological systems. Knowledge of both social and biophysical system components and their interactions represent the foundation for informed rangeland stewardship. Rangeland Ecology & Management uniquely integrates information from multiple system components to address current and pending challenges confronting global rangelands.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信