Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29644431›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of biometeorology2018

Machine learning modeling of plant phenology based on coupling satellite and gridded meteorological dataset.

Bartosz Czernecki, Jakub Nowosad, Katarzyna Jabłońska

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of biometeorology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

3 authors.

Bartosz CzerneckiDepartment of Climatology, Faculty of Geographical and Geological Sciences, Adam Mickiewicz University, Krygowskiego 10, 61 680, Poznań, Poland. nwp@amu.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6496-1386
Jakub NowosadSpace Informatics Lab, Department of Geography and GIS, University of Cincinnati, 219 Braunstein Hall, Cincinnati, OH, 45221, USA.
Katarzyna JabłońskaInstitute of Meteorology and Water Management - National Research Institute, Podleśna 61, 01 673, Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

Narodowe Centrum Nauki DEC-2012/05/N/ST10/03703Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Center 331
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Changes in the timing of plant phenological phases are important proxies in contemporary climate research. However, most of the commonly used traditional phenological observations do not give any coherent spatial information. While consistent spatial data can be obtained from airborne sensors and preprocessed gridded meteorological data, not many studies robustly benefit from these data sources. Therefore, the main aim of this study is to create and evaluate different statistical models for reconstructing, predicting, and improving quality of phenological phases monitoring with the use of satellite and meteorological products. A quality-controlled dataset of the 13 BBCH plant phenophases in Poland was collected for the period 2007-2014. For each phenophase, statistical models were built using the most commonly applied regression-based machine learning techniques, such as multiple linear regression, lasso, principal component regression, generalized boosted models, and random forest. The quality of the models was estimated using a k-fold cross-validation. The obtained results showed varying potential for coupling meteorological derived indices with remote sensing products in terms of phenological modeling; however, application of both data sources improves models' accuracy from 0.6 to 4.6 day in terms of obtained RMSE. It is shown that a robust prediction of early phenological phases is mostly related to meteorological indices, whereas for autumn phenophases, there is a stronger information signal provided by satellite-derived vegetation metrics. Choosing a specific set of predictors and applying a robust preprocessing procedures is more important for final results than the selection of a particular statistical model. The average RMSE for the best models of all phenophases is 6.3, while the individual RMSE vary seasonally from 3.5 to 10 days. Models give reliable proxy for ground observations with RMSE below 5 days for early spring and late spring phenophases. For other phenophases, RMSE are higher and rise up to 9-10 days in the case of the earliest spring phenophases.

Indexed as

Machine LearningMeteorologyPlant DevelopmentPlant Physiological PhenomenaClimatePlantsPolandBBCH scaleE-OBSMachine learningMODISPhenology modelingPhenophase

Identifiers

PMID29644431
PMCPMC6028898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.