Efficiency increase of resources through automation of agriculture requires more information about the production process, as well as process and machinery status. Sensors are necessary for monitoring the status and condition of production by recognizing the surrounding structures such as objects, field structures, natural or artificial markers, and obstacles. Currently, three dimensional (3-D) sensors are economically affordable and technologically advanced to a great extent, so a breakthrough is already possible if enough research projects are commercialized. The aim of this review paper is to investigate the state-of-the-art of 3-D vision systems in agriculture, and the role and value that only 3-D data can have to provide information about environmental structures based on the recent progress in optical 3-D sensors. The structure of this research consists of an overview of the different optical 3-D vision techniques, based on the basic principles. Afterwards, their application in agriculture are reviewed. The main focus lays on vehicle navigation, and crop and animal husbandry. The depth dimension brought by 3-D sensors provides key information that greatly facilitates the implementation of automation and robotics in agriculture.

The leaf area is an important plant parameter for plant status and crop yield. In this paper, a low-cost time-of-flight camera, the Kinect v2, was mounted on a robotic platform to acquire 3-D data of maize plants in a greenhouse. The robotic platform drove through the maize rows and acquired 3-D images that were later registered and stitched. Three different maize row reconstruction approaches were compared: reconstruct a crop row by merging point clouds generated from both sides of the row in both directions, merging point clouds scanned just from one side, and merging point clouds scanned from opposite directions of the row. The resulted point cloud was subsampled and rasterized, the normals were computed and re-oriented with a Fast Marching algorithm. The Poisson surface reconstruction was applied to the point cloud, and new vertices and faces generated by the algorithm were removed. The results showed that the approach of aligning and merging four point clouds per row and two point clouds scanned from the same side generated very similar average mean absolute percentage error of 8.8% and 7.8%, respectively. The worst error resulted from the two point clouds scanned from both sides in opposite directions with 32.3%.

The authors wish to make the following corrections to Table 1 of the title paper [1]: the working environment of the PlantEye platform should be changed from “Greenhouse” to “Open field, Greenhouse” and the shadowing device of the Scanalyzer platform should be changed from “‘√” to “x”.