ArticleScientific reports2025
Refining grapevine vegetation status by utilizing grassland and remote sensing data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative evaluation of vegetation indices for water and heat stress detection and monitoring across land cover types.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present study aimed to investigate specific vegetation indices (VI) at three research sites - one grassland and two vineyards - and evaluate the potential of grassland remote sensing (RS) data to refine Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) values in grass-covered inter-row vineyards. The vineyards differed in soil texture, with silt loam at BCS and clay at GB, located on 8-15% slopes. Field monitoring included NDVI, Photochemical Reflectance Index (PRI), and Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) data at different slope positions. We also downloaded spectral data from Sentinel-2 (S2; n = 124) to see how well the NDVI field and S2 data correlate. Afterward, different machine learning techniques were used to refine the accuracy of the measurements, such as linear regression (LR), random forest (RF), and XGBoost. Significant differences in VI were observed between the research sites, mainly correlating with soil chemistry. While NDVI is an indicator of overall canopy vigor, PRI was more responsive to short-term physiological changes, showing higher sensitivity under stress conditions. Ground truth and RS NDVI were well correlated (r = 0.68), with RF providing the best accuracy when trained with day of year and the grassland data (r = 0.787). Each model moderately predicted grapevine VI using basic inputs (r > 0.61), however, all three models performed well when grassland NDVI included in the training.
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.