Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T12:43:00.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Imagery-Based Weed Cover Threshold Established Using Expert Knowledge

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Louis Longchamps ,
Bernard Panneton ,
Marie-Josée Simard  and
Gilles D. Leroux
Louis Longchamps*
Affiliation:
Department de Phytologie, Université Laval, Québec, Canada
Bernard Panneton
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Horticulture Research and Development Centre, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Canada
Marie-Josée Simard
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Soils and Crops Research and Development Center, Québec, Canada
Gilles D. Leroux
Affiliation:
Department de Phytologie, Université Laval, Québec, Canada
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: louis.longchamps@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The implementation of site-specific weed management requires information about weed cover and decision support systems to determine weed cover thresholds and concomitant herbicide rates. Although it is possible to create accurate weed cover maps over large areas, weed cover thresholds have generally been evaluated using tedious weed density counts. To bridge this gap between weed cover obtained by machine vision and the concept of economic threshold, crop advisers specializing in weed scouting were asked to evaluate over 2,500 weed cover images (2 m by 3 m) and determine if a given image would require herbicide application or not. Using the area under the “receiver operating characteristic” curve method, an optimal weed cover threshold was established. The derived economic thresholds ranged from 0.06 to 0.31% weed cover contingent on the level of tolerance of the expert adviser. Although this threshold seems low, it is comparable with economic threshold values based on weed density.

Keywords

Economic thresholdimageryreceiver operating characteristicsite-specific weed management
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 177 - 185
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

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

Literature Cited

Bradley, AP (1997) The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Pattern Recogn 30:1145–1159 Google Scholar
Cardina, J, Johnson, GA, Sparrow, DH (1997) The nature and consequence of weed spatial distribution. Weed Sci. 45:364–373 Google Scholar
Clay, SA, Kreutner, B, Clay, DE, Reese, C, Kleinjan, J, Forcella, F (2006) Spatial distribution, temporal stability, and yield loss estimates for annual grasses and common ragweed (Ambrosia artimisiifolia) in a corn/soybean production field over nine years. Weed Sci. 54:380–390 Google Scholar
Coble, HD, Mortensen, DA (1992) The threshold concept and its application to weed science. Weed Technol 6:191–195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R (1987) Theory and reality of weed control thresholds. Plant Prot Q 2:13–20 Google Scholar
Czapar, GF, Curry, MP, Wax, LM (1997) Grower acceptance of economic thresholds for weed management in Illinois. Weed Technol 11:828–831 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dew, DA (1972) An index of competition for estimating crop loss due to weeds. Can J Plant Sci. 52:921–927 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goudy, HJ, Bennett, KA, Brown, RB, Tardif, FJ (2001) Evaluation of site-specific weed management using a direct-injection sprayer. Weed Sci. 49:359–366 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemieux, C, Vallee, L, Vanasse, A (2003) Predicting yield loss in maize fields and developing decision support for post-emergence herbicide applications. Weed Res 43:323–332 Google Scholar
Longchamps, L, Panneton, B, Simard, MJ, Leroux, GD, (2013) A technique for high accuracy ground based continuous weed mapping at field scale. T. ASABE 56:1523–1533 Google Scholar
Lundquist, JE, Reich, RM (2011) Predicting the landscape spatial distribution of fuel-generating insects, diseases, and other types of disturbances. J Sustain Forest 30:370–391 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, G, Kirkwood, RC, Martin, DJ (1987) Studies on the mode of action of asulam, aminotriazole, and glyphosate in field horsetail (Equisetum arvensi L.). II. The metabolism of [14 C] asulam, [14 C] aminotriazole, and [14 C] glyphosate. Pestic Sci. 18:65–77 Google Scholar
Ngouajio, M, Lemieux, C, Leroux, GD (1999) Prediction of corn (Zea mays) yield loss from early observations of the relative leaf area and the relative leaf cover of weeds. Weed Sci. 47:297–304 Google Scholar
Oerke, EC (2006) Crop losses to pests. J Agric Sci. 144:31–43 Google Scholar
Ritter, C (2008) Evaluation of Weed Populations under the Influence of Site-Specific Weed Control to Derive Decision Rules for a Sustainable Weed Management. Ph.D. dissertation. Stuttgart, Germany Universität Hohenheim, 97 pGoogle Scholar
Schröder, JJ, Neeteson, JJ, Oenema, O, Struik, PC (2000) Does the crop or the soil indicate how to save nitrogen in maize production: reviewing the state of the art. Field Crops Res 66:151–164 Google Scholar
Simard, MJ, Panneton, B, Longchamps, L, Lemieux, C, Légère, A, Leroux, GD (2009) Validation of a management program based on a weed cover threshold model: effects on herbicide use and weed populations. Weed Sci. 57:187–193 Google Scholar
Statistics Canada (2006) Census on Agriculture. http://statcan.gc.ca/ca-ra2006/. Accessed August 18, 2013Google Scholar
Swanton, CJ, Weaver, S, Cowan, P, Van Acker, R, Deen, W, Shreshta, A (1999) Weed thresholds: theory and applicability. J Crop Prod 2:9–29 Google Scholar
Swinton, SM, Buhler, DD, Forcella, F, Gunsolus, JL, King, RP (1994) Estimation of crop yield loss due to interference by multiple weed species. Weed Sci. 42:103–109 Google Scholar
Thornton, PK, Fawcett, RH, Dent, JB, Perkins, TJ (1990) Spatial weed distribution and economic thresholds for weed control. Crop Prot 9:337–342 Google Scholar
Tian, L, Reid, J, Hummel, J (1999) Development of a precision sprayer for site-specific weed management. T ASAE 42:893–900 Google Scholar
Wallinga, J, van Oijen, M (1997) Level of threshold weed density does not affect the long-term frequency of weed control. Crop Prot 16:273–278 Google Scholar
Weis, M, Gutjahr, C, Rueda Ayala, V, Gerhards, R, Ritter, C, Schölderle, F (2008) Precision farming for weed management: techniques. Gesunde Pflanz 60:171–181 Google Scholar
Wiles, LJ (2005) Sampling to make maps for site-specific weed management. Weed Sci. 53:228–235 Google Scholar
Wiles, LJ, Oliver, GW, York, AC, Gold, HJ, Wilkerson, GG (1992) Spatial distribution of broadleaf weeds in North Carolina soybean (Glycine max) fields. Weed Sci. 40:554–557 Google Scholar
Williams, M, Gerhards, R, Mortensen, D (2000) Two-year weed seedling population responses to a post-emerged method of site-specific weed management. Precis Agric. 2:247–263 Google Scholar
Zhang, J, Weaver, SE, Hamill, AS (2000) Risks and reliability of using herbicides at below-labeled rates 1. Weed Technol 14:106–115 Google Scholar