Victor Rueda-Ayala

Discriminating Crop, Weeds and Soil Surface with a Terrestrial LIDAR Sensor

In this study, the evaluation of the accuracy and performance of a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor for vegetation using distance and reflection measurements aiming to detect and discriminate maize plants and weeds from soil surface was done. The study continues a previous work carried out in a maize field in Spain with a LIDAR sensor using exclusively one index, the height profile. The current system uses a combination of the two mentioned indexes. The experiment was carried out in a maize field at growth stage 12–14, at 16 different locations selected to represent the widest possible density of three weeds: Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P.Beauv., Lamium purpureum L., Galium aparine L.and Veronica persica Poir.. A terrestrial LIDAR sensor was mounted on a tripod pointing to the inter-row area, with its horizontal axis and the field of view pointing vertically downwards to the ground, scanning a vertical plane with the potential presence of vegetation. Immediately after the LIDAR data acquisition (distances and reflection measurements), actual heights of plants were estimated using an appropriate methodology. For that purpose, digital images were taken of each sampled area. Data showed a high correlation between LIDAR measured height and actual plant heights (R2 = 0.75). Binary logistic regression between weed presence/absence and the sensor readings (LIDAR height and reflection values) was used to validate the accuracy of the sensor. This permitted the discrimination of vegetation from the ground with an accuracy of up to 95%. In addition, a Canonical Discrimination Analysis (CDA) was able to discriminate mostly between soil and vegetation and, to a far lesser extent, between crop and weeds. The studied methodology arises as a good system for weed detection, which in combination with other principles, such as vision-based technologies, could improve the efficiency and accuracy of herbicide spraying.

Mechanical Weed Control

Side effects of herbicides and increasing prevalence of organic farming induce the need of further developments in mechanical weed control. Mechanical weed control is mainly associated with cultivating tillage (e.g. tertiary tillage), but also primary and secondary tillage influence weeds. Cultivating tillage is performed in growing crops with harrows , hoes , brushes and a number of special tools for intra-row weed control. Inter-row cultivations have been used in many decades in row crops and perform in general well. To increase their capacity and accuracy, guidance systems are important to steer the hoes along the rows. The success of inter- and intra-row cultivation is highly influenced by selectivity factors. The control mechanisms of all cultivating tillage methods are burring in soil, uprooting, and tearing plants into pieces. Especially for whole crop and intra-row cultivators, successful weed control is highly influenced by appropriate adjustment of the intensity (aggressiveness) of cultivation according to the variations of soil resistance, crop and weed resistance to cultivation and the competitive interactions between crop and weeds. Site-specific weed management aims to identify the spatial and temporal variability of weeds and manage them correspondingly. New technologies for sensing crops and weeds in real-time and robotics allow a precise operation of mechanical tools, to improve efficacy of control and reduce operation costs. Hence in this chapter, implements for mechanical weeding are described together with their options for site-specific weed control strategies. Harrows and rotary hoes are used for whole crop treatment, but it is essential to find the right timing and intensity to obtain the best selectivity and yield response. Different implements attached to the same vehicle are combined together attempting more selective weed control, like the in-row cultivator, the rotary harrow , and the precision hoe . Lately, there are prototypes intending automatic adjustment of the aggressiveness for the spring-tine harrow and autonomous guidance for hoes, thus getting closer to a real-time site-specific weed management approach.

Development and Testing of a Decision Making Based Method to Adjust Automatically the Harrowing Intensity

Harrowing is often used to reduce weed competition, generally using a constant intensity across a whole field. The efficacy of weed harrowing in wheat and barley can be optimized, if site-specific conditions of soil, weed infestation and crop growth stage are taken into account. This study aimed to develop and test an algorithm to automatically adjust the harrowing intensity by varying the tine angle and number of passes. The field variability of crop leaf cover, weed density and soil density was acquired with geo-referenced sensors to investigate the harrowing selectivity and crop recovery. Crop leaf cover and weed density were assessed using bispectral cameras through differential images analysis. The draught force of the soil opposite to the direction of travel was measured with electronic load cell sensor connected to a rigid tine mounted in front of the harrow. Optimal harrowing intensity levels were derived in previously implemented experiments, based on the weed control efficacy and yield gain. The assessments of crop leaf cover, weed density and soil density were combined via rules with the aforementioned optimal intensities, in a linguistic fuzzy inference system (LFIS). The system was evaluated in two field experiments that compared constant intensities with variable intensities inferred by the system. A higher weed density reduction could be achieved when the harrowing intensity was not kept constant along the cultivated plot. Varying the intensity tended to reduce the crop leaf cover, though slightly improving crop yield. A real-time intensity adjustment with this system is achievable, if the cameras are attached in the front and at the rear or sides of the harrow.

Integrating Economics in the Critical Period for Weed Control Concept in Corn

Abstract The effect of weed interference on corn yield and the critical period for weed control (CPWC) were determined in Germany and Benin. Treatments with weed control starting at different crop growth stages and continuously kept weed-free until harvest represented the “weed-infested interval.” Treatments that were kept weed-free from sowing until different crop growth stages represented the “weed-free interval.” Michaelis–Menten, Gompertz, logistic and log–logistic models were employed to model the weed interference on yield. Cross-validation revealed that the log–logistic model fitted the weed-infested interval data equally well as the logistic and slightly better than the Gompertz model fitted the weed-free interval. For Benin, economic calculations considered yield revenue and cost increase due to mechanical weeding operations. Weeding once at the ten-leaf stage of corn resulted already profitable in three out of four cases. One additional weeding operation may optimize and assure profit. Economic calculations for Germany determined a CPWC starting earlier than the four-leaf stage, challenging the decade-long propagated CPWC for corn. Differences between Germany and Benin are probably due to the higher yields and high costs in Germany. This study provides a straightforward method to implement economic data in the determination of the CPWC for chemical and nonchemical weed control strategies. Nomenclature: corn, Zea mays L.

A non-chemical system for online weed control.

Non-chemical weed control methods need to be directed towards a site-specific weeding approach, in order to be able to compete the conventional herbicide equivalents. A system for online weed control was developed. It automatically adjusts the tine angle of a harrow and creates different levels of intensity: from gentle to aggressive. Two experimental plots in a maize field were harrowed with two consecutive passes. The plots presented from low to high weed infestation levels. Discriminant capabilities of an ultrasonic sensor were used to determine the crop and weed variability of the field. A controlling unit used ultrasonic readings to adjust the tine angle, producing an appropriate harrowing intensity. Thus, areas with high crop and weed densities were more aggressively harrowed, while areas with lower densities were cultivated with a gentler treatment; areas with very low densities or without weeds were not treated. Although the weed development was relatively advanced and the soil surface was hard, the weed control achieved by the system reached an average of 51% (20%–91%), without causing significant crop damage as a result of harrowing. This system is proposed as a relatively low cost, online, and real-time automatic harrow that improves the weed control efficacy, reduces energy consumption, and avoids the usage of herbicide.