Matching the Best Viewing Angle in Depth Cameras for Biomass Estimation Based on Poplar Seedling Geometry

In energy crops for biomass production a proper plant structure is important to optimize wood yields. A precise crop characterization in early stages may contribute to the choice of proper cropping techniques. This study assesses the potential of the Microsoft Kinect for Windows v.1 sensor to determine the best viewing angle of the sensor to estimate the plant biomass based on poplar seedling geometry. Kinect Fusion algorithms were used to generate a 3D point cloud from the depth video stream. The sensor was mounted in different positions facing the tree in order to obtain depth (RGB-D) images from different angles. Individuals of two different ages, e.g., one month and one year old, were scanned. Four different viewing angles were compared: top view (0°), 45° downwards view, front view (90°) and ground upwards view (−45°). The ground-truth used to validate the sensor readings consisted of a destructive sampling in which the height, leaf area and biomass (dry weight basis) were measured in each individual plant. The depth image models agreed well with 45°, 90° and −45° measurements in one-year poplar trees. Good correlations (0.88 to 0.92) between dry biomass and the area measured with the Kinect were found. In addition, plant height was accurately estimated with a few centimeters error. The comparison between different viewing angles revealed that top views showed poorer results due to the fact the top leaves occluded the rest of the tree. However, the other views led to good results. Conversely, small poplars showed better correlations with actual parameters from the top view (0°). Therefore, although the Microsoft Kinect for Windows v.1 sensor provides good opportunities for biomass estimation, the viewing angle must be chosen taking into account the developmental stage of the crop and the desired parameters. The results of this study indicate that Kinect is a promising tool for a rapid canopy characterization, i.e., for estimating crop biomass production, with several important advantages: low cost, low power needs and a high frame rate (frames per second) when dynamic measurements are required.

[1]  D. Inzé,et al.  Cell to whole-plant phenotyping: the best is yet to come. , 2013, Trends in plant science.

[2]  Daniel Moura,et al.  In-field crop row phenotyping from 3D modeling performed using Structure from Motion , 2015, Comput. Electron. Agric..

[3]  C. Daughtry,et al.  Evaluation of Digital Photography from Model Aircraft for Remote Sensing of Crop Biomass and Nitrogen Status , 2005, Precision Agriculture.

[4]  Alexandre Escolà,et al.  Discriminating Crop, Weeds and Soil Surface with a Terrestrial LIDAR Sensor , 2013, Sensors.

[5]  F. Bongers.  Methods to assess tropical rain forest canopy structure: an overview , 2001, Plant Ecology.

[6]  P. Börjesson.  Environmental effects of energy crop cultivation in Sweden—I: Identification and quantification , 1999 .

[7]  A. Ashok Kumar,et al.  Phenotyping for Plant Breeding: Applications of Phenotyping Methods for Crop Improvement , 2013 .

[8]  David Bonnett,et al.  Phenotyping transgenic wheat for drought resistance. , 2012, Journal of experimental botany.

[9]  Martin Weis,et al.  Detection and Identification of Weeds , 2010 .

[10]  Nicolas Tremblay,et al.  A comparison of crop data measured by two commercial sensors for variable-rate nitrogen application , 2009, Precision Agriculture.

[11]  Christian Messier,et al.  Assessing the Potential of Low-Cost 3D Cameras for the Rapid Measurement of Plant Woody Structure , 2013, Sensors.

[12]  W. Stuppy,et al.  Three-dimensional analysis of plant structure using high-resolution X-ray computed tomography. , 2003, Trends in plant science.

[13]  Birger Hjelm,et al.  Empirical Models for Estimating Volume and Biomass of Poplars on Farmland in Sweden , 2015 .

[14]  Lutz Plümer,et al.  Low-Cost 3D Systems: Suitable Tools for Plant Phenotyping , 2014, Sensors.

[15]  J. Alex Thomasson,et al.  Ground-based sensing system for weed mapping in cotton , 2008 .

[16]  Michael A. Crimmins,et al.  Monitoring Plant Phenology Using Digital Repeat Photography , 2008, Environmental management.

[17]  Ulrich Schurr,et al.  Future scenarios for plant phenotyping. , 2013, Annual review of plant biology.

[18]  Hans Jørgen Andersen,et al.  Geometric plant properties by relaxed stereo vision using simulated annealing , 2005 .

[19]  Jacinto Gil Sierra,et al.  Usando Kinect como sensor para una pulverización inteligente. , 2013 .

[20]  Jordi Llorens,et al.  Performance of an Ultrasonic Ranging Sensor in Apple Tree Canopies , 2011, Sensors.

[21]  Alexandre Escolà,et al.  Weed discrimination using ultrasonic sensors , 2011 .

[22]  Sander Oude Elberink,et al.  Accuracy and Resolution of Kinect Depth Data for Indoor Mapping Applications , 2012, Sensors.

[23]  Philippe Lucidarme,et al.  On the use of depth camera for 3D phenotyping of entire plants , 2012 .

[24]  Alexandre Escolà,et al.  Deciduous tree reconstruction algorithm based on cylinder fitting from mobile terrestrial laser scanned point clouds , 2014 .

[25]  María-Paz Diago,et al.  Grapevine Yield and Leaf Area Estimation Using Supervised Classification Methodology on RGB Images Taken under Field Conditions , 2012, Sensors.

[26]  Angela Ribeiro,et al.  Accuracy and Feasibility of Optoelectronic Sensors for Weed Mapping in Wide Row Crops , 2011, Sensors.

[27]  Hortensia Sixto,et al.  Biomass production assessment from Populus spp. short‐rotation irrigated crops in Spain , 2014 .

[28]  Guido M. Cortelazzo,et al.  Time-of-Flight Cameras and Microsoft Kinect™ , 2012, Springer Briefs in Electrical and Computer Engineering.

[29]  Simonetta Paloscia,et al.  The potential of multifrequency polarimetric SAR in assessing agricultural and arboreous biomass , 1997, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[30]  Alessandro Cescatti,et al.  Indirect estimates of canopy gap fraction based on the linear conversion of hemispherical photographs Methodology and comparison with standard thresholding techniques , 2007 .

[31]  Erich-Christian Oerke,et al.  Precision Crop Protection - the Challenge and Use of Heterogeneity , 2014 .

[32]  J. Chen,et al.  Evaluation of hemispherical photography for determining plant area index and geometry of a forest stand , 1991 .

[33]  A. Escolà,et al.  Ultrasonic and LIDAR Sensors for Electronic Canopy Characterization in Vineyards: Advances to Improve Pesticide Application Methods , 2011, Sensors.

[34]  Yonghuai Liu,et al.  Accurate Multi-View Stereo 3D Reconstruction for Cost-Effective Plant Phenotyping , 2014, ICIAR.