Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields

Benchmarking farm-level irrigation water productivity (WPI) and water productivity (WP) can assist in understanding the irrigation effectiveness of individual farms and in developing strategies to improve their irrigation management. This study introduces a method to integrate on-farm irrigation mea...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zitian Gao, Danlu Guo, Dongryeol Ryu, Andrew W. Western
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2025-04-01
Series:Agricultural Water Management
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377425000988
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850251543815651328
author Zitian Gao
Danlu Guo
Dongryeol Ryu
Andrew W. Western
author_facet Zitian Gao
Danlu Guo
Dongryeol Ryu
Andrew W. Western
author_sort Zitian Gao
collection DOAJ
description Benchmarking farm-level irrigation water productivity (WPI) and water productivity (WP) can assist in understanding the irrigation effectiveness of individual farms and in developing strategies to improve their irrigation management. This study introduces a method to integrate on-farm irrigation measurements, remotely sensed yields and publicly available rainfall data for multi-year farm-level WPI and WP benchmarking. The method was tested over cotton farms located in south-eastern Australia during the 2011–19 cropping seasons. We trained remote sensing (RS)-based machine learning (ML) models – Random Forest Regression (RFR), Gradient Boosting Regression (GBR) and Support Vector Regression (SVR) – to predict yields for over 400 cotton fields with ground-truth yield data. Predicted cotton yields from the best-performing model were then combined with irrigation and rainfall data for WPI and WP benchmarking. We also examined: 1) if the yield model is transferable to unseen years and 2) if sub-field-scale yield data from a harvester over a small number of fields are effective for training ML models, in case field-scale yield data are insufficient. The results showed that field-scale cotton yield could be predicted with the best accuracy using the GBR model (R2 = 0.7, RMSE = 235 kg/ha, mean absolute error = 176 kg/ha and Pearson correlation = 0.84) when applied to the period of training. The average WPI and WP varied between 0.18–0.36 kg/m3 and 0.16–0.23 kg/m3, respectively. However, the RS-based yield model showed reduced performance outside of the training period. In addition, when field-scale yield samples were used in combination with many sub-field-scale samples for calibration, the model performance was biased to favour the sub-field-scale samples. Our findings demonstrate the ability of RS and ML models to provide yields for benchmarking analysis but highlight the potential risk of reduced accuracy of yield prediction in future years.
format Article
id doaj-art-e8e5b5f6b63f41df84e6af428a6c1f82
institution OA Journals
issn 1873-2283
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series Agricultural Water Management
spelling doaj-art-e8e5b5f6b63f41df84e6af428a6c1f822025-08-20T01:57:52ZengElsevierAgricultural Water Management1873-22832025-04-0131110938410.1016/j.agwat.2025.109384Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yieldsZitian Gao0Danlu Guo1Dongryeol Ryu2Andrew W. Western3Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia; Environment, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia; Corresponding author at: Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia.Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia; School of Engineering, College of Systems & Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, AustraliaDepartment of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, AustraliaDepartment of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, AustraliaBenchmarking farm-level irrigation water productivity (WPI) and water productivity (WP) can assist in understanding the irrigation effectiveness of individual farms and in developing strategies to improve their irrigation management. This study introduces a method to integrate on-farm irrigation measurements, remotely sensed yields and publicly available rainfall data for multi-year farm-level WPI and WP benchmarking. The method was tested over cotton farms located in south-eastern Australia during the 2011–19 cropping seasons. We trained remote sensing (RS)-based machine learning (ML) models – Random Forest Regression (RFR), Gradient Boosting Regression (GBR) and Support Vector Regression (SVR) – to predict yields for over 400 cotton fields with ground-truth yield data. Predicted cotton yields from the best-performing model were then combined with irrigation and rainfall data for WPI and WP benchmarking. We also examined: 1) if the yield model is transferable to unseen years and 2) if sub-field-scale yield data from a harvester over a small number of fields are effective for training ML models, in case field-scale yield data are insufficient. The results showed that field-scale cotton yield could be predicted with the best accuracy using the GBR model (R2 = 0.7, RMSE = 235 kg/ha, mean absolute error = 176 kg/ha and Pearson correlation = 0.84) when applied to the period of training. The average WPI and WP varied between 0.18–0.36 kg/m3 and 0.16–0.23 kg/m3, respectively. However, the RS-based yield model showed reduced performance outside of the training period. In addition, when field-scale yield samples were used in combination with many sub-field-scale samples for calibration, the model performance was biased to favour the sub-field-scale samples. Our findings demonstrate the ability of RS and ML models to provide yields for benchmarking analysis but highlight the potential risk of reduced accuracy of yield prediction in future years.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377425000988Irrigation benchmarkingIrrigation water productivityWater productivityYieldLandsatCotton
spellingShingle Zitian Gao
Danlu Guo
Dongryeol Ryu
Andrew W. Western
Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields
Agricultural Water Management
Irrigation benchmarking
Irrigation water productivity
Water productivity
Yield
Landsat
Cotton
title Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields
title_full Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields
title_fullStr Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields
title_full_unstemmed Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields
title_short Benchmarking farm-level cotton water productivity using on-farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields
title_sort benchmarking farm level cotton water productivity using on farm irrigation measurements and remotely sensed yields
topic Irrigation benchmarking
Irrigation water productivity
Water productivity
Yield
Landsat
Cotton
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377425000988
work_keys_str_mv AT zitiangao benchmarkingfarmlevelcottonwaterproductivityusingonfarmirrigationmeasurementsandremotelysensedyields
AT danluguo benchmarkingfarmlevelcottonwaterproductivityusingonfarmirrigationmeasurementsandremotelysensedyields
AT dongryeolryu benchmarkingfarmlevelcottonwaterproductivityusingonfarmirrigationmeasurementsandremotelysensedyields
AT andrewwwestern benchmarkingfarmlevelcottonwaterproductivityusingonfarmirrigationmeasurementsandremotelysensedyields