ArticlePlant methods2024
Prediction accuracy and repeatability of UAV based biomass estimation in wheat variety trials as affected by variable type, modelling strategy and sampling location.
Article in Plant methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- From plots to commercial fields: scalable, transferable cotton morphology and productivity estimation using functional growth proxies from UAV and PlanetScope time series.Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Multi dimensional variable influence mechanism analysis for wheat biomass estimation using fused UAV spectral and canopy height data and machine learning.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Phenotyping the hidden half: combining UAV phenotyping and machine learning to predict barley root traits in the field.Journal of experimental botany · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study explores the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) for estimating wheat biomass, focusing on the impact of phenotyping and analytical protocols in the context of late-stage variety selection programs. It emphasizes the importance of variable selection, model specificity, and sampling location within the experimental plot in predicting biomass, aiming to refine UAV-based estimation techniques for enhanced selection accuracy and throughput in variety testing programs.
resultsThe research uncovered that integrating geometric and spectral traits led to an increase in prediction accuracy, whilst a recursive feature elimination (RFE) based variable selection workflowled to slight reductions in accuracy with the benefit of increased interpretability. Models, tailored to specific experiments were more accurate than those modelling all experiments together, while models trained for broad-growth stages did not significantly increase accuracy. The comparison between a permanent and a precise region of interest (ROI) within the plot showed negligible differences in biomass prediction accuracy, indicating the robustness of the approach across different sampling locations within the plot. Significant differences in the within-season repeatability (w
conclusionsThe study highlights the promising potential of UAV technology in biomass prediction for wheat at a small plot scale. It suggests that the accuracy of biomass predictions can be significantly improved through optimizing analytical and modelling protocols (i.e., variable selection, algorithm selection, stage-specific model development). Future work should focus on exploring the applicability of these findings under a wider variety of conditions and from a more diverse set of genotypes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.