Advertisement

An approach to forecast grain crop yield using multi-layered, multi-farm data sets and machine learning

  • Patrick FilippiEmail author
  • Edward J. Jones
  • Niranjan S. Wimalathunge
  • Pallegedara D. S. N. Somarathna
  • Liana E. Pozza
  • Sabastine U. Ugbaje
  • Thomas G. Jephcott
  • Stacey E. Paterson
  • Brett M. Whelan
  • Thomas F. A. Bishop
Article
  • 52 Downloads

Abstract

Many broadacre farmers have a time series of crop yield monitor data for their fields which are often augmented with additional data, such as soil apparent electrical conductivity surveys and soil test results. In addition there are now readily available national and global datasets, such as rainfall and MODIS, which can be used to represent the crop-growing environment. Rather than analysing one field at a time as is typical in precision agriculture research, there is an opportunity to explore the value of combining data over multiple fields/farms and years into one dataset. Using these datasets in conjunction with machine learning approaches allows predictive models of crop yield to be built. In this study, several large farms in Western Australia were used as a case study, and yield monitor data from wheat, barley and canola crops from three different seasons (2013, 2014 and 2015) that covered ~ 11 000 to ~ 17 000 hectares in each year were used. The yield data were processed to a 10 m grid, and for each observation point associated predictor variables in space and time were collated. The data were then aggregated to a 100 m spatial resolution for modelling yield. Random forest models were used to predict crop yield of wheat, barley and canola using this dataset. Three separate models were created based on pre-sowing, mid-season and late-season conditions to explore the changes in the predictive ability of the model as more within-season information became available. These time points also coincide with points in the season when a management decision is made, such as the application of fertiliser. The models were evaluated with cross-validation using both fields and years for data splitting, and this was assessed at the field spatial resolution. Cross-validated results showed the models predicted yield relatively accurately, with a root mean square error of 0.36 to 0.42 t ha−1, and a Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient of 0.89 to 0.92 at the field resolution. The models performed better as the season progressed, largely because more information about within-season data became available (e.g. rainfall). The more years of yield data that were available for a field, the better the predictions were, and future work should use a longer time-series of yield data. The generic nature of this method makes it possible to apply to other agricultural systems where yield monitor data is available. Future work should also explore the integration of more data sources into the models, focus on predicting at finer spatial resolutions within fields, and the possibility of using the yield forecasts to guide management decisions.

Keywords

Yield forecast Empirical yield prediction Remote sensing Machine learning Random forest Feature extraction Precision agriculture 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Lawson Grains, Precision Agronomics, and the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) for providing access to the data.

References

  1. Balaghi, R., Tychon, B., Eerens, H., & Jlibene, M. (2008). Empirical regression models using NDVI, rainfall and temperature data for the early prediction of wheat grain yields in Morocco. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 10, 438–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bishop, T., Horta, A., & Karunaratne, S. (2015). Validation of digital soil maps at different spatial supports. Geoderma, 241–242, 238–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bishop, T., & Lark, R. (2007). A landscape-scale experiment on the changes in available potassium over a winter wheat cropping season. Geoderma, 141, 384–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bishop, T. F. A., McBratney, A. B., & Laslett, G. M. (1999). Modelling soil attribute depth functions with equal-area quadratic smoothing splines. Geoderma, 91, 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boydell, B., & McBratney, A. B. (2002). Identifying potential management zones from cotton yield estimates. Precision Agriculture, 3, 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bramley, R. G. V., & Ouzman, J. (2018). Farmer attitudes to the use of sensors and automation in fertilizer decision-making: Nitrogen fertilization in the Australian grains sector. Precision Agriculture.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-018-9589-y.Google Scholar
  7. Breiman, L. (2001). Random forests. Machine Learning, 45, 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bureau of Meteorology—BOM (2017a) Monthly rainfall—Jacup. Retrieved 21 November 2017 from http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=139&p_display_type=dataFile&p_startYear=&p_c=&p_stn_num=010905.
  9. Bureau of Meteorology—BOM (2017b) Monthly rainfall—Munglinup. Retrieved 21 November 2017 http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=139&p_display_type=dataFile&p_startYear=&p_c=&p_stn_num=009868.
  10. Bureau of Meteorology—BOM (2017c) Monthly rainfall totals for Western Australia. Retrieved 21 November 2017 from http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/awap/rain/index.jsp?colour=colour&time=latest&step=0&map=totals&period=month&area=wa.
  11. Bureau of Meteorology—BOM (2017d) Climate outlooks—monthly and seasonal. Retrieved 21 November 2017 from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/outlooks/#/rainfall/median/seasonal/0.
  12. Dahnke, W. C., Swenson, L. J., Goos, R. J., & Leholm, A. G. (1988). Choosing a crop yield goal. SF-822. Fargo: North Dakota State Extension Service.Google Scholar
  13. Donohue, R. J., Lawes, R. A., Mata, G., Gobbett, D., & Ouzman, J. (2018). Towards a national, remote-sensing-based model for predicting field-scale crop yield. Field Crops Research, 227, 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Huete, A., Didan, K., Miura, T., Rodriguez, E. P., Gao, X., & Ferreira, L. G. (2002). Overview of the radiometric and biophysical performance of the MODIS vegetation indices. Remote Sensing of Environment, 83, 195–213.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00096-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jones, J. W., Hoogenboom, G., Porter, C. H., Boote, K. J., Batchelor, W. D., Hunt, L. A., et al. (2003). DSSAT cropping system model. European Journal of Agronomy, 18, 235–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kantanantha, N., Serban, N., & Griffin, P. (2010). Yield and price forecasting for stochastic crop decision planning. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 15, 362–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keating, B. A., Carberry, P. S., Hammer, G. L., Probert, M. E., Robertson, M. J., Holzworth, D., et al. (2003). An overview of APSIM, a model designed for farming systems simulation. European Journal of Agronomy, 18, 267–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lewis, A., Oliver, S., Lymburner, L., Evans, B., Wyborn, L., Mueller, N., et al. (2017). The Australian Geoscience Data Cube—foundations and lessons learned. Remote Sensing of Environment, 202, 276–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lin, L. I. K. (1989). A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics, 45, 255–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lyle, G., Lewis, M., & Ostendorf, B. (2013). Testing the temporal ability of landsat imagery and precision agriculture technology to provide high resolution historical estimates of wheat yield at the farm scale. Remote Sensing, 5, 1549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McBratney, A. B., Mendonça Santos, M. L., & Minasny, B. (2003). On digital soil mapping. Geoderma, 117, 3–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McMaster, G. S., & Wilhelm, W. W. (1997). Growing degree-days: One equation, two interpretations. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 87, 291–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. NASA Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Centre (LPDAAC). (2017). MOD13Q1: MODIS/Terra Vegetation Indices 16-Day L3 Global 250 m SIN Grid V006. NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC. Retrieved 21 November 2017 from (https://lpdaac.usgs.gov,  https://doi.org/10.5067/modis/mod13q1.006.
  24. Raun, W. R., Solie, J. B., Johnson, G. V., Stone, M. L., Lukina, E. V., Thomason, W. E., et al. (2001). In-season prediction of potential grain yield in winter wheat using canopy reflectance. Agronomy Journal, 93, 583–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stefanini, M., Larson, J. A., Lambert, D. M., Yin, X., Boyer, C. N., Scharf, P., et al. (2018). Effects of optical sensing based variable rate nitrogen management on yields, nitrogen use and profitability for cotton. Precision Agriculture, 4, 5.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-018-9599-9.Google Scholar
  26. Taylor, J. A., McBratney, A. B., & Whelan, B. M. (2007). Establishing management classes for broadacre agricultural production. Agronomy Journal, 99, 1366–1376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Torres, R., Snoeij, P., Geudtner, D., Bibby, D., Davidson, M., Attema, E., et al. (2012). GMES Sentinel-1 mission. Remote Sensing of Environment, 120, 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Walsh, O. S., Klatt, A. R., Solie, J. B., Godsey, C. B., & Raun, W. R. (2013). Use of soil moisture data for refined GreenSeeker sensor based nitrogen recommendations in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Precision Agriculture, 14, 343–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Filippi
    • 1
    Email author return OK on get
  • Edward J. Jones
    • 1
  • Niranjan S. Wimalathunge
    • 1
  • Pallegedara D. S. N. Somarathna
    • 1
  • Liana E. Pozza
    • 1
  • Sabastine U. Ugbaje
    • 1
  • Thomas G. Jephcott
    • 1
  • Stacey E. Paterson
    • 1
  • Brett M. Whelan
    • 1
  • Thomas F. A. Bishop
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Sydney Institute of AgricultureThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations