Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mass-Based Image Analysis for Evaluating Straw Cover Under High-Residue Farming Conditions in Rice–Wheat Cropping System

  • Full-Length Research Article
  • Published:
Agricultural Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Estimation of crop residue distribution in paddy fields is extremely crucial especially in tight crop rotation areas that produce large volumes of straw causing germination problems in the following crop. Our objective was to develop an accurate and easy-to-handle field method to quantify the proportion of ground cover. Mass and cover relationships were investigated and analyzed to evaluate straw distribution on the soil surface, by comparing surface cover from three different combine harvesters in a rice–wheat (R–W) cropping system. For each harvester, straw distribution on the ground was measured and virtually reconstructed, and then the straw stacked layers analyzed. The mean straw mass distribution and percent surface cover measured in 2014 and 2015 ranged between 4200–12,000 kg/ha and 60–97%, respectively, for all the harvesters. Flat straw mass was higher than standing stubble mass in all treatments. The most important observation is that the distribution pattern of straw depended on instantaneous material feed rate through the harvester; the higher the feed rate, the poorer the straw distribution uniformity. The Xinjiang Ceres 4LZ-2.5 harvester outperformed all the other harvesters. These findings can improve the estimation of straw cover for tillage straw incorporation or no-till straw return fields and indicates that straw condition should be considered in mass-to-cover relationships.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aguilar J, Evans R, Vigil M, Daughtry CS (2012) Spectral estimates of crop residue cover and density for standing and flat wheat stubble. Agron J 104:271–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bauer T, Strauss P (2014) A rule-based image analysis approach for calculating residues and vegetation cover under field conditions. CATENA 113:363–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Behrens T, Diepenbrock W (2006) Using digital image analysis to describe canopies of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) during vegetative developmental stages. J Agron Crop Sci 192:295–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Blanchard SD, Jakubowski MK, Kelly M (2011) Object-based image analysis of downed logs in disturbed forested landscapes using lidar. Remote Sens 3:2420–2439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bonham CD, Clark DL (2005) Quantification of plant cover estimates. Grassland Sci 51:129–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Booth DT, Cox SE, Berryman RD (2006) Point sampling digital imagery with ‘SamplePoint’. Environ Monit Assess 123:97–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen Z, Chen W, Leblanc SG, Henry GH, Chen W (2010) Digital photograph analysis for measuring percent plant cover in the Arctic. Arct Inst North Am 63:315–326

    Google Scholar 

  8. Choudhury SG, Srivastava S, Singh R, Chaudhari S, Sharma D, Singh S, Sarkar D (2014) Tillage and residue management effects on soil aggregation, organic carbon dynamics and yield attribute in rice–wheat cropping system under reclaimed sodic soil. Soil Till Res 136:76–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Corak M (1993) Is unemployment insurance addictive? Evidence from the benefit durations of repeat users. Ind Lab Relat Rev, Cornell Univ 47:62–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Daughtry C, Hunt E, McMurtrey J (2004) Assessing crop residue cover using shortwave infrared reflectance. Remote Sens Environ 90:126–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dethier MN, Graham ES, Cohen S, Tear LM (1993) Visual versus random-point percent cover estimations: ‘objective’ is not always better. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 96:93–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Govaerts B, Sayre KD, Deckers J (2005) Stable high yields with zero tillage and permanent bed planting? Field Crops Res 94:33–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hofmann P, Strobl J, Blaschke T (2008) A method for adapting global image segmentation methods to images of different resolutions. Int Arch Photogr, Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 38:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  14. Huang X, Kurata N, Wei X, Wang Z-X, Wang A, Zhao Q, Zhao Y, Liu K, Lu H, Li W (2012) A map of rice genome variation reveals the origin of cultivated rice. Nature 490:497–501

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hulet A, Roundy BA, Petersen SL, Jensen RR, Bunting SC (2014) Cover estimations using object-based image analysis rule sets developed across multiple scales in pinyon-juniper woodlands. Rangel Ecol Manag 67:318–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Johnson RA, Reicosky DC (2006) Estimating source carbon from crop residues, roots and rhizodeposits using the national grain-yield database. Agron J 98:622–636

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Karami A (2012) Organic resource management: Impacts on soil aggregate stability and other soil physico-chemical properties. Agr Ecosyst Environ 148:22–28

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kennedy C, Smith C, Cooley D (2001) Observations of change in the cover of polargrass, (Arctagrostis latifolia), and arctic lupine, lupinus arcticus. Upl Tundra Herschel Island, Yukon Territory Canad Field-Nat 115:323–328

    Google Scholar 

  19. Klepper B, Rasmussen PE, Rickman RW (1983) Fertilizer placement for cereal root access. J Soil Water Conserv 38:250–252

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kumhala F, Kroulik M, Vasak J, Kviz Z (2002) The influence of CASE IH combine harvester’s straw and husk distributor design changes on distribution quality. Sci Agric Bohem (Czech Repub) 33:36–40

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kvíz Z, Kumhála F, Masek J, Kroulík M, Procházka P (2003) The distribution quality of plant residues after harvest by different combine harvesters. Sci Agric Bohem (Czech Repub) 34:146–151

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lenka NK, Lal R (2013) Soil aggregation and greenhouse gas flux after 15 years of wheat straw and fertilizer management in a no-till system. Soil Till Res 126:78–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Liu J, Chen Y, Kushwaha R (2010) Effect of tillage speed and straw length on soil and straw movement by a sweep. Soil Till Res 109:9–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lugato E, Berti A, Giardini L (2006) Soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics with and without residue incorporation in relation to different nitrogen fertilisation rates. Geoderma 135:315–321

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Luscier JD, Thompson WL, Wilson JM, Gorham BE, Dragut LD (2006) Using digital photographs and object-based image analysis to estimate percent ground cover in vegetation plots. Front Ecol Environ 4:408–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mackinnon WC, Karl J, Toevs G, Taylor J, Karl M, Spurrier C, Herrick J (2011) BLM core terrestrial indicators and methods. Tech Note 440. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, National Operations Center, Denver, CO

  27. McClellan R, McCool D, Rickman R (2012) Grain yield and biomass relationship for crops in the Inland Pacific Northwest United States. J Soil Water Conserv 67:42–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Meese RJ, Tomich PA (1992) Dots on the rocks: a comparison of percent cover estimation methods. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 165:59–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mulumba L, Rattan L (2008) Mulching effects on selected soil physical properties. Soil Till Res 98:106–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Nagler PL (2000) Plant Litter and soil reflectance. Remote Sens Environ 71:207–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pellant M, Shaver P, Pyke D, Herrick J (2005) Interpreting indicators of rangeland health, version 4. Technical Reference 1734-6. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, National Science and Technology Center, Denver, CO. [cited 2016 Dec 29]. Available from: www.blm.gov/nstc/library/techref.htm

  32. Pforte F, Wilhelm B, Hensel O (2012) Evaluation of an online approach for determination of percentage residue cover. Biosyst Eng 112:121–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Siemens M, Wilkins D (2006) Effect of residue management methods on no-till drill performance. Appl Eng Agric 22:51–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Singh S, Ladha J, Gupta R, Bhushan L, Rao A, Sivaprasad B, Singh P (2007) Evaluation of mulching, intercropping with Sesbania and herbicide use for weed management in dry- seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.). Crop Prot 26:518–524

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Smith PD, Marttio Z, Cai D, Gwary H (2008) Greenhouse gase mitigation in agriculture. Phlip Trans R Soc B 363:789–816

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Tester CF (1990) Organic amendment effects on physical and chemical properties of a sandy soil. Soil Sci Soc Am J 54:827–831

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Thorup-Kristensen K, Magid J, Jensen LS (2003) Catch crops and green manures as biological tools in nitrogen management in temperate zones. Adv Agron 79:227–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Toevs GR, Karl JW, Taylor JJ, Spurrier CS, Karl MS, Bobo MR, Herrick JE (2011) Consistent indicators and methods and a scalable sample design to meet assessment, inventory, and monitoring information needs across scales. Rangelands 33:14–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Vanha Majamaa I, Salemaa M, Tuominen S, Mikkola K (2000) Digitized photographs in vegetation analysis a comparison of cover estimates. Appl Vegetation Sci 3:89–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Voßhenrich H-H, Brunotte J, Ortmeier B (2005) Gitterrastermethode mit Strohindex zur Bewertung der Stroheinarbeitung. Landtechnik-Agric Eng 60:328–329

    Google Scholar 

  41. Xia L, Wang S, Yan X (2014) Effects of long-term straw incorporation on the net global warming potential and the net economic benefit in a rice–wheat cropping system in China. Agr Ecosyst Environ 197:118–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zhang P, Wei T, Jia Z, Han Q, Ren X (2014) Soil aggregate and crop yield changes with different rates of straw incorporation in semiarid areas of northwest China. Geoderma 230:41–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zhang P, Wei T, Li Y, Wang K, Jia Z, Han Q, Ren X (2015) Effects of straw incorporation on the stratification of the soil organic C, total N and C: N ratio in a semiarid region of China. Soil Till Res 153:28–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Zhu L, Zhang Z, Xu J, Tao B, Meng Y (2015) Short-term responses of soil organic carbon and carbon pool management index to different annual straw return rates in a rice—wheat cropping system. CATENA 135:283–289

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors are thankful to the State key program of China (2016YFD0300900) and the Jiangsu Agriculture Mechanization for financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Engineering, Nanjing Agricultural University/Key Laboratory of Intelligent Agricultural Equipment, Nanjing, 210031, Jiangsu Province, China

    Eisa Belal, Cedric Okinda, Ding Qishuo & Zahir Talha

Authors
  1. Eisa Belal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cedric Okinda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ding Qishuo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zahir Talha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ding Qishuo.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 4071 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Belal, E., Okinda, C., Qishuo, D. et al. Mass-Based Image Analysis for Evaluating Straw Cover Under High-Residue Farming Conditions in Rice–Wheat Cropping System. Agric Res 6, 359–367 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-017-0287-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-017-0287-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation