Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41249277›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Improving sugar beet canopy mapping through UAV image analysis.

Jianjun Jiang, Donghui Li, Qiansheng Qiu, Lingchao Xiao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jianjun JiangSchool of Electrical Automation and Information Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin, 300072, China.
Donghui LiSchool of Electrical Automation and Information Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin, 300072, China. zytxqk@126.com.
Qiansheng QiuZhejiang Xinneng Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd, Jiaxing, 314400, Zhejiang, China.
Lingchao XiaoZhejiang Xinneng Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd, Jiaxing, 314400, Zhejiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fractional vegetation cover (FVC) is an important indicator of crop growth and a key parameter in vegetation modeling. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) equipped with RGB cameras offer a practical and cost-effective alternative to labor-intensive field surveys and multispectral imaging for FVC estimation. In this study, 18 segmentation methods, derived from the combination of six vegetation indices and three thresholding algorithms, were applied to UAV imagery of sugar beet fields during the 2022 growing season. The methods were validated using ground truth data collected from 30 plots across four growth stages. Results indicated that the Excess Green (ExG), Green Leaf Index (GLI), and Red-Green-Blue Vegetation Index (RGBVI), when combined with Otsu and Ridler-Calvard (RC) thresholding, generally provided the most accurate segmentation of vegetation cover. In particular, ExG with Otsu and RC achieved the highest accuracy (NRMSE = 5.1%, R² = 0.96), whereas ExGB with the Two-Peaks method showed the weakest performance (NRMSE = 42.3%, R² = 0.34). Statistical analyses confirmed that ExG-based approaches demonstrated stronger correlations with field measurements compared to other methods. These findings suggest that ExG in combination with Otsu or RC can be considered a promising option for UAV-based estimation of sugar beet vegetation cover, although further validation under different environmental and crop conditions is recommended.

Indexed as

Crop monitoringFractional vegetation coverImage segmentationSugar beetUAV imagery

Identifiers

PMID41249277
PMCPMC12623423

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.