The disclosure is related to monitoring and prediction of agricultural performance over wide areas.
A modern crop farm may be thought of as a complex biochemical factory optimized to produce corn, wheat, soybeans or countless other products, as efficiently as possible. The days of planting in spring and waiting until fall harvest to assess results are long gone. Instead, today's best farmers try to use all available data to monitor and promote plant growth throughout a growing season. Farmers influence their crops through the application of fertilizers, growth regulators, harvest aids, herbicides and pesticides. Precise crop monitoring—to help decide quantity, location and timing of field applications—has a profound effect on cost, crop yield and pollution.
Normalized difference vegetative index (NDVI) is an example of a popular crop metric. NDVI is based on differences in optical reflectivity of plants and dirt at different wavelengths. Dirt reflects more visible (VIS) red light than near-infrared (NIR) light, while plants reflect more NIR than VIS. Chlorophyll in plants is a strong absorber of visible red light; hence, plants' characteristic green color.
where r is reflectivity measured at the wavelength indicated by the subscript. Typically, NIR is around 770 nm while VIS is around 660 nm. In various agricultural applications, NDVI correlates well with biomass, plant height, nitrogen content or frost damage.
Farmers use NDVI measurements to decide when and how much fertilizer to apply. Early in a growing season it may be hard to gauge how much fertilizer plants will need over the course of their growth. Too late in the season, the opportunity to supply missing nutrients may be lost. Thus the more measurements are available during a season, the better.
A crop's yield potential is the best yield obtainable for a particular plant type in a particular field and climate. Farmers often apply a high dose of fertilizer, e.g. nitrogen, to a small part of a field, the so-called “N-rich strip”. This area has enough nitrogen to ensure that nitrogen deficiency does not retard plant growth. NDVI measurements on plants in other parts of the field are compared with those from the N-rich strip to see if more nitrogen is needed to help the field keep up with the strip.
The consequences of applying either too much or too little nitrogen to a field can be severe. With too little nitrogen the crop may not achieve its potential and profit may be left “on the table.” Too much nitrogen, on the other hand, wastes money and may cause unnecessary pollution during rain runoff. Given imperfect information, farmers tend to over apply fertilizer to avoid the risk of an underperforming crop. Thus, more precise and accurate plant growth measurements save farmers money and prevent pollution by reducing the need for over application.
NDVI measurements may be obtained from various sensor platforms, each with inherent strengths and weaknesses. Satellite or aerial imaging can quickly generate NDVI maps that cover wide areas. However, satellites depend on the sun to illuminate their subjects and the sun is rarely, if ever, directly overhead a field when a satellite acquires an image. Satellite imagery is also affected by atmospheric phenomena such as clouds and haze. These effects lead to an unknown bias or offset in NDVI readings obtained by satellites or airplanes. Relative measurements within an image are useful, but comparisons between images, especially those taken under different conditions or at different times, may not be meaningful.
Local NDVI measurements may be obtained with ground based systems such as the Trimble Navigation “GreenSeeker”. A GreenSeeker is an active sensor system that has its own light source that is scanned approximately one meter away from plant canopy. The light source is modulated to eliminate interference from ambient light. Visible and near-infrared reflectivity are measured from illumination that is scanned over a field. Ground-based sensors like the GreenSeeker can be mounted on tractors, spray booms or center-pivot irrigation booms to scan an entire field. (GreenSeekers and other ground-based sensors may also be hand-held and, optionally, used with portable positioning and data collection devices such as laptop computers, portable digital assistants, smart phones or dedicated data controllers.) Active, ground-based sensors provide absolute measurements that may be compared with other measurements obtained at different times, day or night. It does take time, however, to scan the sensors over fields of interest.
What is needed are wide area plant monitoring systems and methods capable of providing absolute data that can be compared with other data obtained by different methods and/or at different times. Furthermore, farmers need help navigating the vast stores of potentially valuable data that affect plant growth.
Wide-area agricultural monitoring and prediction encompasses systems and methods to generate calibrated estimates of plant growth and corresponding field prescriptions. Data from ground and satellite based sensors are combined to obtain absolute, calibrated plant metrics, such as NDVI, over wide areas. Further inputs, such as soil, crop characteristics and climate data, are stored in a database. A processor uses the measured plant metrics and database information to create customized field prescription maps that show where, when and how much fertilizer, pesticide or other treatment should be applied to a field to maximize crop yield.
Ground data are used to remove the unknown bias or offset of satellite or aerial images thereby allowing images taken at different times to be compared with each other or calibrated to an absolute value. Soil, crop and climate data may also be stored as images or maps. The volume of data stored in the database can be quite large depending on the area of land covered and the spatial resolution. Simulations of plant growth may be run with plant and climate models to build scenarios such that a farmer can predict not just what may happen to his crops based on average assumptions, but also probabilities for outlying events.
A basic ingredient of any field prescription, however, is an accurate map of actual plant progress measured in the field. NDVI is used here as a preferred example of a metric for measuring plant growth; however, other parameters, such as the green vegetation index, or other reflectance-based vegetative indices, may also be useful.
In
Scale 305 in
It is apparent that NDVI measurements for the set of fields shown in
Soil data 415, crop data 420 and climate data 425 may also be inputs to the database and processor although not all of these data may be needed for every application. All of the data sources 405 through 425, and other data not shown, are georeferenced. Each data point (soil type, crop type, climate history, NDVI from various sources, etc.) is associated with a location specified in latitude and longitude or any other convenient mapping coordinate system. The various data may be supplied at different spatial resolution. Climate data, for example, is likely to have lower spatial resolution than soil type.
Data inputs 405 through 425 are familiar to agronomists as inputs to plant yield potential algorithms. Database and processor 430 are thus capable of generating wide-area field prescriptions based on any of several possible plant models and algorithms. The ability to run different hypothetical scenarios offers farmers a powerful tool to assess the risks and rewards of various fertilizer or pesticide application strategies. For example, a farmer might simulate the progress of one of his fields given rainfall and growing degree day scenarios representing average growing conditions and also growing conditions likely to occur only once every ten years. Furthermore, the farmer may send a ground-based NDVI sensor to scan small parts of just a few of his fields frequently, perhaps once a week, for example. These small data collection areas may then be used to calibrate satellite data covering a large farm. The resulting calibrated data provides the farmer with more precise estimates of future chemical needs and reduces crop yield uncertainty.
It is rarely possible to obtain ground and satellite NDVI data measured at the same time. If only a few days separate the measurements, the resulting errors may be small enough to ignore. However, better results may be obtained by using a plant growth model to propagate data forward or backward in time as needed to compare asynchronous sources.
In
The use of a linear plant growth model to compare asynchronous ground-based and satellite measurements of NDVI may be understood by referring to
The situation plotted in
It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the methods discussed above in connection with
Sparse spatial NDVI sampling may be sufficient to calibrate wide-area satellite data. More dense sampling is needed for smaller management zones which are often associated with more rapidly varying topography, while less dense sampling is sufficient for larger management zones which are often associated with flatter topography.
The wide-area agricultural and prediction systems and methods described herein give farmers more precise and accurate crop information over wider areas than previously possible. This information may be combined with soil, climate, crop and other spatial data to generate field prescriptions using standard or customized algorithms.
Although many of the systems and methods have been described in terms of fertilizer application, the same principles apply to pesticide, herbicide and growth regulator application as well. Although many of the systems and methods have been described as using images obtained from satellites, the same principles apply to images obtained from airplanes, helicopters, balloons, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and other aerial platforms. Thus “aerial data” comprises data obtained from satellite, airplane, helicopter, balloon and UAV imaging platforms. Similarly, “ground-based data” comprises data obtained from sensors that may be mounted on a truck, tractor or other vehicle, or that may be hand-held. Although many of the systems and methods have been described in terms of NDVI, other reflectance-based vegetative indices may be used.
The above description of the disclosed embodiments is provided to enable any person skilled in the art to make or use the disclosure. Various modifications to these embodiments will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art, and the principles defined herein may be applied to other embodiments without departing from the scope of the disclosure. Thus, the disclosure is not intended to be limited to the embodiments shown herein but is to be accorded the widest scope consistent with the principles and novel features disclosed herein.
This application is a continuation of “Wide-area agricultural monitoring and prediction”, U.S. Ser. No. 12/911,046, filed on Oct. 25, 2010.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5003329 | Itabashi | Mar 1991 | A |
5087916 | Metzdorff et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
5103250 | Arifuku et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5247356 | Ciampa | Sep 1993 | A |
5427356 | Krotov et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5506644 | Suzuki et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5517419 | Lanckton et al. | May 1996 | A |
5581299 | Raney | Dec 1996 | A |
5596494 | Kuo | Jan 1997 | A |
5633946 | Lachinski et al. | May 1997 | A |
5646207 | Schell | Jul 1997 | A |
5689742 | Chamberlain | Nov 1997 | A |
5719773 | Choate | Feb 1998 | A |
5768640 | Takahashi et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5845161 | Schrock et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5897728 | Cole et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5902347 | Backman et al. | May 1999 | A |
5913078 | Kimura et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5922939 | Cota | Jul 1999 | A |
5966122 | Itoh | Oct 1999 | A |
5969243 | Frey et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5991690 | Murphy | Nov 1999 | A |
6009359 | El-Hakim et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6070682 | Isogai et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6076917 | Wen | Jun 2000 | A |
6085135 | Steckel | Jul 2000 | A |
6128446 | Schrock et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6141614 | Janzen | Oct 2000 | A |
6185990 | Missotten et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6205397 | Eslambolchi et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6222985 | Miyake et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6282362 | Murphy et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6337951 | Nakamura | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6346980 | Tani et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6393927 | Biggs et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6401069 | Boys et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6504571 | Narayanaswami et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6529615 | Hendrickson et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6574561 | Alexander et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6597818 | Kumar et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6690883 | Pelletier | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6691135 | Pickett et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6732162 | Wood et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6741948 | Hauger et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6802205 | Barguirdjian et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6868340 | Alexander et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6917206 | Rains et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6975942 | Young et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6993196 | Sun et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7106328 | Royan | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7167187 | Scott et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7191056 | Costello et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7234106 | Simske | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7248285 | Needham | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7248968 | Reid | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7283975 | Broughton | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7313604 | Wood et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7411493 | Smith | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7465323 | Au et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7466244 | Kimchi | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7482973 | Tucker et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7508840 | Delaney | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7516563 | Koch | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7541975 | Sever et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7617246 | Koch et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7634380 | Martin et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7658096 | Pinto et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7664233 | Kirchmeier et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
7720703 | Broughton | May 2010 | B1 |
7724130 | Norstrom et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7739138 | Chauhan et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7766547 | Weppenaar et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7813741 | Hendrey et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7848865 | Di Federico et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7872669 | Darrell et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
8105720 | Koenig et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8131118 | Jing et al. | Mar 2012 | B1 |
8265835 | Peterson et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8319165 | Holland | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8504252 | Hamilton et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
20020120424 | Hauger et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20030182260 | Pickett et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030187560 | Keller et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040100285 | Rains et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040168148 | Goncalves et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040203571 | Hashizume | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040225444 | Young et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050034062 | Bufkin et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050209815 | Russon et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050223337 | Wheeler et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060061595 | Goede et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060095207 | Reid | May 2006 | A1 |
20060217105 | Kumar | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070010924 | Otani et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070076920 | Ofek | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20080125920 | Miles et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080191054 | Di Federico et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080258881 | Manson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080258967 | Manson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080261627 | Manson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080262727 | Manson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080262733 | Manson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080262734 | Manson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080263097 | Manson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080263174 | Manson et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080284587 | Saigh et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080304711 | Scharf et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090132132 | Peterson et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090136788 | Koenig et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20100100540 | Davis et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100250136 | Chen | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100274657 | Workman et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100277185 | Hughes | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100306012 | Zyskowski et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110064312 | Janky et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110181610 | Baggs et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110282578 | Miksa et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120200697 | Wuestefeld et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120255354 | Fu et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2004073203 | Mar 2004 | JP |
2007024859 | Feb 2007 | JP |
2010068719 | Apr 2010 | JP |
Entry |
---|
A. W. M. Verkroost and M. J . Wassen, “A Simple Model for Nitrogen-limited Plant Growth and Nitrogen Allocation”, Annals of Botany 96: 871-876, 2005, Oxford University Press. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority in PCT/US2011/053547, Mar. 26, 2012. |
Espacenet abstract for JP 2004 073203. |
Espacenet abstract for JP 2010 068719. |
Pawelka, Elizabeth “Make your 3270 applications accessible from PDAs and cell phones”, CCR2: A Publication for the IBM System z Software Community, Issue 6., (2008). |
Gruen, Armin et al., “Algorithms for Automated Extraction of Man-Made Objects from Raster Image Data in a GIS”, Institute of Geodesy & Photogrammetry, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 1994. |
“UpNext: 3D Local Search and Community.”, www.upnext.com, (2009). |
“You City”, www.youcity.com, (2009). |
Agrios, Bronwyn et al., “Get in Touch with Volunteered Geographic Information”, ArcUser www.esri.com, (Summer 2010),50-55. |
Qtaishat, K. S., “Assessing the Performance of Different Direct-Georeferencing Strategies”, Institute of Engineering Surveying and Space Geodesy, University of Nottingham, ASPRS 2006 Annual Congference, Reno, NV,(May 2006). |
Schwarz, Klaus-Peter “Aircraft Position and Attitude Determination by GPS and INS”, International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, vol. XXXI, Part B6, Vienna., (1996). |
Mostafa, Mohamed M., “Digital Image Georeferencing From a Multiple Camera Source by GNS/INS”, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, vol. 56, Issue 1, (Jun. 2001). |
“PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion”, PCT/US2012/061681, Apr. 22, 2013. |
Saha, S. K. , “Water and Wind Induced Soil Erosion Assessment and Monitoring Using Remote Sensing and GIS”, Proceedings of a Training Workshop, Dehra Dun, India, Jul. 7-11, 2003, 315-330. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20140107957 A1 | Apr 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12911046 | Oct 2010 | US |
Child | 14109003 | US |