TABLE 9.
Wilting accuracy matrix with the number of manual wilting scores (2019) on the visual scale at the left and outside the table and the count of image-derived wilting scores in the table.
| Estimated turgid vs. wilted plants | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| Proximal images | Aerial images | |||||
|
|
|
|||||
| Plant water status | No of plots within each water status | Turgid | Wilted | No of plots within each water status | Turgid | Wilted |
| Turgid | 89 | 82 | 7 | 90 | 86 | 4 |
| Wilted | 78 | 5 | 73 | 78 | 5 | 73 |
| Total | 167 | 168 | ||||
| Accuracy | 93% | 92% | 94% | 95% | 96% | 94% |
Wilting was on a binary scale of turgid/wilted†. The percentage represents the fraction of wilting values that were estimated correctly using logistic model derived in 2018. The 2018 binary models were validated by substituting the RGB color indices‡ values derived in 2019. The proximal and aerial images were taken at 15 weeks after planting.
†Wilting score 0 and 1 were rated as turgid and scores above 2 (2 inclusive) were rated as wilted.
‡Color space indices – Intensity, Hue, Saturation, Lightness, a*, b*, u*, v*, green area (GA), greener area (GGA), crop senescence index (CSI).