Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36960224›Full record

ReviewNational science review2023

Challenges and opportunities in remote sensing-based crop monitoring: a review.

Bingfang Wu, Miao Zhang, Hongwei Zeng, Fuyou Tian, Andries B Potgieter, Xingli Qin, Nana Yan, Sheng Chang, Yan Zhao, Qinghan Dong and 8 more

Full text readReview
In one paragraph

Review in National science review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

18 authors.

Bingfang WuState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5546-365X
Miao ZhangState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Hongwei ZengState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Fuyou TianState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Andries B PotgieterQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, Brisbane 4343, Australia.
Xingli QinState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Nana YanState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Sheng ChangState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Yan ZhaoQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, Brisbane 4343, Australia.
Qinghan DongDepartment of Remote Sensing, Flemish Institute of Technological Research, Mol 2400, Belgium.
Vijendra BokenDepartment of Geography and Earth Science, University of Nebraska-Kearney, NE 68849, USA.
Dmitry PlotnikovDepartment of Satellite Monitoring Technologies, Space Research Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 117997, Russia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1272-7050
Huadong GuoState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Fangming WuState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Hang ZhaoState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Bart DerondeDepartment of Remote Sensing, Flemish Institute of Technological Research, Mol 2400, Belgium.
Laurent TitsDepartment of Remote Sensing, Flemish Institute of Technological Research, Mol 2400, Belgium.
Evgeny LoupianDepartment of Satellite Monitoring Technologies, Space Research Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 117997, Russia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Building a more resilient food system for sustainable development and reducing uncertainty in global food markets both require concurrent and near-real-time and reliable crop information for decision making. Satellite-driven crop monitoring has become a main method to derive crop information at local, regional, and global scales by revealing the spatial and temporal dimensions of crop growth status and production. However, there is a lack of quantitative, objective, and robust methods to ensure the reliability of crop information, which reduces the applicability of crop monitoring and leads to uncertain and undesirable consequences. In this paper, we review recent progress in crop monitoring and identify the challenges and opportunities in future efforts. We find that satellite-derived metrics do not fully capture determinants of crop production and do not quantitatively interpret crop growth status; the latter can be advanced by integrating effective satellite-derived metrics and new onboard sensors. We have identified that ground data accessibility and the negative effects of knowledge-based analyses are two essential issues in crop monitoring that reduce the applicability of crop monitoring for decisions on food security. Crowdsourcing is one solution to overcome the restrictions of ground-truth data accessibility. We argue that user participation in the complete process of crop monitoring could improve the reliability of crop information. Encouraging users to obtain crop information from multiple sources could prevent unconscious biases. Finally, there is a need to avoid conflicts of interest in publishing publicly available crop information.

Indexed as

crop conditioncrop monitoringcrop productionGround dataRemote Sensing

Identifiers

PMID36960224
PMCPMC10029851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read21
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.