利用农田灌溉测量和遥感产量对农田一级棉花水分生产力进行基准测试

IF 7.8 1区 农林科学 Q1 AGRONOMY Agricultural Water Management Pub Date : 2025-04-30 Epub Date: 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1016/j.agwat.2025.109384
Zitian Gao , Danlu Guo , Dongryeol Ryu , Andrew W. Western
{"title":"利用农田灌溉测量和遥感产量对农田一级棉花水分生产力进行基准测试","authors":"Zitian Gao ,&nbsp;Danlu Guo ,&nbsp;Dongryeol Ryu ,&nbsp;Andrew W. Western","doi":"10.1016/j.agwat.2025.109384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Benchmarking farm-level irrigation water productivity (WP<sub>I</sub>) and water productivity (WP) can assist in understanding the irrigation effectiveness of individual farms and in developing strategies to improve their irrigation management. This study introduces a method to integrate on-farm irrigation measurements, remotely sensed yields and publicly available rainfall data for multi-year farm-level WP<sub>I</sub> and WP benchmarking. The method was tested over cotton farms located in south-eastern Australia during the 2011–19 cropping seasons. We trained remote sensing (RS)-based machine learning (ML) models – Random Forest Regression (RFR), Gradient Boosting Regression (GBR) and Support Vector Regression (SVR) – to predict yields for over 400 cotton fields with ground-truth yield data. Predicted cotton yields from the best-performing model were then combined with irrigation and rainfall data for WP<sub>I</sub> and WP benchmarking. We also examined: 1) if the yield model is transferable to unseen years and 2) if sub-field-scale yield data from a harvester over a small number of fields are effective for training ML models, in case field-scale yield data are insufficient. The results showed that field-scale cotton yield could be predicted with the best accuracy using the GBR model (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.7, RMSE = 235 kg/ha, mean absolute error = 176 kg/ha and Pearson correlation = 0.84) when applied to the period of training. The average WP<sub>I</sub> and WP varied between 0.18–0.36 kg/m<sup>3</sup> and 0.16–0.23 kg/m<sup>3</sup>, respectively. However, the RS-based yield model showed reduced performance outside of the training period. In addition, when field-scale yield samples were used in combination with many sub-field-scale samples for calibration, the model performance was biased to favour the sub-field-scale samples. Our findings demonstrate the ability of RS and ML models to provide yields for benchmarking analysis but highlight the potential risk of reduced accuracy of yield prediction in future years.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7634,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Water Management","volume":"311 ","pages":"Article 109384"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields\",\"authors\":\"Zitian Gao ,&nbsp;Danlu Guo ,&nbsp;Dongryeol Ryu ,&nbsp;Andrew W. Western\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.agwat.2025.109384\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Benchmarking farm-level irrigation water productivity (WP<sub>I</sub>) and water productivity (WP) can assist in understanding the irrigation effectiveness of individual farms and in developing strategies to improve their irrigation management. This study introduces a method to integrate on-farm irrigation measurements, remotely sensed yields and publicly available rainfall data for multi-year farm-level WP<sub>I</sub> and WP benchmarking. The method was tested over cotton farms located in south-eastern Australia during the 2011–19 cropping seasons. We trained remote sensing (RS)-based machine learning (ML) models – Random Forest Regression (RFR), Gradient Boosting Regression (GBR) and Support Vector Regression (SVR) – to predict yields for over 400 cotton fields with ground-truth yield data. Predicted cotton yields from the best-performing model were then combined with irrigation and rainfall data for WP<sub>I</sub> and WP benchmarking. We also examined: 1) if the yield model is transferable to unseen years and 2) if sub-field-scale yield data from a harvester over a small number of fields are effective for training ML models, in case field-scale yield data are insufficient. The results showed that field-scale cotton yield could be predicted with the best accuracy using the GBR model (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.7, RMSE = 235 kg/ha, mean absolute error = 176 kg/ha and Pearson correlation = 0.84) when applied to the period of training. The average WP<sub>I</sub> and WP varied between 0.18–0.36 kg/m<sup>3</sup> and 0.16–0.23 kg/m<sup>3</sup>, respectively. However, the RS-based yield model showed reduced performance outside of the training period. In addition, when field-scale yield samples were used in combination with many sub-field-scale samples for calibration, the model performance was biased to favour the sub-field-scale samples. Our findings demonstrate the ability of RS and ML models to provide yields for benchmarking analysis but highlight the potential risk of reduced accuracy of yield prediction in future years.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural Water Management\",\"volume\":\"311 \",\"pages\":\"Article 109384\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural Water Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377425000988\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Water Management","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377425000988","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对农场一级的灌溉水生产率(WPI)和水生产率(WP)进行基准测试有助于了解单个农场的灌溉效率,并有助于制定改善其灌溉管理的战略。本研究介绍了一种方法,将农田灌溉测量、遥感产量和公开可用的降雨量数据整合起来,用于多年农场级WPI和WP基准测试。该方法在2011-19种植季期间在澳大利亚东南部的棉花农场进行了测试。我们训练了基于遥感(RS)的机器学习(ML)模型——随机森林回归(RFR)、梯度增强回归(GBR)和支持向量回归(SVR)——利用真实产量数据预测400多个棉田的产量。然后将表现最佳的模型预测的棉花产量与灌溉和降雨数据相结合,用于WPI和WP基准。我们还检查了:1)产量模型是否可转移到未见过的年份;2)在田级产量数据不足的情况下,来自小块田的收获机的子田级产量数据是否对训练ML模型有效。结果表明,GBR模型对大田棉花产量的预测精度最高,R2 = 0.7, RMSE = 235 kg/ha,平均绝对误差= 176 kg/ha, Pearson相关系数= 0.84。平均WPI和WP变化范围分别为0.18-0.36 kg/m3和0.16-0.23 kg/m3。然而,基于rs的收益模型显示,在训练期之外的表现有所下降。此外,当田间规模的产量样本与许多子田间规模的样本结合使用时,模型的性能偏向于子田间规模的样本。我们的研究结果证明了RS和ML模型为基准分析提供产量的能力,但强调了未来几年产量预测准确性降低的潜在风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields
Benchmarking farm-level irrigation water productivity (WPI) and water productivity (WP) can assist in understanding the irrigation effectiveness of individual farms and in developing strategies to improve their irrigation management. This study introduces a method to integrate on-farm irrigation measurements, remotely sensed yields and publicly available rainfall data for multi-year farm-level WPI and WP benchmarking. The method was tested over cotton farms located in south-eastern Australia during the 2011–19 cropping seasons. We trained remote sensing (RS)-based machine learning (ML) models – Random Forest Regression (RFR), Gradient Boosting Regression (GBR) and Support Vector Regression (SVR) – to predict yields for over 400 cotton fields with ground-truth yield data. Predicted cotton yields from the best-performing model were then combined with irrigation and rainfall data for WPI and WP benchmarking. We also examined: 1) if the yield model is transferable to unseen years and 2) if sub-field-scale yield data from a harvester over a small number of fields are effective for training ML models, in case field-scale yield data are insufficient. The results showed that field-scale cotton yield could be predicted with the best accuracy using the GBR model (R2 = 0.7, RMSE = 235 kg/ha, mean absolute error = 176 kg/ha and Pearson correlation = 0.84) when applied to the period of training. The average WPI and WP varied between 0.18–0.36 kg/m3 and 0.16–0.23 kg/m3, respectively. However, the RS-based yield model showed reduced performance outside of the training period. In addition, when field-scale yield samples were used in combination with many sub-field-scale samples for calibration, the model performance was biased to favour the sub-field-scale samples. Our findings demonstrate the ability of RS and ML models to provide yields for benchmarking analysis but highlight the potential risk of reduced accuracy of yield prediction in future years.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Agricultural Water Management
Agricultural Water Management 农林科学-农艺学
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
14.90%
发文量
648
审稿时长
4.9 months
期刊介绍: Agricultural Water Management publishes papers of international significance relating to the science, economics, and policy of agricultural water management. In all cases, manuscripts must address implications and provide insight regarding agricultural water management.
期刊最新文献
Enhancing water productivity in sugarcane cultivation by integrating basal crop coefficient with deficit irrigation Compound drought-heatwave events and crop loss amplified by inconsistency Ecological and environmental impacts of large-scale interbasin water transfer projects: A case study of the middle route of the south-to-north water diversion project Assimilation of remote sensing data and crop model simulations for improved rice yield prediction under controlled irrigation and extreme precipitation in Northeast China Economic valuation of irrigation water using production functions: A case study from the Pennaiyar River Basin, Tamil Nadu, India
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1