UAV-Based Hyperspectral Monitoring Using Push-Broom and Snapshot Sensors: A Multisite Assessment for Precision Viticulture Applications.
bands co-registration
hyperspectral data cube
imaging sensor
radiometric calibration
remote sensing
unmanned aerial vehicles
Journal
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 1424-8220
Titre abrégé: Sensors (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101204366
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 Aug 2022
31 Aug 2022
Historique:
received:
25
07
2022
revised:
24
08
2022
accepted:
25
08
2022
entrez:
9
9
2022
pubmed:
10
9
2022
medline:
14
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Hyperspectral aerial imagery is becoming increasingly available due to both technology evolution and a somewhat affordable price tag. However, selecting a proper UAV + hyperspectral sensor combo to use in specific contexts is still challenging and lacks proper documental support. While selecting an UAV is more straightforward as it mostly relates with sensor compatibility, autonomy, reliability and cost, a hyperspectral sensor has much more to be considered. This note provides an assessment of two hyperspectral sensors (push-broom and snapshot) regarding practicality and suitability, within a precision viticulture context. The aim is to provide researchers, agronomists, winegrowers and UAV pilots with dependable data collection protocols and methods, enabling them to achieve faster processing techniques and helping to integrate multiple data sources. Furthermore, both the benefits and drawbacks of using each technology within a precision viticulture context are also highlighted. Hyperspectral sensors, UAVs, flight operations, and the processing methodology for each imaging type' datasets are presented through a qualitative and quantitative analysis. For this purpose, four vineyards in two countries were selected as case studies. This supports the extrapolation of both advantages and issues related with the two types of hyperspectral sensors used, in different contexts. Sensors' performance was compared through the evaluation of field operations complexity, processing time and qualitative accuracy of the results, namely the quality of the generated hyperspectral mosaics. The results shown an overall excellent geometrical quality, with no distortions or overlapping faults for both technologies, using the proposed mosaicking process and reconstruction. By resorting to the multi-site assessment, the qualitative and quantitative exchange of information throughout the UAV hyperspectral community is facilitated. In addition, all the major benefits and drawbacks of each hyperspectral sensor regarding its operation and data features are identified. Lastly, the operational complexity in the context of precision agriculture is also presented.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36081033
pii: s22176574
doi: 10.3390/s22176574
pmc: PMC9460142
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Sensors (Basel). 2020 Feb 24;20(4):
pubmed: 32102358
Sensors (Basel). 2022 Aug 31;22(17):
pubmed: 36081033
Sensors (Basel). 2018 Jan 17;18(1):
pubmed: 29342101
Front Plant Sci. 2022 Jun 02;13:898722
pubmed: 35769294
Sci Rep. 2020 Oct 15;10(1):17450
pubmed: 33060759
Appl Opt. 2008 Oct 1;47(28):F46-60
pubmed: 18830284
Sensors (Basel). 2019 Nov 25;19(23):
pubmed: 31775382
Science. 1985 Jun 7;228(4704):1147-53
pubmed: 17735325
Sensors (Basel). 2019 Oct 29;19(21):
pubmed: 31671804
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 1;11(1):2721
pubmed: 33526834