Mapping Cabernet Franc vineyards by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for variability in vegetation indices, water status, and virus titer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hypothesis of this research was that the maps based on remotely-sensed images would create zones of different vigor, yield, water status, winter hardiness and berry composition and the wines from the unique zones would show different chemical and sensorial profiles. A second hypothesis was that titer of grapevine leafroll-associated virus (GLRaV) could be correlated spatially to NDVI and other spectral indices. To determine zonation, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with multispectral and thermal sensors were flown over six Cabernet Franc vineyard blocks in Ontario, Canada. Zonation was based on NDVI values, and spatial correlations were examined between the NDVI and leaf water potential (Ψ), soil water content (SWC), stomatal conductance (gs), winter hardiness (LT50), vine size, yield, and berry composition. Additional NDVI data were acquired using GreenSeeker (proximal sensing), and both NDVI data sets produced maps of similar configuration. Several direct correlations were found between UAV-based NDVI and vine size, berry weight, yield, titratable acidity, SWC, leaf Ψ, gs, and NDVI from GreenSeeker. Inverse correlations included thermal data, Brix, color/ anthocyanins/ phenols, and LT50. The pattern of UAV-based NDVI and other variables corresponded to the PCA results. Thermal scan and GreenSeeker were useful tools for mapping variability in water status, yield components, and berry composition. In 2016, zoned maps were created based on UAV NDVI data, and grapes were harvested according to the separate zones. Additionally, spatial correlations between GLRaV titer and NDVI were observed. Use of UAVs may be able to delineate zones of differing vine size, yield components, and berry composition, as well as areas of different virus status and winter hardiness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".