Abstract
ABSTRACT Amicrocomputer-based image processing procedure was developed for evaluating the percent canopy cover of crops from overhead slide photographs. The procedure was designed to be non-destructive and use the entire image for calculating canopy cover. Statistical comparisons are provided between a visual inspection method, the computer procedure, and leaf area measurements with a leaf area meter. In comparison to leaf area measurements, the computer procedure produced acceptable canopy cover estimates, while the visual inspection procedure estimates were larger than the leaf area measurement results. Under actual field situations, the computer-based procedure also worked well, however, the computer method could process only 43 of the 50 slides in the sample. Although human error was reduced by the computer procedure, time requirements for processing were increased. The cost of the image processing system is a limiting factor for wide use of the technique unless the computer and camera system have additional applications.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
The computer procedure produced acceptable canopy cover estimates against leaf area measurements.
Verbatim
e0“In comparison to leaf area measurements, the computer procedure produced acceptable canopy cover estimates”
Claim · model-written summary
Visual inspection estimates were larger than leaf area measurement results.
Verbatim
e0“the visual inspection procedure estimates were larger than the leaf area measurement results”
t0“Plant”
Claim · model-written summary
The computer procedure worked well in field situations.
Not reportedComparatorValue
Verbatim
e0“Under actual field situations, the computer-based procedure also worked well”
t0“Plant”
Claim · model-written summary
The computer method processed 43 of 50 slides.
Verbatim
e0“the computer method could process only 43 of the 50 slides in the sample”
t0“Plant”
Claim · model-written summary
The computer procedure reduced human error.
Not reportedComparatorValue
Verbatim
e0“human error was reduced by the computer procedure”
t0“Plant”
Claim · model-written summary
The computer procedure increased processing time.
Not reportedComparatorValue
Verbatim
e0“time requirements for processing were increased”
t0“Plant”
Claim · model-written summary
System cost limits wide use unless computer and camera have other applications.
Verbatim
e0“The cost of the image processing system is a limiting factor for wide use of the technique unless the computer and camera system have additional applications”
t0“Plant”