4.6 Review

Systematic Mapping Study on Remote Sensing in Agriculture

Journal

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
Volume 10, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app10103456

Keywords

remote images; systematic mapping study; agriculture; applications

Funding

  1. Spanish MICINN [RTI2018-098156-B-C53]
  2. European Commission FEDER funds [RTI2018-098156-B-C53]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities [RTI2018-098309-B-C33, TIN2017-90689-REDT]
  4. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The area of remote sensing techniques in agriculture has reached a significant degree of development and maturity, with numerous journals, conferences, and organizations specialized in it. Moreover, many review papers are available in the literature. The present work describes a literature review that adopts the form of a systematic mapping study, following a formal methodology. Eight mapping questions were defined, analyzing the main types of research, techniques, platforms, topics, and spectral information. A predefined search string was applied in the Scopus database, obtaining 1590 candidate papers. Afterwards, the most relevant 106 papers were selected, considering those with more than six citations per year. These are analyzed in more detail, answering the mapping questions for each paper. In this way, the current trends and new opportunities are discovered. As a result, increasing interest in the area has been observed since 2000; the most frequently addressed problems are those related to parameter estimation, growth vigor, and water usage, using classification techniques, that are mostly applied on RGB and hyperspectral images, captured from drones and satellites. A general recommendation that emerges from this study is to build on existing resources, such as agricultural image datasets, public satellite imagery, and deep learning toolkits.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available