2017
DOI: 10.1111/gfs.12312
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Remote sensing as a tool to assess botanical composition, structure, quantity and quality of temperate grasslands

Abstract: Grassland systems frequently exhibit small‐scale botanical and structural heterogeneity with pronounced spatio‐temporal dynamics. These features present particular challenges for sensor applications, in addition to limitations posed by the high cost and low spatial resolution of many available remote‐sensing (RS) systems. There has been little commercial application of RS for practical grassland farming. This article considers the developments in sensor performance, data analysis and modelling over recent deca… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
100
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 105 publications
(101 citation statements)
references
References 119 publications
(154 reference statements)
1
100
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this respect, we need data analysis methods that allow interpretation of eddy-covariance flux measurements and remote sensing measurements (albedo, NDVI-derived estimates of LAI and biomass; see Wachendorf et al [112] for a review of available methods and their potential application in grassland research) in terms of biodiversity. Such data (or proxies obtained from model analysis, e.g., [113]) are needed to link models across spatial scales (both upscaling and downscaling).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this respect, we need data analysis methods that allow interpretation of eddy-covariance flux measurements and remote sensing measurements (albedo, NDVI-derived estimates of LAI and biomass; see Wachendorf et al [112] for a review of available methods and their potential application in grassland research) in terms of biodiversity. Such data (or proxies obtained from model analysis, e.g., [113]) are needed to link models across spatial scales (both upscaling and downscaling).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, much time and effort is required to receive reliable data especially on large areas.Sensors attached on UAVs are useful non-destructive tools for obtaining spatial information from large and remote areas. There exist different sensor systems, such as LiDAR, ultrasound and RGB (red, green, blue) imaging to collect spatial data for a rapid quantification of aboveground biomass [3,[12][13][14]. A UAV in combination with a consumer-grade digital camera for RGB imaging represents a low-cost approach for estimating yield, which may be affordable und workable for farmers.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter used a high-resolution camera (pixel size = 1 cm) mounted on a UAV and combined CH with spectral vegetation indices (VI), resulting in highly significant correlations with biomass. VIs from multior hyperspectral sensors also show promising potential for qualitative and quantitative biomass estimation; however extensive spectral calibration work is necessary for these technique [3].To understand the spatial variability and dynamics in grasslands over the entire growing season multi-temporal studies are needed. So far, no study using yield prediction models by SfM considered different proportions of legumes (including pure legume and grass stands as well as legume-grass mixtures), which frequently occur in practical grassland farming.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As summarized by Ali, Cawkwell, Dwyer, Barrett, and Green (2016), remote sensing from satellites equipped with optical, radio detection and ranging (radar) or light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensors can be used to estimate temperate grassland crop biomass (Wachendorf, Fricke, & Möckel, 2017). These methods are non-invasive and address some of the issues encountered by the groundbased monitoring approaches described in the previous paragraph, such as the labour intensity, the temporal limitations (and also spatial, depending on the required resolution) and human bias (Ali et al, 2016).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%