Advertisement

Precision Agriculture

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 63–80 | Cite as

Weed Detection Using Canopy Reflection

  • E. Vrindts
  • J. De Baerdemaeker
  • H. Ramon
Article

Abstract

For site-specific application of herbicides, automatic detection and evaluation of weeds is desirable. Since reflectance of crop, weeds and soil differs in the visual and near infrared wavelengths, there is potential for using reflection measurements at different wavelengths to distinguish between them. Reflectance spectra of crop and weed canopies were used to evaluate the possibilities of weed detection with reflection measurements in laboratory circumstances. Sugarbeet and maize and 7 weed species were included in the measurements. Classification into crop and weeds was possible in laboratory tests, using a limited number of wavelength band ratios. Crop and weed spectra could be separated with more than 97% correct classification. Field measurements of crop and weed reflection were conducted for testing spectral weed detection. Canopy reflection was measured with a line spectrograph in the wavelength range from 480 to 820 nm (visual to near infrared) with ambient light. The discriminant model uses a limited number of narrow wavelength bands. Over 90% of crop and weed spectra can be identified correctly, when the discriminant model is specific to the prevailing light conditions.

weed detection canopy reflectance precision crop protection 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersen, H. and Granum, E. 1998. Classifying daylight conditions from colour histogram assessment. Presented at AgEng Oslo98, 24–27 August 1998, Oslo, Sweden, organized by EurAgEng, CIGR, NLH, AgEng Paper No. 98-a-037.Google Scholar
  2. Borregaard, T., Nielsen, H., Nørgaard, L. and Have, H. 2000. Crop-weed discrimination by line imaging spectroscopy. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 75, 389–400.Google Scholar
  3. Burks, T. F., Shearer, S. A., Gates, R. S. and Donohue, K. D. 2000a. Backpropagation neural network design and evaluation for classifying weed species using color image texture. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 43(4), 1029–1037.Google Scholar
  4. Burks, T. F., Shearer, S. A. and Payne, F. A. 2000b. Classification of weed species using color texture features and discriminant analysis. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 43(2), 441–448.Google Scholar
  5. Cousens, R., Brain, P., O'Donovan, J. T. and O'sullivan, A. 1987. The use of biologically realistic equations to describe the effects of weed density and relative time of emergence on crop yield. Weed Science 35, 720–725.Google Scholar
  6. Donald, W. 1994. Geostatistics for mapping weeds, with a Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) patch as a case study. Weed Science 42, 648–657.Google Scholar
  7. El-Faki, M. S., Zhang, N. and Peterson, D. E. 2000a. Weed detection using color machine vision. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 43(6), 1969–1978.Google Scholar
  8. El-Faki, M. S., Zhang, N. and Peterson, D. E. 2000b. Factors affecting color-based weed detection. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 43(4), 1001–1009.Google Scholar
  9. Favier, J. F., Ross, D. W., Tsheko, R., Kennedy, D. D., Muir, A. Y. and Fleming, J. 1999. Discrimination of weeds in brassica crops using optical spectral reflectance and leaf texture analysis. In: Proceedings of SPIE 3543—Precision Agriculture and Biological Quality, edited by G. E. Meyer and J. A. DeShazer (SPIE, Bellingham, Washington, USA), p. 311–318.Google Scholar
  10. Feyaerts, F., Pollet, P., Wambacq, P. and Van Gool, L. 1998. Sensor for weed detection based on spectral measurements. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Precision Agriculture, edited by P. C., Robert, R. H., Rust, and W. E. Larsen (ASA/CSSA/SSSA, Madison, WI, USA), Part B, p. 1537–1548.Google Scholar
  11. Franz, E., Gebhardt, M. R. and Unklesbay, K. B. 1995. Algorithms for extracting leaf boundary information from digital images of plant foliage. Transactions of the ASAE 38(2), 625–633.Google Scholar
  12. Gausman, H. W. 1985. Plant Leaf Optical Properties in Visible and Near-Infrared Light. Graduate Studies No. 29 (Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA), p. 78Google Scholar
  13. Gausman, H. W., Allen W. A., Wiegand, C. L., Escobar, D. E., Rodrigues R. R. and Richardson, A. J. 1973. The Leaf Mesophylls of Twenty Crops, Their Light Spectra and Optical and Geometrical Parameters. Technical Bulletin No. 1465 (Agricultural Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture in cooperation with Texas Agricultural Experiment Station).Google Scholar
  14. Guyer, D. E., Miles, G. E., Schreiber, M. M., Mitchell, O. R. and Vanderbilt, V. C. 1986. Machine vision and image processing for plant identification. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 29(6), 1500–1507.Google Scholar
  15. Hahn, F. and Muir, A. Y. 1993. Weed-crop discrimination by optical reflectance. In: Proceedings of the IV International Symposium on Fruit, Nut, and Vegetable Production Engineering, edited by F. Juste (Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación, INIA, March 1993, Valencia-Zaragoza, Spain), p. 221–228.Google Scholar
  16. Kropff, M. J. 1988. Modelling the effects of weeds on crop production. Weed Research 28, 465–471.Google Scholar
  17. Moshou, D., De Ketelaere, B., Vrindts, E., Kennes, P., De Baerdemaeker, J. and Ramon, H. 1998. Local linear mapping neural networks for pattern recognition of plants. In: Proceedings of the First IFAC Workshop on Control Application and Ergonomics in Agriculture, edited by N. Sigrimis and P. Groumpos (Pergamon), p. 61–66.Google Scholar
  18. Murray, G. D. 1977. A cautionary note on selection of variables in discriminant analysis. Applied Statistics 26(3), 246–250.Google Scholar
  19. Pollet, P., Feyaerts, F., Wambacq, P. and Van Gool, L. 1998. Weed detection based on structural information using an imaging spectrograph. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Precision Agriculture, edited by P. C. Robert, R. H., Rust, and W. E. Larsen (ASA/CSSA/SSSA, Madison, WI, USA), p. 1579–1591.Google Scholar
  20. Rew, L. J., Miller, P. C. H. and Paice, M. E. R. 1997. The importance of patch mapping resolution for sprayer control. Aspects of Applied Biology—Optimizing Pesticide Applications 48, 49–55.Google Scholar
  21. SAS Institute Inc. 1989. SAS/Stat* User's Guide, Version 6, Fourth edition, vol. 1, p. 686–693 and vol. 2, p. 493–1508.Google Scholar
  22. Tang L., Tian, L. and Steward, B. L. 2000. Color image segmentation with genetic algorithm for in-field weed sensing. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 43(4), 1019–1027.Google Scholar
  23. Tian, L., Slaughter, D. C. and Norris, R. F. 1997. Outdoor field machine vision identification of tomato seedlings for automated weed control. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 40(6), 1761–1768.Google Scholar
  24. Vrindts, E. and De Baerdemaeker, J. 1996. Feasibility of weed detection with optical reflection measurements. In: Proceedings of Brighton Crop Protection Conference 1996—Pests and Diseases; 18–21 November 1996, (British Crop Protection Council, Brighton, UK) p. 443–444.Google Scholar
  25. Vrindts, E., and De Baerdemaeker, J. 1997. Optical discrimination of crop, weed and soil for on-line weed detection. In: '97, Proceedings of the First European Conference on Precision Agriculture, edited by J. Stafford (BIOS Scientific Publishers, Oxford), vol. 2: Technology, IT and Management, p. 537–544.Google Scholar
  26. Walter, H., and Koch, W. 1980. Light reflectance characteristics of weed and crop leaves as affected by plant species and herbicides. In: Proceedings of Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds 1980, November 1980 (British Crop Protection Council, Brighton, UK), p. 243–250.Google Scholar
  27. Wartenberg, G. 1996. Untersuchungen der Voraussetzungen für den teilflächenspezifischen chemischen Pflanzenschutz. (Investigation of the Premises of Site-Specific Chemical Crop Protection) Forschungsberichte des ATB 1996/1. Institut für Agrartechnik Bornim e.V. ATB, Abteilung Technik im Plfanzenbau, Potsdam-Bornim, p. 72.Google Scholar
  28. Woebbecke D. M., Meyer, G. E., Von Bargen, K. and Mortensen, D. A. 1995. Shape features for identifying young weeds using image analysis. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 38(1), 271–281.Google Scholar
  29. Zhang N. and Chaisattapagon C. 1995. Effective criteria for weed identification in wheat fields using machine vision. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 38(3), 965–974.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Vrindts
    • 1
  • J. De Baerdemaeker
    • 2
  • H. Ramon
    • 2
  1. 1.Dept. AgroEngineering and Economics, Lab. AgroMachinery and ProcessingKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenHeverleeBelgium
  2. 2.Dept. AgroEngineering and Economics, Lab. AgroMachinery and ProcessingKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenHeverleeBelgium

Personalised recommendations