Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T06:40:22.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Hyperspectral imagery as a supporting tool in precision irrigation of karst landscapes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2017

M. Zovko*
Affiliation:
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagreb, Croatia
U. Žibrat
Affiliation:
The Agricultural Institute of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia
M. Knapič
Affiliation:
The Agricultural Institute of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia
M. Bubalo
Affiliation:
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagreb, Croatia
M. Romić
Affiliation:
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagreb, Croatia
D. Romić
Affiliation:
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagreb, Croatia
*
† E-mail: mzovko@agr.hr

Abstract

This research was carried out in an experimental vineyard grown in artificially transformed karst terrain (Croatia). The experimental design included four water treatments in three replicates: 1) fully watered or based on 100% evapotranspiration (ETc) application; 2) regulated deficit irrigation based on 75% and 50% ETc applications; and 3) non-watered. Hyperspectral images of grapevines were taken in the summer of 2016 using two spectral-radiance (W·sr−1·m−2) calibrated cameras, covering wavelengths from 409 to 988 nm and 950 to 2509 nm. The four treatments were grouped into two new sets: 1) drought (NO); and 2) watered (the remaining three treatments). The watered group was then split into two new sets: 1) 50% treatment; and 2) 75+100% treatment. The images were analyzed using Partial least squares – discriminant analysis (PLS-DA), and Single Vector Machines (SVM). The PLS-DA demonstrated the capability to determine levels of grapevine drought or watered groups with 70 - 80% accuracy. A similar success rate was achieved in distinguishing the 50% group from the 75+100% group.

Figure 0

Figure 1 Aerial photograph of the study area and maps of the vineyard plot with their respective treatments

Figure 1

Figure 2 PLS-DA score plot of watered (N50, N75 and N100) and drought (N0) treatments. A - All five boxes on the far left belong to Line 1 of treatment N0 and were identified as outliers. B – Final score plot of watered-drought treatments. The numbers in parentheses next to axis labels denote how much variability of the spectra (first number) and treatments (second number) is explained by the factor

Figure 2

Table 1 Accuracy measures of SVM classifications

Figure 3

Figure 3 PLS-DA score plot of watered treatments N50, N75, and N100

Figure 4

Figure 4 PLS-DA correlation loadings plot of Factor 1 for differentiating treatment groups N50, N57, and N100. The area between the dotted lines denotes upper and lower bounds of significance

Figure 5

Figure 5 PLS-DA scores of treatments N50 and N75+N100