Paper · 2024 · Smart Agricultural Technology

Comparative analysis of RGB and multispectral UAV image data for leaf area index estimation of sweet potato

Shoki Ochiai; Erika Kamada; Ryo Sugiura

7
claims
17
verbatim quotes
9
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

• In estimating LAI, the combination of image types affects the accuracy. • EVI2 outperforms other indices for LAI estimation in a mono-regression. • Two or three image types provide more accurate estimates than a single image type. • Increasing the number of image types further does not appear to be effective. This study aims to evaluate whether the utilization of a broader array of image types and the extraction of plant canopy using RGB and multispectral cameras mounted on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) can improve leaf area index (LAI) estimation accuracy. The accuracy of LAI estimation for sweet potato was compared across different model types—mono-regression models based on a single image, multivariate regression models based on a single type of image, and multivariate regression models based on multiple image types—by employing 10 types of images based on color, morphological indices, vegetation indices (VIs) from RGB cameras, reflectance, VIs from multispectral cameras, and each of their canopy part image. For each regression model, we compared the estimation accuracy based on the whole image with that based on the canopy part image. For the mono-regression model, EVI2 from the whole image exhibited the lowest test root mean squared error (RMSE) of 0.403, which is attributed to EVI2’s capacity to mitigate the effects of spectral saturation. Contrary to the models with multiple image types that demonstrated improved accuracy, the multivariate regression models based on a single image type did not enhance estimation accuracy; this shows that the use of multiple image types improves the LAI estimation accuracy owing to the synergy of different spectral information from various image types. Plant canopy extraction did not enhance the estimation accuracy in mono-regression models or multivariate regression models based on a single image type; however, it improved the accuracy of multivariate regression models based on multiple image types, provided the image types were appropriately combined. The highest estimation accuracy was achieved by a partial least squares regression model based on VI (from the RGB camera) and reflectance (from the multispectral camera) of the canopy part (test R 2 = 0.887, test RMSE = 0.351), suggesting that this is an effective approach for LAI estimation in sweet potato (cultivar Beniharuka ). Overall, this study demonstrates that an optimal combination of image type and plant canopy extraction can enhance LAI estimation accuracy in UAV-based monitoring.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In mono-regression, EVI2 from the whole image gave the lowest test RMSE (0.403) for sweet potato LAI estimation.

Taxon
sweet potatoIpomoea batatast0
Outcome
lowest test root mean squared error (RMSE)e1
Direction
loweste1
Value
0.403e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sweet potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–107 · show in text ↑
e1

“For the mono-regression model, EVI2 from the whole image exhibited the lowest test root mean squared error (RMSE) of 0.403”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1161–1283 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

EVI2 mitigating the effects of spectral saturation is given by the authors as the explanation for its lowest test RMSE in mono-regression.

Taxon
sweet potatoIpomoea batatast0
Outcome
lowest test root mean squared error (RMSE)e1
Qualifier
capacity to mitigate the effects of spectral saturatione2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sweet potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–107 · show in text ↑
e1

“For the mono-regression model, EVI2 from the whole image exhibited the lowest test root mean squared error (RMSE) of 0.403”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1161–1283 · show in text ↑
e2

“which is attributed to EVI2’s capacity to mitigate the effects of spectral saturation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1285–1370 · show in text ↑

schema checkedfield values found in the cited quotesPermalinkReport an issue

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two or three image types gave more accurate LAI estimates than a single image type.

Taxon
sweet potatoIpomoea batatast0
Outcome
more accurate estimatese1
Direction
more accuratee1
Comparator
a single image typee1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sweet potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–107 · show in text ↑
e1

“Two or three image types provide more accurate estimates than a single image type”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 150–231 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Multivariate regression models based on a single image type did not enhance LAI estimation accuracy.

Taxon
sweet potatoIpomoea batatast0
Outcome
estimation accuracye1
Direction
did not enhancee1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sweet potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–107 · show in text ↑
e1

“the multivariate regression models based on a single image type did not enhance estimation accuracy”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1458–1557 · show in text ↑

schema checkedfield values found in the cited quotesPermalinkReport an issue

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant canopy extraction did not enhance LAI estimation accuracy in mono-regression models or in multivariate models based on a single image type, compared with the whole image.

Taxon
sweet potatoIpomoea batatast0
Treatment
Plant canopy extractione1
Outcome
estimation accuracye1
Direction
did not enhancee1
Comparator
whole imagee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sweet potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–107 · show in text ↑
e1

“Plant canopy extraction did not enhance the estimation accuracy in mono-regression models or multivariate regression models based on a single image type”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1725–1877 · show in text ↑
e2

“we compared the estimation accuracy based on the whole image with that based on the canopy part image”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1058–1159 · show in text ↑

schema checkedfield values found in the cited quotesPermalinkReport an issue

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant canopy extraction improved the accuracy of multivariate models based on multiple image types, provided the image types were appropriately combined.

Taxon
sweet potatoIpomoea batatast0
Treatment
Plant canopy extractione1
Outcome
accuracy of multivariate regression models based on multiple image typese1
Direction
improvede1
Qualifier
provided the image types were appropriately combinede1
Comparator
whole imagee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sweet potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–107 · show in text ↑
e1

“Plant canopy extraction did not enhance the estimation accuracy in mono-regression models or multivariate regression models based on a single image type; however, it improved the accuracy of multivariate regression models based on multiple image types, provided the image types were appropriately combined”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1725–2030 · show in text ↑
e2

“we compared the estimation accuracy based on the whole image with that based on the canopy part image”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1058–1159 · show in text ↑

schema checkedfield values found in the cited quotesPermalinkReport an issue

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A partial least squares model using RGB-camera VI and multispectral reflectance of the canopy part gave the highest LAI estimation accuracy (test R2 = 0.887, test RMSE = 0.351).

Taxon
sweet potatoIpomoea batatast0
Outcome
highest estimation accuracye1
Value
test R 2 = 0.887, test RMSE = 0.351e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sweet potato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–107 · show in text ↑
e1

“The highest estimation accuracy was achieved by a partial least squares regression model based on VI (from the RGB camera) and reflectance (from the multispectral camera) of the canopy part (test R 2 = 0.887, test RMSE = 0.351)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2032–2259 · show in text ↑