Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:07:20.130Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applications of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Weed Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2017

J. M. Prince Czarnecki ,
S. Samiappan ,
L. Wasson ,
J. D. McCurdy ,
D. B. Reynolds ,
W. P. Williams  and
R. J. Moorhead
J. M. Prince Czarnecki*
Affiliation:
Geosystems Research Institute, Mississippi State University, Box 9627, Mississippi State, Mississippi, 39762, USA
S. Samiappan
Affiliation:
Geosystems Research Institute, Mississippi State University, Box 9627, Mississippi State, Mississippi, 39762, USA
L. Wasson
Affiliation:
Geosystems Research Institute, Mississippi State University, Box 9627, Mississippi State, Mississippi, 39762, USA
J. D. McCurdy
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, Box 9555, Mississippi State, Mississippi, 39762, USA
D. B. Reynolds
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University, Box 9555, Mississippi State, Mississippi, 39762, USA
W. P. Williams
Affiliation:
US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Box 5367, Mississippi State, Mississippi, 39762, USA
R. J. Moorhead
Affiliation:
Geosystems Research Institute, Mississippi State University, Box 9627, Mississippi State, Mississippi, 39762, USA
*
†E-mail: Joby.Czarnecki@msstate.edu
Get access

Abstract

For most producers, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) are a novelty that has been little employed in their agricultural operations. An UAV will not fix every problem on the farm, but there are some practical applications for which UAVs have demonstrated value. Three examples of how UAVs have been used in weed science applications are presented here; the methods are transferable to other agricultural commodities with similar characteristics. The first of these is quantification of the extent and severity of non-target herbicide injury. The second application is calculation of spray thresholds based on weed populations. The third application is development of site-specific herbicide treatment.

Keywords

CornZea maysRiceOryza sativaBermudagrassCynodon dactylon
Type
UAV applications
Information
Advances in Animal Biosciences , Volume 8 , Special Issue 2: Papers presented at the 11th European Conference on Precision Agriculture (ECPA 2017), John McIntyre Centre, Edinburgh, UK, July 16–20 2017 , July 2017 , pp. 807 - 811
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bagavathiannan, MV and Norsworthy, JK 2012. Late-season seed production in arable weed communities: management implications. Weed Science 60, 325–334.Google Scholar
Bell, GE and Xiong, X 2008. Chapter 36: The History, Role, and Potential of Optical Sensing for Practical Turf Management. In Handbook of Turfgrass Management and Physiology, edited by M Pessarakli, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida 641–660.Google Scholar
Carrow, RN, Krum, JM, Flitcroft, I and Cline, V 2010. Precision turfgrass management: challenges and field applications for mapping turfgrass soil and stress. Precision Agriculture 11, 115–134.Google Scholar
Chapman, SC, Merz, T, Chan, A, Jackway, P, Hrabar, S, Dreccer, MF, et al. 2014. Pheno-copter: a low-altitude, autonomous remote-sensing robotic helicopter for high-throughput field-based phenotyping. Agronomy 4, 279–301.Google Scholar
Dicke, D, Jacobi, J and Büchse, A 2012. Quantifying herbicide injuries in maize by use of remote sensing. Julius-Kühn-Archiv 434, 199–205.Google Scholar
Heap, I 2016. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org (retrieved 30/11/16).Google Scholar
Longchamps, L, Panneton, B, Simard, M-J and Leroux, GD 2014. An imagery-based weed cover threshold established using expert knowledge. Weed Science 62, 177–185.Google Scholar
Lopez‐Granados, F 2011. Weed detection for site‐specific weed management: mapping and real‐time approaches. Weed Research 51, 1–11.Google Scholar
Miller, T, Street, JE, Buehring, N, Kanter, D, Walker, TW, Bond, JA, et al. 2008. Mississippi’s Rice Growers’ Guide. Mississippi State University. Extension Service Publication 2255. http://extension.msstate.edu/sites/default/files/publications/publications/p2255.pdf (retreived 12/12/16).Google Scholar
Pena, JM, Torres-Sanchez, J, de Castro, AI, Kelly, M and Lopez-Granados, F 2013. Weed mapping in early-season maize fields using object-based analysis of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) images. PLOS One 8, e77151.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, J, Nielsen, J, Garcia‐Ruiz, F, Christensen, S and Streibig, JC 2013. Potential uses of small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in weed research. Weed Research 53, 242–248.Google Scholar
Shaner, DL and Beckie, HJ 2014. The future for weed control and technology. Pest management science 70, 1329–1339.Google Scholar
Tanimoto, SL 1981. Template matching in pyramids. Computer Graphics and Image Processing 16, 356–369.Google Scholar