Interpolation of Data Measured by Field Harvesters: Deployment, Comparison and Verification
- 284 Downloads
Yield is one of the key indicators in agriculture. The most common practices provide only one yield value for a whole field according to the weight of the harvested crop. On the contrary, precision agriculture techniques discover spatial patterns within a field to minimise the environmental burden caused by agricultural activities. Field harvesters equipped with sensors provide more detailed and spatially localised values. The measurements from such sensors need to be filtered and interpolated for the purposes of follow-up analyses and interpretations. This study verified the differences between three methods of interpolation (Inverse Distance Weighted, Inverse Distance Squared and Ordinary Kriging) derived from field sensor measurements that were (1) obtained directly from the field harvester, (2) processed by global filters, and (3) processed by global and local filters. Statistical analyses evaluated the results of interpolations from three fully operational Czech fields. The revealed spatial patterns, as well as recommendations regarding the suitability of the interpolation methods used, are presented at the end of this paper.
KeywordsData filtering Field harvester Interpolation Inverse Distance Squared Inverse Distance Weighted Ordinary Kriging Yield mapping
This paper is part of a project that has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 818346 titled “Sino-EU Soil Observatory for Intelligent Land Use Management” (SIEUSOIL). Kateřina Trojanová, Tomáš Pavelka and Šimon Leitgeb were also supported by funding from Masaryk University under grant agreement No. MUNI/A/1576/2018. The authors would like to thank all persons from the Rostěnice Farm who participated in the study.
- 1.Almasi, A., Jalalian, A., Toomanian, N.: Using OK and IDW methods for prediction the spatial variability of a horizon depth and OM in Soils of Shahrekord, Iran. J. Environ. Earth Sci. 4(15), 17–27 (2014)Google Scholar
- 5.Charvat, K., et al.: Advanced visualisation of big data for agriculture as part of databio development. In: IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, pp. 415–418 (2018)Google Scholar
- 6.Gozdowski, D., Samborski, S., Dobers, E.S.: Evaluation of methods for the detection of spatial outliers in the yield data of winter wheat. Colloquium Biometricum 2010(40), 41–51 (2010)Google Scholar
- 8.Huisman, O., By, R.A.: Principles of Geographic Information Systems: An Introductory Textbook, 4th edn. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation, Enschede (2009)Google Scholar
- 9.Krivoruchko, K.: Spatial Statistical Data Analysis for GIS Users, 1st edn. ESRI Press, Redlands (2011)Google Scholar
- 11.Lee, K.H., Chung, S.O., Choi, M.-C., Kim, Y.-J., Lee, J.-S., Kim, S.-K.: Post processing software for grain yield monitoring systems suitable to Korean full-feed combines. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Precision Agriculture, pp. 1–15 (2016)Google Scholar
- 13.Li, J., Heap, A.D.: A review of comparative studies of spatial interpolation methods in environmental sciences: performance and impact factors. Ecol. Inform. 6(3–4), 228–241 (2010)Google Scholar
- 14.Longley, P.A., Goodchild, M.F., Maguire, D.J., Rhind, D.W.: Geographic Information Science and Systems, 4th edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2015)Google Scholar
- 16.Palma, R., Reznik, T., Esbrí, M., Charvat, K., Mazurek, C.: An INSPIRE-based vocabulary for the publication of agricultural linked data. In: Tamma, V., Dragoni, M., Gonçalves, R., Ławrynowicz, A. (eds.) OWLED 2015. LNCS, vol. 9557, pp. 124–133. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33245-1_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Spekken, M., Anselmi, A.A., Molin, J.P.: A simple method for filtering spatial data. In: 9th European Conference on Precision Agriculture, pp. 259–266 (2013)Google Scholar