Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX (지적과 국토정보)

LX Spatial Information Research Institute (한국국토정보공사 공간정보연구원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the UAV-based Vegetable Index Comparison for Detection of Pine Wilt Disease Trees

소나무재선충병 피해목 탐지를 위한 UAV기반의 식생지수 비교 연구

  • Jung, Yoon-Young (Department of Landscape Architecture, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Kim, Sang-Wook (Department of Landscape Architecture, Wonkwang University)
  • 정윤영 (원광대학교 대학원 산림환경조경전공) ;
  • 김상욱 (원광대학교 산림조경학과)
  • Received : 2020.05.03
  • Accepted : 2020.06.12
  • Published : 2020.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aimed to early detect damaged trees by pine wilt disease using the vegetation indices of UAV images. The location data of 193 pine wilt disease trees were constructed through field surveys and vegetation index analyses of NDVI, GNDVI, NDRE and SAVI were performed using multi-spectral UAV images at the same time. K-Means algorithm was adopted to classify damaged trees and confusion matrix was used to compare and analyze the classification accuracy. The results of the study are summarized as follows. First, the overall accuracy of the classification was analyzed in order of NDVI (88.04%, Kappa coefficient 0.76) > GNDVI (86.01%, Kappa coefficient 0.72) > NDRE (77.35%, Kappa coefficient 0.55) > SAVI (76.84%, Kappa coefficient 0.54) and showed the highest accuracy of NDVI. Second, K-Means unsupervised classification method using NDVI or GNDVI is possible to some extent to find out the damaged trees. In particular, this technique is to help early detection of damaged trees due to its intensive operation, low user intervention and relatively simple analysis process. In the future, it is expected that the utilization of time series images or the application of deep learning techniques will increase the accuracy of classification.

본 연구는 UAV 영상의 식생지수를 활용한 소나무재선충병 피해목 조기 탐지를 그 목적으로 하며, NDVI를 비롯한 대표적인 식생지수들을 선정하고 각각의 분류 정확도 비교분석을 통해 최적의 식생지수를 분석해보았다. 현장답사를 통하여 193개체의 소나무재선충병 피해목 위치데이터를 구축하고 동시에 다중분광 UAV 영상을 이용하여 4가지 식생지수 분석을 수행하였다. 무감독분류(K-Means)를 통하여 피해목을 분류하였고, 오차행렬(Confusion Matrix)를 이용하여 식생지수별 분류정확도를 비교·분석하였다. 연구의 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫째 분류의 전체정확도는 NDVI (88.04%, Kappa계수 0.76) > GNDVI (86.01%, Kappa계수 0.72) > NDRE (77.35%, Kappa계수 0.55) > SAVI (76.84%, Kappa계수 0.54)순으로 분석되어 NDVI가 가장 높은 정확도를 보였으며, GNDVI가 거의 비슷한 수준의 분류정확도를 보였다. 둘째, NDVI 및 GNDVI 식생지수를 이용한 K-Means 무감독 분류방법으로 피해목의 판별이 어느 정도 가능한 것으로 판단된다. 특히 위 기법은 연산이 집약적이고 사용자의 개입이 적고 분석과정이 상대적으로 간단하여 피해목의 조기 탐지에 도움을 줄 수 있을 것으로 판단된다. 향후 시계열영상의 활용 또는 딥러닝기법의 추가 응용으로 분류정확도를 높일 수 있을 것으로 기대한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Kim DI, Song YS, Kim Gh, Kim CW. 2014. A Study on the Application of UAV for Korean Land Monitoring. Journal of the Korean Society of Surveying, Geodesy, Photogrammetry, and Cartography. 32(1):29-38. https://doi.org/10.7848/ksgpc.2014.32.1.29
  2. Kim MJ, Bang HS, Lee JW. 2017. Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle for Forecasting Pine Wood Nematode in Boundary Area: A Case Study of Sejong Metropolitan Autonomous City. Journal of Korean Forest Society. 106(1):100-109. https://doi.org/10.14578/JKFS.2017.106.1.100
  3. Kim SR, Kim ES, Nam YW, Choi WI, Kim CM. 2015. Distribution Characteristics Analysis of Pine Wilt Disease Using Time Series Hyperspectral Aerial Imagery. Korean Society of Remote Sensing. 31(5):385-394. https://doi.org/10.7780/kjrs.2015.31.5.3
  4. Na SI, Park CW, Cheong YK, Kang CS, Choi IB, Lee KD. 2016. Selection of Optimal Vegetation Indices for Estimation of Barley & Wheat Growth based on Remote Sensing - An Application of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle and Field Investigation Data -. Korean Journal of Remote Sensing. 32(5):483-497. https://doi.org/10.7780/kjrs.2016.32.5.7
  5. Lee SK, Park SJ, Baek GM, Kim HB, Lee CW. 2019. Detection of Damaged Pine Tree by the Pine Wilt Disease Using UAV Image. Korean Journal of Remote Sensing. 35(3):359-373. https://doi.org/10.7780/KJRS.2019.35.3.2
  6. Lee SW, Oh HJ, An DU, Jeong SJ. 2004. An Impleme ntation of K-Means Algorithm Improving Clus ter Centroids Decision Methodologies. The KIP S Transactions : Part B. 11(7):867-874.
  7. Lee JB, Kim ES, Lee SH. 2014. An Analysis of Spect ral Pattern for Detecting Pine Wilt Disease Usi ng Ground-Based Hyperspectral Camera. Kore an Journal of Remote Sensing. 30(5):665-675. https://doi.org/10.7780/kjrs.2014.30.5.11
  8. Lee CM, Lim TH, Lee SM, Mun IS, Han SS, Lee DW. 2015. Nematicidal and Reproduction Supression Activity of Actinomyces Isolates against Pine Wood Nematode, Bursaphelenchus xylophilus. Korean Journal of Pesticide Science. 19(2): 141-150. https://doi.org/10.7585/kjps.2015.19.2.141
  9. Lee HJ, Kwak JH, Lee SY. 1999. Development of Satellite Image Classification Technology for diversified Satellite Information Applications. National Radio Research Institute. 12-13.
  10. Lim ET. 2020. Pine Wilt Disease Detection Based on Deep Learning Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicle[Thesis]. Hanbat University. p. 1-51.
  11. Jo MH, Kim JB, Oh JS, Lee KJ. 2001. Extraction Method of Damaged Area by Pinetree Pest (Bursaphelenchus Xylophilus) using High Resolution IKONOS Image. Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies. 4(4):72-78.
  12. Hong KY. 2017. A Extraction and Accuracy Assessment of Dead Tree Using UAV Image [Thesis]. University of Seoul. p. 1-71.
  13. Automotive Industry Action Group(AIAG). 2010. Measurement Systems Analysis Reference Manual, 4th Edition. Chrysler, Ford, General Motors Supplier Quality Requirements Task Force.
  14. Congalton RG. 1991. A Review of Assessing the Accuracy of Classifications of Remotely Sensed Data. Remote Sensing of Environment. 37:35-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4257(91)90048-B
  15. Deering DW, Rouse JW, Haas RH, Schell JΑ. 1975. Measuring Forage Production of Grazing Units from Landsat MSS Data. 10th Internatonal Symposium on Remote Sensing of Environment. 2:1169-1178.
  16. Flynn KF, Chapra SC. 2014. Remote Sensing of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation in a Shallow Non-Turbid River Using an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Remote Sens. 6(12):12815-12836. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs61212815
  17. Gitelson A, Kaufman YJ, Merzlyak MN. 1996. Use of a Green Channel in Remote Sensing of Global Vegetation from EOS-MODIS. Remote Sensing of Environment. 58(3):289-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(96)00072-7
  18. Hardisky MA, Klemas V, Smart RM. 1983. The influence of Soil Salinity, Growth form, and Leaf Moisture on the Spectral Radiance of Spartina alterniflora Canopies. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing. 49: 77-83.
  19. Herrmann I, Pimstein A, Karnieli A, Cohen Y, Alchanatis V, Bonfil D. 2011. LAI Assessment of Wheat and Potato Crops by VEN${\mu}$S and Sentinel-2 Bands. Remote Sensing of Environment. 115(8):2141-2151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.04.018
  20. Huete AR. 1988. A Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index(SAVI). Remote Sensing of Environment. 25(3):259-309.
  21. Huete AR, Liu HQ. 1994. An Error and Sensitivity Analysis of the Atmospheric and Soilcorrecting Variants of the NDVI for the MODIS-EOS. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. 32(4):897-905. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.298018
  22. Kim DS, Lee SM, Chung YJ, Choi KS, Moon YS, Park CG. 2003. Emergence Ecology of Japanese Pine Sawyer, Monochamus Alternatus (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae), a Vector of Pinewood Nematode, Bursaphelenchus xylophilus. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology. 42(4):307-313.
  23. Korhonen L, Packalen P, Rautiainen M. 2017. Comparison of Sentinel-2 and Landsat 8 in the Estimation of Boreal Forest Canopy Cover and Leaf Area Index. Remote Sensing of Environment. 195(2017):259-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.03.021
  24. Lee KS, Kim SH, Park JH, Kim TG, Park YI, Woo CS. 2006. Estimation of Forest LAI in Close Canopy Situation Using Optical Remote Sensing Data. Korean Journal of Remote Sensing. 22(5):305-311.
  25. Rouse JW, Haas RH, Schell JA, Deering DW. 1974. Monitoring Vegetation Systems in th Great Plains with ERTS. Washington D.C.: NASA p. 309-317.
  26. Story M, Congalton RG. 1986. Accuracy Assessment: A User’s Perspective. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing. 52(3): 397-399.
  27. Tomas JR, Gausman HW. 1977. Leaf Reflectance vs. Leaf Chlorophyll and Carotenoid Concentrations for Eight Crops. Agronomy Journal. 69(5):799-802. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1977.00021962006900050017x