Next Article in Journal
Agronomic Evaluation of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Under Different Degrees of Drought–Rehydration Conditions Under Drip Irrigation
Previous Article in Journal
Fine Mapping of Bush Gene and Development of Molecular Marker for Bush Type in Pumpkin (Cucurbita maxima Duch.)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Prediction of Anthracnose Risk in Large-Leaf Tea Trees Based on the Atmospheric Environmental Changes in Yunnan Tea Gardens—Cox Regression Model and Machine Learning Model
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Harnessing Data-Driven Technologies for Sustainable Farming Practices

1
Group Agrivoltaics, Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE, 79110 Freiburg, Germany
2
Instituto Tecnológico Agrario de Castilla y León (ITACyL), Ctra. Burgos km 119, 47071 Valladolid, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2024, 14(12), 2969; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14122969
Submission received: 3 December 2024 / Accepted: 11 December 2024 / Published: 13 December 2024

1. Technological Advancements and Practical Applications

Remote sensing (RS) and machine learning (ML) are driving significant changes in agriculture. This Special Issue, “Data-Driven Agriculture: Remote Sensing and Machine Learning for Sustainable Farming Practices”, highlights how these technologies contribute to sustainable farming.
With challenges like climate change, water scarcity, and the need for efficient resource use, RS and ML have become essential. RS provides real-time monitoring of crops and soil, offering an overview of agricultural areas. ML analyzes large datasets to identify patterns and insights, helping optimize decisions and resource use. Together, these tools allow farmers to address issues like pest control and nutrient management with greater precision and efficiency.
Recent advancements have shown diverse applications of RS platforms tailored to specific agricultural needs. Satellite imagery allows for large-scale monitoring and has been used to evaluate agronomic and quality variability in pistachios, providing insights into phenological stages and aiding the classification of productive areas for improved management [1]. Sentinel-2 NDVI time series have also been applied to assess vegetation dynamics in crops like wheat, barley, and maize, as well as forests, revealing variability influenced by environmental and management factors [2]. Additionally, comparisons of satellite data, including Sentinel-2 and Landsat-7/8, in regard to retrieving leaf chlorophyll content (Chl) have shown the superior performance of Sentinel-2 due to its red edge bands and higher resolution addressing challenges from canopy structure effects and the soil background, delivering accurate and consistent results [3]. These examples demonstrate the flexibility and broad applicability of satellite platforms across diverse agricultural settings.
In contrast, UAV platforms provide high-resolution, localized data, which is crucial for precision interventions in specific areas. UAV RGB imagery has been used to quantify tree-level flower intensity in apple orchards through pixel-based classification, outperforming expert assessments and enhancing agricultural monitoring [4]. Additionally, multispectral UAV imagery has been applied to map water stress variability in vineyards using canopy fraction-based vegetation indices (VIs). These indices effectively tracked water stress trends by integrating NDVI and NDRE with environmental data [5]. At a closer level, hyperspectral imaging (HSI) combined with ML has been employed to trace the origin of pistachio nuts and irrigation practices, evaluating water content and color pigments. This approach has shown potential for predicting yield and commercial quality, supporting sustainable pistachio production [6].

2. Challenges and Opportunities in Data-Driven Agriculture

The potential of data-driven agriculture is vast, but several key challenges must be addressed to ensure its success. Making technology accessible and affordable for smallholder farmers is essential. Future efforts should focus on:
  • Interdisciplinary collaboration: Bringing together agronomy, data science, and engineering expertise is critical to developing practical and holistic solutions [7]. Combining agronomic knowledge with RS and ML ensures these tools meet scientific and agricultural needs.
  • Scalable models: Modular and adaptable frameworks are needed to support adoption across various systems, from large-scale farms to smallholder operations [8], ensuring that technological benefits are accessible regardless of scale or available resources.
  • Climate resilience: RS and ML play a crucial role in creating strategies to mitigate climate risks by monitoring vegetation stress and predicting the impact of weather on yields [9], promoting sustainable resource use and resilience.
  • Enhanced optimization: Automation in agriculture increasingly relies on path-planning tools, including features such as swath creation and route optimization [10]. Moreover, enhanced path planning will improve field operations by using actual environmental data to optimize tasks like aerial inspections and spraying, reducing energy consumption and increasing precision [11].
  • High-quality datasets: The advancement of ML in agriculture depends on robust datasets, such as LiDAR data for 3D vineyard modeling [12] or multispectral imagery for precision management and disease diagnosis [13]. Sentinel-2 datasets, combined with algorithms like SVM and RF, have produced highly accurate cropland maps, offering valuable insights for resource management [14].
  • Expanding applications: Integrating RS and ML into agricultural systems will improve their efficiency and deployment. One example is agrivoltaics, which requires the monitoring of plant growth, yield, photosynthesis, and microclimatic conditions to perform optimally [15]. However, these systems can be challenging for agricultural monitoring [16] and represent a new paradigm reliant on RS and ML integration for future optimization.
These challenges underscore both the complexities of implementing data-driven agriculture and the opportunities for innovation. Overcoming them requires not only technological progress but also practical demonstrations of feasibility and real-world impact.

3. Insights from the Special Issue: Bridging Challenges with Solutions

Thus, the contributions in this Special Issue play a crucial role by showcasing how RS and ML are being applied across different agricultural domains. These papers offer valuable insights into tackling key barriers such as scalability, affordability, and climate resilience, helping to promote more inclusive and sustainable farming practices:
  • Crop monitoring and disease detection: Innovative applications of ML and predictive models have demonstrated remarkable accuracy in early disease detection. Ye et al. (2024) [17] utilized LASSO-COX-NOMOGRAM modeling to predict anthracnose risk in tea trees based on atmospheric conditions in Yunnan, achieving an external verification accuracy of 83.3%, showcasing the potential for non-invasive, high-precision disease management.
  • Precision irrigation and water management: Integrating RS and ML has transformed water management practices. Garofalo et al. (2024) utilized random forest models with satellite imagery to predict stem water potential in olive orchards, achieving an R2 of 0.78. This method offers a cost-effective and accurate alternative to traditional field measurements, which is critical for water-scarce regions [18].
  • Soil and nutrient assessment: Advances in high-resolution mapping have greatly enhanced soil health monitoring. Peng et al. (2024) introduced the mlhrsm R package for generating detailed soil moisture maps, leveraging quantile random forest algorithms to provide daily-to-weekly updates at resolutions as fine as 30 m, facilitating targeted soil management strategies [19].
  • Vineyard disease management: Precise and timely interventions in vineyard management are critical. Vélez et al. (2024) [20] demonstrated the use of field spectroscopy for detecting powdery mildew in vineyards, introducing the Powdery Mildew Vegetation Index (PMVI) with a high accuracy of R2 = 0.7.
  • Comparative index performance: Vegetation indices are fundamental in agriculture for optimizing resource management. Colovic et al. (2024) [21] explored the effectiveness of aerial RGB and hyperspectral indices for evaluating water and nitrogen status in sweet maize. Their findings highlighted the utility of specific indices such as CIred-edge, NDRE, and DD for monitoring physiological traits, underscoring the cost-effectiveness of aerial RGB indices in agricultural applications.
  • AI infrastructure for agricultural transformation: Rapid deployment of AI-driven solutions adaptable to dynamic field conditions is vital. Cob-Parro et al. (2024) [22] proposed an open-source AI architecture tailored for agricultural applications. Their MLOps-based framework fosters collaboration among data scientists and ML engineers.
We thank the contributors and reviewers who made this Special Issue possible. Their insights advance the understanding of RS and ML in agriculture and highlight practical pathways toward sustainable practices.
As agriculture enters this data-driven era, the combination of technological innovation and traditional farming knowledge will shape its future. We can build a more resilient and sustainable agricultural landscape by fostering equitable access to these tools.

Author Contributions

Both authors contributed equally to the writing of this editorial. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and European Union ≪NextGenerationEU≫//PRTR, grant number RYC2021-033890. Dr. Sergio Vélez’s contract has been supported by the Iberdrola Foundation and the European Commission under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA)—E4F, part of the Horizon 2020 program (Grant Agreement No 101034297, https://doi.org/10.3030/101034297, accessed on 20 March 2024).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Barajas, E.; Álvarez, S.; Fernández, E.; Vélez, S.; Rubio, J.A.; Martín, H. Sentinel-2 Satellite Imagery for Agronomic and Quality Variability Assessment of Pistachio (Pistacia vera L.). Sustainability 2020, 12, 8437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Sáenz, C.; Cicuéndez, V.; García, G.; Madruga, D.; Recuero, L.; Bermejo-Saiz, A.; Litago, J.; De La Calle, I.; Palacios-Orueta, A. New Insights on the Information Content of the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index Sentinel-2 Time Series for Assessing Vegetation Dynamics. Remote Sens. 2024, 16, 2980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wan, L.; Ryu, Y.; Dechant, B.; Lee, J.; Zhong, Z.; Feng, H. Improving Retrieval of Leaf Chlorophyll Content from Sentinel-2 and Landsat-7/8 Imagery by Correcting for Canopy Structural Effects. Remote Sens. Environ. 2024, 304, 114048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhang, C.; Valente, J.; Wang, W.; Guo, L.; Tubau Comas, A.; Van Dalfsen, P.; Rijk, B.; Kooistra, L. Feasibility Assessment of Tree-Level Flower Intensity Quantification from UAV RGB Imagery: A Triennial Study in an Apple Orchard. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2023, 197, 256–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Berry, A.; Vivier, M.A.; Poblete-Echeverría, C. Evaluation of Canopy Fraction-Based Vegetation Indices, Derived from Multispectral UAV Imagery, to Map Water Status Variability in a Commercial Vineyard. Irrig. Sci. 2024, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Martínez-Peña, R.; Castillo-Gironés, S.; Álvarez, S.; Vélez, S. Tracing Pistachio Nuts’ Origin and Irrigation Practices through Hyperspectral Imaging. Curr. Res. Food Sci. 2024, 9, 100835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lieder, S.; Schröter-Schlaack, C. Smart Farming Technologies in Arable Farming: Towards a Holistic Assessment of Opportunities and Risks. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Antle, J.M.; Basso, B.; Conant, R.T.; Godfray, H.C.J.; Jones, J.W.; Herrero, M.; Howitt, R.E.; Keating, B.A.; Munoz-Carpena, R.; Rosenzweig, C.; et al. Towards a New Generation of Agricultural System Data, Models and Knowledge Products: Design and Improvement. Agric. Syst. 2017, 155, 255–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tamayo-Vera, D.; Wang, X.; Mesbah, M. A Review of Machine Learning Techniques in Agroclimatic Studies. Agriculture 2024, 14, 481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mier, G.; Valente, J.; De Bruin, S. Fields2Cover: An Open-Source Coverage Path Planning Library for Unmanned Agricultural Vehicles. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2023, 8, 2166–2172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Vélez, S.; Mier, G.; Ariza-Sentís, M.; Valente, J. Integrated Framework for Multipurpose UAV Path Planning in Hedgerow Systems Considering the Biophysical Environment. Crop Prot. 2025, 187, 106992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Vélez, S.; Ariza-Sentís, M.; Valente, J. VineLiDAR: High-Resolution UAV-LiDAR Vineyard Dataset Acquired over Two Years in Northern Spain. Data Brief 2023, 51, 109686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Fonseka, C.L.I.S.; Halloluwa, T.; Hewagamage, K.P.; Rathnayake, U.; Bandara, R.M.U.S. A Dataset of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Multispectral Images Acquired over a Field to Identify Nitrogen Requirements. Data Brief 2024, 54, 110479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Savitha, C.; Talari, R. Mapping Cropland Extent Using Sentinel-2 Datasets and Machine Learning Algorithms for an Agriculture Watershed. Smart Agric. Technol. 2023, 4, 100193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Gorjian, S.; Bousi, E.; Özdemir, Ö.E.; Trommsdorff, M.; Kumar, N.M.; Anand, A.; Kant, K.; Chopra, S.S. Progress and Challenges of Crop Production and Electricity Generation in Agrivoltaic Systems Using Semi-Transparent Photovoltaic Technology. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 158, 112126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Vélez, S.; Valente, J.; Bretzel, T.; Trommsdorff, M. Assessing the Impact of Overhead Agrivoltaic Systems on Gnss Signal Performance for Precision Agriculture. Smart Agric. Technol. 2024, 9, 100664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ye, R.; Shao, G.; Ma, Z.; Gao, Q.; Wang, B.; Li, T. Prediction of Anthracnose Risk in Large-Leaf Tea Trees Based on the Atmospheric Environmental Changes in Yunnan Tea Gardens—Cox Regression Model and Machine Learning Model. Agronomy 2024, 14, 1501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Garofalo, S.P.; Giannico, V.; Costanza, L.; Alhajj Ali, S.; Camposeo, S.; Lopriore, G.; Pedrero Salcedo, F.; Vivaldi, G.A. Prediction of Stem Water Potential in Olive Orchards Using High-Resolution Planet Satellite Images and Machine Learning Techniques. Agronomy 2023, 14, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Peng, Y.; Yang, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Huang, J. A Machine Learning-Based High-Resolution Soil Moisture Mapping and Spatial–Temporal Analysis: The Mlhrsm Package. Agronomy 2024, 14, 421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Vélez, S.; Barajas, E.; Rubio, J.A.; Pereira-Obaya, D.; Rodríguez-Pérez, J.R. Field-Deployed Spectroscopy from 350 to 2500 Nm: A Promising Technique for Early Identification of Powdery Mildew Disease (Erysiphe Necator) in Vineyards. Agronomy 2024, 14, 634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Colovic, M.; Stellacci, A.M.; Mzid, N.; Di Venosa, M.; Todorovic, M.; Cantore, V.; Albrizio, R. Comparative Performance of Aerial RGB vs. Ground Hyperspectral Indices for Evaluating Water and Nitrogen Status in Sweet Maize. Agronomy 2024, 14, 562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Cob-Parro, A.C.; Lalangui, Y.; Lazcano, R. Fostering Agricultural Transformation through AI: An Open-Source AI Architecture Exploiting the MLOps Paradigm. Agronomy 2024, 14, 259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Vélez, S.; Álvarez, S. Harnessing Data-Driven Technologies for Sustainable Farming Practices. Agronomy 2024, 14, 2969. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14122969

AMA Style

Vélez S, Álvarez S. Harnessing Data-Driven Technologies for Sustainable Farming Practices. Agronomy. 2024; 14(12):2969. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14122969

Chicago/Turabian Style

Vélez, Sergio, and Sara Álvarez. 2024. "Harnessing Data-Driven Technologies for Sustainable Farming Practices" Agronomy 14, no. 12: 2969. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14122969

APA Style

Vélez, S., & Álvarez, S. (2024). Harnessing Data-Driven Technologies for Sustainable Farming Practices. Agronomy, 14(12), 2969. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14122969

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop