2023
DOI: 10.3390/rs15245767
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimating the SPAD of Litchi in the Growth Period and Autumn Shoot Period Based on UAV Multi-Spectrum

Jiaxing Xie,
Jiaxin Wang,
Yufeng Chen
et al.

Abstract: The relative content of chlorophyll, assessed through the soil and plant analyzer development (SPAD), serves as a reliable indicator reflecting crop photosynthesis and the nutritional status during crop growth and development. In this study, we employed machine learning methods utilizing unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) multi-spectrum remote sensing to predict the SPAD value of litchi fruit. Input features consisted of various vegetation indices and texture features during distinct growth periods, and to streamli… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
(39 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Among the four feature input sets of texture information, SVR consistently had the highest R 2 , RPD, and the smallest RMSE, (R 2 = 0.688, RMSE = 0.714%, and RPD = 1.783). This precision is lower than that of the SPAD estimation model constructed by Xie et al [83] using the SVR algorithm combined with texture features based on the Litchi Fruit Growth Period but higher than the model built using the combination of the Litchi Fruit Growth Period and the Autumn Shoot Period. Models based on a single growth period are more robust, as they do not have to account for the impact of canopy heterogeneity across multiple growth stages on model estimation, further demonstrating the potential of the TFCIs developed in this study for LNC estimation.…”
Section: The Comparability Of Various Machine Learning Algorithms In ...mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Among the four feature input sets of texture information, SVR consistently had the highest R 2 , RPD, and the smallest RMSE, (R 2 = 0.688, RMSE = 0.714%, and RPD = 1.783). This precision is lower than that of the SPAD estimation model constructed by Xie et al [83] using the SVR algorithm combined with texture features based on the Litchi Fruit Growth Period but higher than the model built using the combination of the Litchi Fruit Growth Period and the Autumn Shoot Period. Models based on a single growth period are more robust, as they do not have to account for the impact of canopy heterogeneity across multiple growth stages on model estimation, further demonstrating the potential of the TFCIs developed in this study for LNC estimation.…”
Section: The Comparability Of Various Machine Learning Algorithms In ...mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Compared with using vegetation indices or texture features alone, the combination of these two in combination 4 could offer a more comprehensive feature description. Vegetation indices typically reflect the growth status and photosynthetic activity of vegetation [ 34 ], while texture features provide information about the structure and spatial distribution of vegetation canopies [ 35 ]. By combining these two features, the model could more accurately capture the complex relationship between leaf moisture content and vegetation growth status.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to the method based on time series VI, several studies have underscored the potential of canopy spectral responses for inverting field crop parameters [11,24]. Subsequently, methods are employed to derive crop maturity information based on these crop parameters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%