Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T19:53:10.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early mapping of industrial tomato in Central and Southern Italy with Sentinel 2, aerial and RapidEye additional data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2018

Gaia Vaglio Laurin Open the ORCID record for Gaia Vaglio Laurin [Opens in a new window] ,
Claudio Belli ,
Roberto Bianconi ,
Pietro Laranci  and
Dario Papale
Gaia Vaglio Laurin*
Affiliation:
Department for Innovation in Biological, Agro-Food and Forest Systems (DIBAF), University of Tuscia, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
Claudio Belli
Affiliation:
Terrasystem s.r.l., Via Pacinotti, 5, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
Roberto Bianconi
Affiliation:
Terrasystem s.r.l., Via Pacinotti, 5, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
Pietro Laranci
Affiliation:
Terrasystem s.r.l., Via Pacinotti, 5, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
Dario Papale
Affiliation:
Department for Innovation in Biological, Agro-Food and Forest Systems (DIBAF), University of Tuscia, 01100 Viterbo, Italy
*
Author for correspondence: Gaia Vaglio Laurin, E-mail: gaia.vl@unitus.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Timely crop information, i.e. well before harvesting time and at first stages of crop development, can benefit farmers and producer organizations. The current case study documents the procedure to deliver early data on planted tomato to users, showing the potential of Sentinel 2 (S2) to map tomato at the very beginning of the crop season, which is a challenging task. Using satellite data, integrated with ground and aerial data, an initial estimate of area planted with tomato and early tomato maps were generated in seven main production areas in Italy. Estimates of the amount of area planted with tomato provided similar results either when derived from field surveys or from remote-sensing-based classification. Tomato early maps showed a producer accuracy >80% in seven cases out of nine, and a user accuracy >80% in five cases out of nine, with differences attributed to the varying agricultural characteristics and environmental heterogeneity of the study areas. The additional use of aerial data improved producer accuracy moderately. The ability to identify abrupt growth changes, such as those caused by natural hazards, was also analysed: S2 detected significant changes in tomato growth between a hailstorm-affected area and a control area. The study suggests that S2, with enhanced spectral capabilities and open data policy, represents very valuable data, allowing crop monitoring at an early development stage.

Keywords

Early classificationremote sensingtomato damage assessmenttomato mapping
Type
Crops and Soils Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 156 , Issue 3 , April 2018 , pp. 396 - 407
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Belgiu, M and Csillik, O (2018) Sentinel-2 cropland mapping using pixel-based and object-based time-weighted dynamic time warping analysis. Remote Sensing of Environment 204, 509–523.Google Scholar
Conrad, C et al. (2010) Per-field irrigated crop classification in arid Central Asia using SPOT and ASTER data. Remote Sensing 2, 1035–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conrad, C et al. (2011) Potentials of RapidEye time series for improved classification of crop rotations in heterogeneous agricultural landscapes: experiences from irrigation systems in Central Asia. In Neale, CMU, Maltese, A and Richter, K (eds), Remote Sensing for Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Hydrology XIII. SPIE Proceedings 8174. Bellingham, WA: SPIE, article 817412, pp. 19–22.Google Scholar
Conrad, C et al. (2014) Derivation of temporal windows for accurate crop discrimination in heterogeneous croplands of Uzbekistan using multitemporal RapidEye images. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 103, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wit, AJW and Clevers, JGPW (2004) Efficiency and accuracy of per-field classification for operational crop mapping. International Journal of Remote Sensing 25, 4091–4112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drusch, M et al. (2012) Sentinel-2: ESA's optical high-resolution mission for GMES operational services. Remote Sensing of Environment 120, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisette, T et al. (2005) Towards a national agricultural land cover classification-evaluating decision tree approach. In Werle, D (ed.), Proceedings of the 26th Canadian Symposium on Remote Sensing, Wolfville, NS, Canada. Vancouver, Canada: Canadian Remote Sensing Society, pp. 385–389.Google Scholar
Forkuor, G et al. (2014) Integration of optical and Synthetic Aperture Radar imagery for improving crop mapping in Northwestern Benin, West Africa. Remote Sensing 6, 6472–6499.Google Scholar
Förster, S et al. (2012) Crop type mapping using spectral-temporal profiles and phenological information. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 89, 30–40.Google Scholar
Geipel, J et al. (2016) A programmable aerial multispectral camera system for in-season crop biomass and nitrogen content estimation. Agriculture 6, 1–9.Google Scholar
Gerstmann, H, Möller, M and Gläßer, C (2016) Optimization of spectral indices and long-term separability analysis for classification of cereal crops using multi-spectral RapidEye imagery. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 52, 115–125.Google Scholar
Hale Topaloglu, R, Sertel, E and Musaoglu, N (2016) Assessment of classification accuracies of SENTINEL-2 and LANDSAT-8 data for land cover/use mapping. ISPRS-International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences XLI-B8, 1055–1059.Google Scholar
Hillnhütter, C et al. (2011) Remote sensing to detect plant stress induced by Heterodera schachtii and Rhizoctonia solani in sugar beet fields. Field Crops Research 122, 70–77.Google Scholar
Hoberg, T and Müller, S (2011) Multitemporal crop type classification using conditional random fields and RapidEye data. In International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences: [ISPRS Hannover Workshop 2011: High-Resolution Earth Imaging for Geospatial Information], vol. 38. Göttingen, Germany: Copernicus GmbH, pp. 115–121. 38–4, Nr. W19 (No. W19).Google Scholar
Immitzer, M, Vuolo, F and Atzberger, C (2016) First experience with sentinel-2 data for crop and tree species classifications in Central Europe. Remote Sensing 8, article number 166, 1–27. doi: 10.3390/rs8030166.Google Scholar
Inglada, J et al. (2015) Assessment of an operational system for crop type map production using high temporal and spatial resolution satellite optical imagery. Remote Sensing 7, 12356–12379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglada, J et al. (2016) Improved early crop type identification by joint use of high temporal resolution SAR and optical image time series. Remote Sensing 8, article no. 362, 1–21. doi: 10.3390/rs8050362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, HO, Yeom, JM and Kim, YS (2011) Agricultural land cover classification using RapidEye satellite imagery in South Korea-first result. In Neale, CMU, Maltese, A and Richter, K (eds), Remote Sensing for Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Hydrology XIII. SPIE Proceedings 8174. Bellingham, WA: SPIE, article 817424, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar
Löw, F et al. (2012) Per-field crop classification in irrigated agricultural regions in middle Asia using random forest and support vector machine ensemble. In Habib, S et al. (eds), Earth Resources and Environmental Remote Sensing/GIS Applications III. SPIE Proceedings 8538. Bellingham, WA: SPIE, article no. 85380R, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Mahlein, AK et al. (2012) Recent advances in sensing plant diseases for precision crop protection. European Journal of Plant Pathology 133, 197–209.Google Scholar
Marino, S and Alvino, A (2014) Proximal sensing and vegetation indices for site-specific evaluation on an irrigated crop tomato. European Journal of Remote Sensing 47, 271–283.Google Scholar
Mariotto, I et al. (2013) Hyperspectral versus multispectral crop-productivity modeling and type discrimination for the HyspIRI mission. Remote Sensing of Environment 139, 291–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mastrorilli, M et al. (2010) Ground-based remote sensing for assessing tomato water-status. Italian Journal of Agronomy 5, 177–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montandon, LM and Small, EE (2008) The impact of soil reflectance on the quantification of the green vegetation fraction from NDVI. Remote Sensing of Environment 112, 1835–1845.Google Scholar
Mosleh, MK, Hassan, QK and Chowdhury, EH (2015) Application of remote sensors in mapping rice area and forecasting its production: a review. Sensors 15, 769–791.Google Scholar
Ozdarici-Ok, A, Ok, AO and Schindler, K (2015) Mapping of agricultural crops from single high-resolution multispectral images – data-driven smoothing vs. parcel-based smoothing. Remote Sensing 7, 5611–5638.Google Scholar
Pan, Z et al. (2015) Mapping crop phenology using NDVI time-series derived from HJ-1 A/B data. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 34, 188–197.Google Scholar
Rouse, J et al. (1974) Monitoring vegetation systems in the Great Plains with ERTS. In Freden, SC, Mercanti, EP and Becker, MA (eds), Third Earth Resources Technology Satellite-1 Symposium. Volume I: Technical Presentations. NASA SP-351, NASA Paper A20. Washington, DC: NASA, pp. 309–317.Google Scholar
Seelan, SK et al. (2003) Remote sensing applications for precision agriculture: a learning community approach. Remote Sensing of Environment 88, 157–169.Google Scholar
Senthilnath, J et al. (2016) Detection of tomatoes using spectral-spatial methods in remotely sensed RGB images captured by UAV. Biosystems Engineering 146, 16–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shang, J et al. (2014) Estimating plant area index for monitoring crop growth dynamics using Landsat-8 and RapidEye images. Journal of Applied Remote Sensing 8, article no. 085196, 1–12. doi: 10.1117/1.JRS.8.085196.Google Scholar
Sibanda, M, Mutanga, O and Rouget, M (2016) Discriminating rangeland management practices using simulated HyspIRI, Landsat 8 OLI, Sentinel 2 MSI, and VENμS Spectral Data. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing 9, 3957–3969.Google Scholar
Sims, DA and Gamon, JA (2002) Relationships between leaf pigment content and spectral reflectance across a wide range of species, leaf structures and developmental stages. Remote Sensing of Environment 81, 337–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thenkabail, PS et al. (2013) Selection of hyperspectral narrowbands (HNBs) and composition of hyperspectral twoband vegetation indices (HVIs) for biophysical characterization and discrimination of crop types using field reflectance and Hyperion/EO-1 data. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing 6, 427–439.Google Scholar
Turker, M and Arikan, M (2005) Sequential masking classification of multi-temporal Landsat7 ETM+ images for field-based crop mapping in Karacabey, Turkey. International Journal of Remote Sensing 26, 3813–3830.Google Scholar
Usha, K and Singh, B (2013) Potential applications of remote sensing in horticulture – a review. Scientia Horticulturae 153, 71–83.Google Scholar
Vaglio Laurin, G et al. (2016) Discrimination of tropical forest types, dominant species, and mapping of functional guilds by hyperspectral and simulated multispectral Sentinel-2 data. Remote Sensing of Environment 176, 163–176.Google Scholar
Zhang, M et al. (2003) Detection of stress in tomatoes induced by late blight disease in California, USA, using hyperspectral remote sensing. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 4, 295–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar