| |
DOI: | 10.21273/HORTSCI.39.1.55 |
Web URL(s): | https://journals.ashs.org/hortsci/view/journals/hortsci/39/1/article-p55.xml?rskey=lfdSCy Last checked: 11/19/2019 Requires: PDF Reader |
Publication Type:
| Refereed |
Author(s): | Olmstead, Mercy A.;
Wample, Robert;
Greene, Stephanie;
Tarara, Julie |
Author Affiliation: | Olmstead: Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Washington State University, Prosser, Washington; Wample: Director, Viticulture and Enology Research Center, Department of Viticulture and Enology, Fresno, California; Greene: Plant Geneticist Tarara: Research Horticulturist, USDA, ARS National Temperate Forage Legume Germplasm Resources Unit and USDA, ARS Horticultural Crops Research Unit, Prosser, Washington |
Title: | Nondestructive measurement of vegetative cover using digital image analysis |
Section: | Crop production Other records with the "Crop production" Section
|
Source: | HortScience. Vol. 39, No. 1, February 2004, p. 55-59. |
Publishing Information: | Alexandria, VA: American Society for Horticultural Science |
# of Pages: | 5 |
Keywords: | TIC Keywords: Measurement; Percent living ground cover; Density; Visual evaluation; Software; Photography
|
Abstract/Contents: | "Traditionally, vegetative cover has been subjectively assessed by visual assessment. However, visual assessment is thought to overestimate percent vegetative cover. Thus, a repeatable method to objectively quantify percent cover is desirable. In two vineyards near Prosser, Wash., the percentage of ground surface covered by up to 15 different cover crops was assessed both visually and by computer-assisted digital image analysis. Quadrats in the cover crop were photographed digitally and the images analyzed with commercially available software. Areas of green vegetation in each image were identified and measured. Weeds in some images were differentiated from the cover crop by user-defined thresholds. Subjective visual estimates of percent vegetative cover were generally higher than those digitally estimated. Values for the visual estimates ranged from 5% to 70% in 1998 (mean = 52.4%) and 7.5% to 55% in 1999 (mean = 30.7%), compared to digital readings ranging from 0.5% to 24% (mean = 11.1%) and 10.3% to 36.6% cover (mean = 20.1%), respectively. The visual assessments had lower coefficients of variability in 1998 (cv 28.1) than the digital image analysis (cv 52.3), but in 1999, the values for the two techniques were similar (cv 41.2 vs. cv 45.7). Despite initial variations between the two methods, the accuracy of digital image analysis for measuring percentage vegetative cover is superior." |
Language: | English |
References: | 23 |
Note: | Pictures, b/w Tables Graphs |
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete): Olmstead, M. A., R. Wample, S. Greene, and J. Tarara. 2004. Nondestructive measurement of vegetative cover using digital image analysis. HortScience. 39(1):p. 55-59. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=94791 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 94791. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
| DOI: 10.21273/HORTSCI.39.1.55 |
| Web URL(s): https://journals.ashs.org/hortsci/view/journals/hortsci/39/1/article-p55.xml?rskey=lfdSCy Last checked: 11/19/2019 Requires: PDF Reader |
| MSU catalog number: SB 1 .H64 |
| Find from within TIC: Digitally in TIC by record number. |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |