Submitted:
04 July 2023
Posted:
05 July 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
1.1. The problem
1.2. State of the art
- Climate FieldView: An integrated digital platform that collects and analyzes field data, helping farmers make more informed decisions regarding crop management, planting, and harvesting. The available tools allow farmers to manually delineate management zones (https://www.fieldview.com.au/).
- Granular’s Farm Management Software (FMS), credited as the first cloud-based, mobile-centric program of its kind, offers an intuitive breakdown of everything a farmer needs to consider, from financial to soil management to operations. The platform is mostly oriented to sensors and smart agriculture (https://www.corteva.com/resources/media-center/granular-provides-new-digital-nitrogen-management-options-to-farmers.html).
- Farmers Edge: A comprehensive smart agriculture platform that includes field-centric data collection, satellite imagery, variable rate technology, and weather analytics to optimize farm operations (https://farmersedge.ca/).
- Agworld: A collaborative farm management platform that allows farmers, agronomists, and other stakeholders to work together on planning, budgeting, and reporting of farm activities. It incorporates add-in applications for specific works (e.g. Satamap for satellite image display) (https://www.agworld.com/us/).
- Taranis: This platform uses artificial intelligence (AI)-driven image analysis, combining high-resolution aerial imagery and field-level weather data to detect and predict pest and disease issues, enabling farmers to make proactive decisions (https://www.taranis.com/).
- Trimble: A platform offering a range of precision agriculture solutions, mostly oriented to equipment and automation, including guidance and steering systems, flow and application control, yield monitoring, and water management tools (https://agriculture.trimble.com/en/products/software/trimble-agriculture-software).
- Sentera: A platform that integrates drone and satellite imagery with sensor data, enabling farmers to monitor plant health, track growth, and identify potential issues (https://sentera.com/).
- John Deere Operations Center: A web-based platform that helps farmers track equipment, manage field data, and analyze agronomic information to optimize their operations (https://operationscenter.deere.com/).
- Topcon Agriculture: A suite of visualization and decision-making tools including auto-steering systems, variable rate control, yield monitoring, and farm management software (https://tap.topconagriculture.com/).
- Raven Industries: Providing automations like guidance and steering systems, application controls, and field computers to help farmers optimize their operations (https://ravenind.com/).
1.3. Objectives
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. System architecture
2.2. Data requirements
- Land rent
- Seeds
- Irrigation
- Fertilizers
- Weed killers
- Pesticides/Insecticides
- Harvest
-
Machinery
- a)
- Depreciation
- b)
- Maintenance
- c)
- Spare parts
- 9.
- Land rent (absolute amounts)
- 10.
-
Degree of difficulty per field for shared cost (weighting factor: 1-5)
- d)
- Seeds
- e)
- Irrigation
- f)
- Fertilizers
- g)
- Weed killers
- h)
- Pesticides/Insecticides
- i)
- Harvest
- j)
- Machinery
2.3. Algorithms developed
- First, the rate of difficulty of each field is multiplied by the field’s extent and then divided by the number of fields under consideration, to give a weighted rate of difficulty.
- Then, the weighted rate of difficulty of each field is divided by the total weighted rate of difficulty to give the cost share for the field (for each of the shared cost categories).
- Finally, the cost share of every field is multiplied by the total cost of the category and divided by the number of fields to give the absolute cost per field (for that cost category).
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. System functionality
3.2. System interface
3.3. Experiences
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Barkley, A.; Barkley, P. W. Principles of Agricultural Economics, 1st ed.; Routledge: Abingdon-London, United Kingdom, 2013; pp. 1–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Epifanova, I. Y.; Humeniuk, V. S. Profitability of the enterprise: modern approaches to defining the essence. Econ Soc 2016, 3, 189–192. [Google Scholar]
- Smoliy, L.V. Formation of the results of economic activity of Agricultural Enterprises. Collected Works of Uman National University of Horticulture 2019, 95, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shmatkovska, T. О.; Dziamulych, M.; Vavdiiuk, N.; Petrukha, S.; Koretska, N.; Bilochenko, A. Trends and Conditions for the Formation of Profitability of Agricultural Enterprises: A Case Study of Lviv Region, Ukraine. Univers. J. Agric. Res. 2022, 10, 88–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shahbandeh, M. Smart Agriculture: Market Size Worldwide 2026. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/720062/market-value-smart-agriculture-worldwide/ (accessed on 20 April 2023).
- McBratney, A. B.; Whelan, B.; Ancev, T.; Bouma, J. Future Directions of Precision Agriculture. Precis. Agric. 2005, 6, 7–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whelan, B.; McBratney, A. B. Definition and interpretation of potential management zones in Australia. In Solutions for a Better Environment. In Proceedings of the 11th Australian Agronomy Conference, Geelong, Victoria, Australia, 0–11., 2-6 February 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, P.; Pandey, P. C.; Petropoulos, G. P.; Pavlides, A.; Srivastava, P. K.; Koutsias, N.; Deng, K. A. K.; Bao, Y. Hyperspectral remote sensing in precision agriculture: present status, challenges, and future trends. In Earth Observation, Hyperspectral Remote Sensing; Pandey, P. C., Srivastava, P. K., Balzter, H., Bhattacharya, B., Petropoulos, G. P., Eds.; Elsevier eBooks, 2020; pp. 121–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karydas, C. G.; Chatziantoniou, M.; Stamkopoulos, K.; Iatrou, M.; Vassiliadis, V.; Mourelatos, S. Embedding a precision agriculture service into a farm management information system- ifarma/PreFer. Smart Agric. Technol. 2023, 4, 100175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tey, Y.S.; Brindal, M. A meta-analysis of factors driving the adoption of precision agriculture. Precis. Agric. 2022, 23, 353–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paraforos, D.S.; Vassiliadis, V.; Kortenbruck, D.; Stamkopoulos, K.; Ziogas, V.; Sapounas, A. A.; Griepentrog, H.W. Multi-level automation of farm management information systems. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2017, 142, 504–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iatrou, M.; Karydas, C.; Tseni, X.; Mourelatos, S. Representation Learning with a Variational Autoencoder for Predicting Nitrogen Requirement in Rice. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 5978. [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. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).