Next Article in Journal
Finite State GUI Testing with Test Case Prioritization Using Z-BES and GK-GRU
Previous Article in Journal
Deep Learning and Long-Duration PRPD Analysis to Uncover Weak Partial Discharge Signals for Defect Identification
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Opportunities and Challenges in the Smart and Comprehensive Monitoring of Complex Surface Systems

1
Faculty of Engineering, Huanghe Science & Technology University, Zhengzhou 450003, China
2
School of Resources and Environment, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450002, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(19), 10571; https://doi.org/10.3390/app131910571
Submission received: 14 September 2023 / Accepted: 21 September 2023 / Published: 22 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Comprehensive Monitoring Technologies in Wetland and Cropland)
The trade-offs between wetland and cropland generate new challenges in understanding the balance between humanity and nature regarding the global carbon cycle, biological diversity, and food supplies [1]. Effective monitoring techniques can be used to acquire valuable information to improve the accuracy, efficiency, and decision making of system construction via bio–physical–chemical interconversion [2]. Moreover, large, curved, and diverse data sets involved in the monitoring process require high-level intelligence and visualization to process [3]. In addition, the fast development of high-quality sensors leads to the dramatic enrichment of a field monitoring data source. Therefore, effective, accurate, and comprehensive information from varied sensors becomes crucial in figuring out the constitutive mechanism of wetland and cropland systems.
Field observation sensors are commonly deployed in the field to automatically acquire data from various physical, chemical, or biological parameters of the environment [4]. Such devices can be either active or passive, depending on whether they provide their own source of energy or detect energy from the environment, such as wave samplers, current meters, water quality sensors, fiber optic sensors, etc. [5]. Field observation sensors can be used to monitor the environmental dynamics and changes over time and space, supporting the research and management of natural resources and ecosystems and, more importantly, providing validation data for remote sensing and modeling [6].
Using sufficient data from various sensors, monitoring platforms and techniques are widely investigated to accomplish the complex monitoring process. Satellite remote sensing is a commonly used method that exploits sensors on satellites, aircrafts, or drones to collect real-time or near-real-time data on the Earth’s surface without direct contact [7]. Remote sensing provides information from large-scale Earth observations, producing regional-, continental-, and even global-scale visions on environmental change and responses to human activities [8], and further supports various applications, such as environmental monitoring, agricultural development, geological exploration, etc. [9]. However, the limitations of spatial, spectral, and temporal resolutions hinder the practice of mature satellite remote sensing techniques for small-scale targets, e.g., a specific parcel [10]. Benefiting from the efficient acquisition of high-resolution images of small targets or areas at low altitude, UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) have various applications such as 3D modeling, terrain surveying, ecological monitoring, geological hazard monitoring, search and rescue, etc. [11,12]. Hence, UAVs are an effective additional platform for small-scale monitoring missions, effectively enhancing the monitoring accuracy of remote sensing despite the lack of continuous observation [13]. Moreover, a ground-based monitoring platform employ sensors and cameras attached to the ground or a fixed structure to comprehensively measure the deformation or movement of the targeted field [14]. Ground-based monitoring techniques, such as hyperspectral detecting, IoT-supported continuous photography, and soil parameter monitoring, can be used for monitoring landslides, volcanoes, bridges, dams, and other significant civil infrastructures in current crop and wetland monitoring missions [15,16].
Technical accuracy and efficacy require sufficient data to support potential practical and theoretical studies. Sensors with different targets and at various distances supply multi-sourced large-scale data sets, which are critical for achieving the effective and depictive models as theoretical guidance. Hence, proper techniques facilitate comprehensive data utilization in formulating the predicted models. Verdugo-Vásquez et al. [17] developed a climate-based model to estimate grapevine phenology, taking into account meteorological data and microclimate data at the plant level. Cooper et al. [18] proposed a predictive modeling framework that integrates genetic, environmental, management, and phenotype data to predict crop performance across diverse scenarios. Furbank and Tester [19] reviewed the advanced mathematical and statistical methods for predicting plant development performance using multiple traits, as well as the integration of experimental metadata within data schemas. Such traditional statistical models effectively estimate plant phenotype factors and water quality.
Nevertheless, theoretical derivations among multi-source data still require in-depth studies. Theoretical inversion models can be significantly developed using multi-source data, in terms of the analyzed information, to reduce the uncertainty and error of the inversion results. Wang et al. [20] used multi-source data fusion of near-surface spectral reflectance, vegetation index, and soil moisture to estimate the growth parameters of summer maize, such as leaf area index and chlorophyll content. Zhang et al. [21] proposed a data integration method that combines the time series monitoring of satellite-based synthetic aperture radar interferometry and leveling data to extract fine subsidence information. Sun et al. [22] developed a multi-source, multi-scale, source-independent full waveform inversion method that uses both surface and borehole seismic data to invert the velocity distribution of the subsurface.
Deep learning techniques are capable of integrating large multi-source data in crop growth and hydrodynamic models to develop in situ monitoring equipment to detect fast-changing phenomena, as they can extract complex features and patterns from remote sensing data, such as spectral, spatial, temporal, and contextual information. Li et al. [23] used a deep neural network (DNN), recursive neural network (RNN), and convolutional neural network (CNN) to classify crops based on remote sensing data, and achieved a higher accuracy than traditional methods. Liu et al. [24] reviewed data fusion techniques that employ multi-source satellite data sets to monitor the hydrological, vegetation, and topographic characteristics of wetlands, which are important indicators of wetland health and function. Alsharif et al. [25] presented object-based and pixel-based deep learning techniques to classify agricultural crops via unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) imagery, showing that these can improve agricultural field management and productivity.
In summary, the comprehensive monitoring of croplands and wetlands is has potential but is also a huge challenge. This Special Issue is a collection of reviews and original research articles related to space-, aerial-, and ground-based monitoring techniques, which are used to orient crops, wetlands, freshwater areas and their complex interactions, including both algorithms, theoretical models, applications, and hardware development.

Author Contributions

Q.Y. and Y.G. contributed equally to the article. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors acknowledge financial support from the 9th Group Project of Key Disciplines in Henan Province—Mechanical design, Manufacturing and Mechatronics.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zhao, W.; Li, A. A Review on Land Surface Processes Modelling over Complex Terrain. Adv. Meteorol. 2015, 2015, 607181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Nakanishi, Y.; Kaneta, T.; Nishino, S. A Review of Monitoring Construction Equipment in Support of Construction Project Management. Front. Built Environ. 2022, 7, 632593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Qi, T.-F.; Fang, H.-R.; Chen, Y.-F.; He, L.-T. Research on digital twin monitoring system for large complex surface machining. J. Intell. Manuf. 2023, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Takami, K.; Furukawa, T.; Kumon, M.; Kimoto, D.; Dissanayake, G. Estimation of a nonvisible field-of-view mobile target incorporating optical and acoustic sensors. Auton. Robot. 2016, 40, 343–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wang, L.; Wang, Y.j.; Song, S.; Li, F. Overview of Fibre Optic Sensing Technology in the Field of Physical Ocean Observation. Front. Phys. 2021, 9, 558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Papa, F.; Crétaux, J.-F.; Grippa, M.; Robert, E.; Trigg, M.; Tshimanga, R.M.; Kitambo, B.; Paris, A.; Carr, A.; Fleischmann, A.S.; et al. Water Resources in Africa under Global Change: Monitoring Surface Waters from Space. Surv. Geophys. 2023, 44, 43–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Elgy, J.; Jones, H.K. Use of Remote Sensing and GIS for Environmental Modelling and Monitoring. In Environmentally Devastated Areas in River Basins in Eastern Europe; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1998; pp. 155–168. [Google Scholar]
  8. Singh, R.N. Sensing diversifies into remote sensing. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens. 2006, 34, 437–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sinnhuber, B.-M. Frank S. Marzano and Guido Visconti: Remote Sensing of Atmosphere and Ocean from Space: Models, Instruments and Techniques. J. Atmos. Chem. 2004, 48, 105–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pei, W.; Shi, Z.; Gong, K. Small target detection with remote sensing images based on an improved YOLOv5 algorithm. Front. Neurorobotics 2023, 16, 1074862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ren, H.; Zhao, Y.; Xiao, W.; Hu, Z. A review of UAV monitoring in mining areas: Current status and future perspectives. Int. J. Coal Sci. Technol. 2019, 6, 320–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sun, W.; Dai, L.; Zhang, X.; Chang, P.; He, X. RSOD: Real-time small object detection algorithm in UAV-based traffic monitoring. Appl. Intell. 2022, 52, 8448–8463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Al-Ali, Z.M.; Abdullah, M.M.; Asadalla, N.B.; Gholoum, M. A comparative study of remote sensing classification methods for monitoring and assessing desert vegetation using a UAV-based multispectral sensor. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2020, 192, 389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Pieraccini, M.; Miccinesi, L. Ground-Based Radar Interferometry: A Bibliographic Review. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 1029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mu, X.; Hu, R.; Zeng, Y.; McVicar, T.R.; Ren, H.; Song, W.; Wang, Y.; Casa, R.; Qi, J.; Xie, D.; et al. Estimating structural parameters of agricultural crops from ground-based multi-angular digital images with a fractional model of sun and shade components. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2017, 246, 162–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wang, W.; Shi, K.; Zhang, Y.; Li, N.; Sun, X.; Zhang, D.; Zhang, Y.; Qin, B.; Zhu, G. A ground-based remote sensing system for high-frequency and real-time monitoring of phytoplankton blooms. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 439, 129623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Carvalho, L.C.; Gonçalves, E.F.; Marques da Silva, J.; Costa, J.M. Potential Phenotyping Methodologies to Assess Inter- and Intravarietal Variability and to Select Grapevine Genotypes Tolerant to Abiotic Stress. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 718202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Washburn, J.D.; Cimen, E.; Ramstein, G.; Reeves, T.; O’Briant, P.; McLean, G.; Cooper, M.; Hammer, G.; Buckler, E.S. Predicting phenotypes from genetic, environment, management, and historical data using CNNs. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2021, 134, 3997–4011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Rahaman, M.M.; Chen, D.; Gillani, Z.; Klukas, C.; Chen, M. Advanced phenotyping and phenotype data analysis for the study of plant growth and development. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zhao, J.; Pan, F.; Xiao, X.; Hu, L.; Wang, X.; Yan, Y.; Zhang, S.; Tian, B.; Yu, H.; Lan, Y. Summer Maize Growth Estimation Based on Near-Surface Multi-Source Data. Agronomy 2023, 13, 532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Liu, H.; Li, M.; Yuan, M.; Li, B.; Jiang, X. A fine subsidence information extraction model based on multi-source inversion by integrating InSAR and leveling data. Nat. Hazards 2022, 114, 2839–2854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Guo, Y.; Huang, J.; Cui, C.; Li, Z.; Fu, L.; Li, Q. Multi-source multi-scale source-independent full waveform inversion. J. Geophys. Eng. 2019, 16, 479–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yao, J.; Wu, J.; Xiao, C.; Zhang, Z.; Li, J. The Classification Method Study of Crops Remote Sensing with Deep Learning, Machine Learning, and Google Earth Engine. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 2758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Jafarzadeh, H.; Mahdianpari, M.; Gill, E.W.; Brisco, B.; Mohammadimanesh, F. Remote Sensing and Machine Learning Tools to Support Wetland Monitoring: A Meta-Analysis of Three Decades of Research. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 6104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bouguettaya, A.; Zarzour, H.; Kechida, A.; Taberkit, A.M. Deep learning techniques to classify agricultural crops through UAV imagery: A review. Neural Comput. Appl. 2022, 34, 9511–9536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
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

Yao, Q.; Guo, Y. Opportunities and Challenges in the Smart and Comprehensive Monitoring of Complex Surface Systems. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10571. https://doi.org/10.3390/app131910571

AMA Style

Yao Q, Guo Y. Opportunities and Challenges in the Smart and Comprehensive Monitoring of Complex Surface Systems. Applied Sciences. 2023; 13(19):10571. https://doi.org/10.3390/app131910571

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yao, Qingyu, and Yulong Guo. 2023. "Opportunities and Challenges in the Smart and Comprehensive Monitoring of Complex Surface Systems" Applied Sciences 13, no. 19: 10571. https://doi.org/10.3390/app131910571

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