Advertisement

Landscape and Nature: Olive Tree Digital Parameterization

  • Fabio Bianconi
  • Marco Filippucci
Chapter
Part of the Urban and Landscape Perspectives book series (URBANLAND, volume 20)

Abstract

In the centrality of perception, landscape is connected to natural elements. It is almost impossible to think about landscape without reference to environmental elements. The celebrated quote by Mies Van Der Rohe, God is in the details, is valid also for landscape, where to understand the whole that is landscape, a process that drills down and analyzes the singular elements is necessary. But in this idea of landscape it is possible to lose oneself inside the romantic echoes of artistic research, forgetting the scientific needs so important in a landscape project. It can represent a theme of representation study, even more in function than digital tools. The project of landscape involves similarly architectural and agricultural sciences, both addressed to the transformation of natural elements, both finalized to a better life, both based on morphological evolution, both aimed to give efficiency in performance and results. In this sense, this research integrates the science of representation studies with agricultural tree analysis to describe the architectural form of an olive tree and to show a scientific visualization of the relationship between morphology and light interception in the canopy. The representation of plant architecture, manipulated with pruning operations for agricultural purposes of light optimization, describes the action of sunlight in the tree, by testing the potential of digital design tools – especially generative modelling. Through the design of a specific algorithm, the tree is interpreted as a fragmented photovoltaic panel, analyzed by using 14,000 control points corresponding to its leaves. The possibility of selecting these classes of elements becomes the instrument to explain the canopy structure, finding the categories that describe and simulate the annual radiance and illuminance. The developed modelling process and its purely theoretical significance constitute the basis for a variety of applications in data analysis and comparison among different models, evaluations, theories, and operations. This research is the first step of an important action of the European project OLIVE4CLIMATE-LIFE (LIFE15 CCM/IT/000141), the sustainable olive oil supply chain for climate change mitigation. The approach in the representation topic is central to its autoptical capacity to analyze the relationship between the elements and the whole in the landscape.

Keywords

Natural elements Generative modelling Optimization Morphological analysis Environmental survey 

References

  1. Andrieu B, Allirand JM, Jaggard K (1997) Ground cover and leaf area index of maize and sugar beet crops. Agronomie 17:315–321Google Scholar
  2. Andrieuay B, Ivanova N, Boissard P (1995) Simulation of light interception from a maize canopy model constructed by stereo plotting. Agric For Meteorol 75:103–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Béland M, Widlowski JL, Fournier RA (2014) A model for deriving voxel-level tree leaf area density estimates from ground-based LiDAR. Environ Model Softw 51:184–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellasio C, Olejníčková J, Tesař R, Šebela D, Nedbal L (2012) Computer reconstruction of plant growth and chlorophyll fluorescence emission in three spatial dimensions. Sensors 12, 1052:–1071Google Scholar
  5. Benes B (1995) Generating a model of plant using NURBS. J WSCG 1Google Scholar
  6. Birch C, Andrieu B, Fournier C, Vos J, Room P (2003) Modelling kinetics of plant canopy architecture. Concepts and applications. Eur J Agron 19:519–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blunt W, Stearn WT (1950) The art of botanical illustration: an illustrated history. Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourgeois D, Reinhart CF, Ward G (2008) A standard daylight coefficient model for dynamic daylighting simulations. Build Res Inf 36:68–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Casella E, Sinoquet H (2003) A method for describing the canopy architecture of coppice poplar with allometric relationships. Tree Physiol 23:1153–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cassirer E (1963) The individual and the Cosmos in renaissance philosophy. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Charles-Edwards DA, Thorpe MR (1976) Interception of diffuse and direct-beam radiation by a hedgerow apple orchard. Ann Bot 40:603–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chelle M, Andrieu B (1998) The nested radiosity model for the distribution of light within plant canopies. Ecol Model 111:75–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cluzeau C, Dupouey JL, Courbaud B (1995) Polyhedral representation of crown shape. A geometric tool for growth modelling. Annales des sciences forestieres 52:297–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cohen S, Fuchs M (1987) The distribution of leaf area, radiation, photosynthesis and transpiration in a shamouti orange hedgerow orchard. Agric For Meteorol 40:123–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Colwell JE (1974) Vegetation canopy reflectance. Remote Sens Environ 3:175–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Côté JF, Widlowski JL, Fournier RA, Verstraete MM (2009) The structural and radiative consistency of three-dimensional tree reconstruction from terrestrial Lidar. Remote Sens Environ 113:1067–1081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Côté JF, Fournier R, Egli R (2011) An architectural model of trees for estimation of forest structural attributes using terrestrial lidar. Environ Model Softw 26:761–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Crawley DB, Lawrie LK, Winkelmann FC, Buhl WF, Huang Y, Curtis O, Pedersen J, Strand RK, Liesen RJ, Fisher DE, Witte MJ, Glazer J (2001) EnergyPlus: creating a new-generation building energy simulation program. Energy Build 33:319–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leonardo da Vinci, Trattato della pittura, 1540, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Roma: Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270Google Scholar
  20. Daughtry CST (1990) Direct measurements of canopy structure. Remote Sens Rev 5:45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. De Reffye P, Houllier F (1997) Modelling plant growth and architecture: some recent advances and applications to agronomy and forestry. Curr Sci 73:984Google Scholar
  22. De Reffye P, Lecoustre R, Dauzat J, Ouattara S, Flori A, N’Cho YP (1989) Modelling of plant architecture. Application to tropical agronomic perennial plants. Particular case of Palmaceae. Oleagineux 44(11):22–52Google Scholar
  23. de Rubertis R, Soletti A (eds) (2000) De Vulgari Architectura. Indagine sui luoghi urbani irrisolti. Officina, RomaGoogle Scholar
  24. Díaz-Espejo A, Fernández JE, Durán PJ, Girón IF, Sinoquet H, Sonohat G, Phattaralerphong J, Infante JM, Chamorro V, Villagarcía L, Palomo J (2008) Canopy architecture and radiation interception measurements in olive. Acta Hortic 791:531–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dioscoride, Codex Aniciae Julianae, 512, in Nationalbibliothek, Vien: cod. MS. med gr.1, Ms. Medicus graecus IGoogle Scholar
  26. Docci M (1996) Il rilievo come conoscenza profonda, in Istituto di Disegno e Architettura dell’Università degli Studi di Perugia (ed) Il rilievo. Dall’architettura concreta al suo modello immateriale. Atti del Convegno, Centro stampa della Università degli Studi di Perugia, PerugiaGoogle Scholar
  27. Dornbusch T, Andrieu B (2010) Lamina2Shape – an image processing tool for an explicit description of lamina shape tested on winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Comput Electron Agric 70:217–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dornbusch T, Wernecke P, Diepenbrock W (2007) A method to extract morphological traits of plant organs from 3D point clouds as a database for an architectural plant model. Ecol Model 200:119–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Edinburgh UK, Seidel D, Fleck S, Leuschner C (2012) Analyzing forest canopies with ground based laser scanning: a comparison with hemispherical photography. Agric For Meteorol 154:1–8Google Scholar
  30. Eloy C (2011) Leonardo’s rule, self-similarity and wind-induced stresses in trees. Phys Rev Lett 107:258101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Falster DS, Westoby M (2003) Leaf size and angle vary widely across species: what consequences for light interception? New Phytol 158:509–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Filippucci M (2010a) Nuvole di pixel. La fotomodellazione con software liberi per il rilievo d’architettura. Disegnarecon 3(6):50–63Google Scholar
  33. Filippucci M (2010b) Virtual in virtual, discretization in discretization: shape and perception in parametric modelling for renewing descriptive geometry. In: Ando N et al (eds) Proceedings of ICGG 2010 14th international conference on geometry and graphics, International society for Geometry and Graphics, KyotoGoogle Scholar
  34. Filippucci M, Regni L, Nasini L, Brunori A, Rinchi G, Proietti P (2016) Architectural modelling of an olive tree. Generative tools for the scientific visualization of morphology and radiation relationships. Ecol Inform 36:84–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fourcaud T, Lac P (2003) Numerical modelling of shape regulation and growth stresses in trees. I. An incremental static finite element formulation. Trees 17:23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fourcaud T, Blaise F, Lac P, Castera P, de Reffye P (2003) Numerical modelling of shape regulation and growth stresses in trees. II. Implementation in the AMAPpara software and simulation of tree growth. Trees 17:31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ganis A (1997) Radiation transfer estimate in a row canopy: a simple procedure. Agric For Meteorol 88:67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Giordano G (1988) Tecnologia del legno. UTET, TorinoGoogle Scholar
  39. Giuliani R, Magnanini E, Fracassa C, Nerozzi F (2000) Ground monitoring the light-shadow windows of a tree canopy to yield canopy light interception and morphological traits. Plant Cell Environ 23:783–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Godin C (2000) Representing and encoding plant architecture: a review. Ann For Sci 57:413–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Godin C, Caraglio Y (1998) A multiscale model of plant topological structure. J Theor Biol 191:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Godin C, Costes E, Caraglio Y (1997) Exploring plant topological structure with the AMAPmod software: an outline. Silva Fenn 31:357–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Godin C, Costes E, Sinoquet H (1999) A method for describing plant architecture which integrates topology and geometry. Ann Bot 84:343–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hallè F (1986) Modular growth in seed plants. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B 313:77–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hanan J (1997) Virtual plants – integrating architectural and physiological models. Environ Model Softw 12:35–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hanan JS, Room PM (1996) Practical aspects of virtual plant research. In: Second CSIRO symposium on computational challenges in life sciences, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  47. Kandinsky W (1926) Punkt und Linie zu Fläche. Beitrag zur Analyse der malerischen Elemente. 9Google Scholar
  48. Klee P (1956) Das bildnerische Denken. Benno Schwabe & Co, BaselGoogle Scholar
  49. Küppers M (1989) Ecological significance of aboveground architectural patterns in woody plants: a question of cost-benefit relationships. Trends Ecol Evol 4:375–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kuuluvainen T, Pukkala T (1987) Effect of crown shape and tree distribution on the spatial distribution of shade. Agric For Meteorol 40:215–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lagios K, Niemasz J, Reinhart CF (2010) Animated building performance simulation (ABPS) – linking Rhinoceros/Grasshopper with radiance/daysim. In: Proceedings of SimBuild 2010, IBSA, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. Lang A (1973) Leaf orientation of a cotton plant. Agric Meteorol 11:37–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lévi-Strauss C (1962) Le pensee sauvage. Presses Pocket, ParisGoogle Scholar
  54. Lewis P (1999) Three-dimensional plant modelling for remote sensing simulation studies using the botanical plant modelling system. Agronomie 19:185–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Li X, Zhao H, Liu Y, Jiang H, Bian Y (2014) Laser scanning based three dimensional measurement of vegetation canopy structure. Opt Lasers Eng 54:152–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Llorens J, Gil E, Llop J, Escolà A (2011) Ultrasonic and LIDAR sensors for electronic canopy characterization in Vineyards: advances to improve pesticide application methods. Sensors 11:2177–2194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mandelbrot B (1982) The fractal geometry of nature. W. H. Freeman and Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  58. Mariscal MJ, Orgaz F, Villalobos FJ (2000) Modelling and measurement of radiation interception by olive canopies. Agric For Meteorol 100:183–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. McClelland CK (1916) On the regularity of blooming in the cotton plant. Science 44:578–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. McLuhan M (1964) Understanding media: the extensions of man. Gingko Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  61. McNeil A, Jonsson CJ, Appelfeld D, Ward G, Lee ES (2013) A validation of a ray-tracing tool used to generate bi-directional scattering distribution functions for complex fenestration systems. Sol Energy 98:404–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Migliari R (2012) La Geometria Descrittiva e il suo rinnovamento. Gangemi, RomaGoogle Scholar
  63. Miranda-Fuentes A, Llorens J, Gamarra-Diezma JL, Gil-Ribes JA, Gil E (2015) Towards an optimized method of olive tree crown volume measurement. Sensors 15:3671–3687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Mondrian P (1957) Life and work. Abrams, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  65. Monge G (1798) Gèomètrie descriptive. Boudouin, ParisGoogle Scholar
  66. Monsi M, Saeki T (1953) Uber den Liechfaktor in den Pflanzengesellschaften und seine Bedeutung für die Stoffproduktion. Jpn J Bot 14:22–52Google Scholar
  67. Munari B (1978) Disegnare un albero. Corraini, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  68. Munoz-Garcıa MA, Melado-Herreros A, Balenzategui JL, Barrerio P (2014) Low-cost irradiance sensors for irradiation assessments inside tree canopies. Sol Energy 103:143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Myneni R (1991) Modeling radiative transfer and photosynthesis in three-dimensional vegetation canopies. Agric For Meteorol 55:323–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Norman JM, Welles JM (1983) Radiative transfer in an array of canopies. Agron J 75:80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Paris C, Bruzzone L (2015) A three-dimensional model-based approach to the estimation of the tree top height by fusing low-density LiDAR data and very high resolution optical images. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 53:467–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Parveaud CE, Chopard J, Dauzat J, Courbaud B, Auclair D (2008) Modelling foliage characteristics in 3D tree crowns: influence on light interception and leaf irradiance. Trees 22:87–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pearcy RW, Yang W (1996) A three-dimensional crown architecture model for assessment of light capture and carbon gain by understory plants. Oecologia 108:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Prata de Moraes Frasson R, Krajewski WF (2010) Three-dimensional digital model of a maize plant. Agric For Meteorol 150:478–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Proietti P, Tombesi A, Boco M (1994) Influence of leaf shading and defoliation on oil synthesis and growth of olive fruit. Acta Hortic 356:272–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Proietti P, Nasini L, Famiani F, Guelfi P, Standardi A (2008) Influence of light availability on fruit and oil characteristics in Olea europea L. Acta Hortic 949:243–250Google Scholar
  77. Proietti P, Nasini L, Reale L, Caruso T, Ferranti F (2015) Productive and vegetative behaviour of olive cultivars in super high-density olive grove. Sci Agric 72:20–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Prusinkiewicz P (1998) Modeling of spatial structure and development of plants: a review. Sci Hortic 74:113–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Prusinkiewicz P, Hanan J (1989) Lindenmayer systems, fractals, and plants. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Ross J (1981) The radiation regime and architecture of plant stands. W. Junk, Neanderthal, The HagueCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Salminen H, Saarenmaa H, Perttunen J, Sievanen R, Kev JV, Nikinmaa E (1994) Modelling trees using an object-oriented scheme. Math Comput Model 20:49–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Schumacher P (2017) On parametricism, market processes and the politicization of architectural education, interviewed by Berrin Chatzi Chousein for the World Architecture Community, in http://www.patrikschumacher.com/ [2018]
  83. Sievanen R, Nikinmaa E, Nygren P, Ozier-Lafontaine H, Perttunen J, Hakula H (2000) Components of functional-structural tree models. Ann For Sci 57:399–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Sinoquet H, Andrieu B (1993) The geometrical structure of plant canopies: characterization and direct measurement methods. In: Varlet-Grancher C, Sinoquet H, Bonhomme R (eds) Crop structure and light microclimate. INRA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  85. Sinoquet H, Adam B, Rivet P, Godin C (1997a) Interactions between light and plant architecture in an agroforestry walnut tree. Agrofor Forum 8:37–40Google Scholar
  86. Sinoquet H, Rivet P, Godin C (1997b) Assessment of the three-dimensional architecture of walnut trees using digitising. Silva Fennica 31:265–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Sonohat G, Sinoquet H, Kulandaivelu V, Combes D, Lescourret F (2006) Three-dimensional reconstruction of partially 3D-digitized peach tree canopies. Tree Physiol 26:337–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Sterck FJ, Schieving F, Lemmensand A, Pons TL (2005) Performance of trees in forest canopies: explorations with a bottom-up functional–structural plant growth model. New Phytol 166:827–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Takafumi T, Yamaguchi J, Takeda Y (1998) Measurements of forest canopy structure with laser plane range-finding method – development of a measurement system and applications to real forests. Agric For Meteorol 91:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Takenaka A, Inui Y, Osawa A (1998) Measurements of threedimensional structure of plants with a simple device and estimation of light capture of individual leaves. Funct Ecol 12:159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Taylor R (2005) Pollock, Mondrian and nature: recent scientific investigations. Chaos Complex Lett 1(3):112–134Google Scholar
  92. Tremmel DC, Bazzaz FA (1993) How neighbor canopy architecture affects target plant performance. Ecology 74:2114–2124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Van Elsacker P, Keppens H, Lemeur R (1983) A simple photographical method for analyzing the radiation interception by an individual tree. Agric Meteorol 29:296–303Google Scholar
  94. Villalobos FJ, Testi L, Hidalgo J, Pastor M, Orgaz F (2006) Modelling potential growth and yield of olive (Olea europaea L.) canopies. Eur J Agron 24:296–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Vitruvius M.P., De Architectura Google Scholar
  96. Wagenmakers PS (1991) Simulation of light distribution in dense orchard systems. Agric For Meteorol 57:13–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Ward G, Rubinstein F (1988) A new technique for computer simulation of illuminated spaces. J IES 17(1):80–91Google Scholar
  98. Willaume M, Lauri PE, Sinoquet H (2004) Light interception in apple trees influenced by canopy architecture manipulation. Trees 18:705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Xu W, Su Z, Feng Z, Xu H, Jiao Y, Yan F (2013) Comparison of conventional measurement and LiDAR-based measurement for crown structures. Comput Electron Agric 98:242–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabio Bianconi
    • 1
  • Marco Filippucci
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Study of PerugiaPerugiaItaly

Personalised recommendations