Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Computer Standards & Interfaces

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/csi

A review on application of technology systems, standards and interfaces for

agriculture and food sector
Abhijit Suprem a,⁎, Nitaigour Mahalik b, Kiseon Kim c
a
Lyles College of Engineering, California State University, Fresno, United States
b
Jordan College of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, California State University, Fresno, United States
c
School of Communication and Sensor Networks, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Application of technology systems is seen in many sectors including agriculture and food. Traditionally, agri-
Received 17 October 2011 cultural industry has been solely dependent on human labor with limited application of mechanical equip-
Accepted 17 September 2012 ment and machines. The applications of advanced technology such as embedded computing, robotics,
Available online 26 September 2012
wireless technology, GPS/GIS (Geographical Positioning System/Geographical Information System) and
DBMS (Database Management System) software are seen to be recent developments. This paper reviews
Keywords:
Technology for food and agriculture
the applications of technology systems in agriculture and food. Because knowledge on standardization and
Sensor network interfacing plays a key role in using the technology systems in any application domain, this paper aims to
RFID highlight the important attributes of such an emerging research area. In particular, the paper describes soil
sampling methods and technology applications; field and yield mapping with GPS and GIS; harvesters and
future research in robotic-based harvesters; food processing and packaging technology such as traceability
and status of RFID networking research; application of sensor network; data management and execution sys-
tems; and the automation and control standards such as fieldbus systems and OMAC guidelines.
© 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
2. Soil sampling and mapping methods and technology applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
2.1. WAAS interface and precision agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357
2.2. Yield mapping for crops grading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358
3. Harvesters and Ag robots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358
3.1. Future research in robotic based harvester design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
3.2. Fieldbus and other interfaces for automation and control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
4. Application of sensor network technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
5. Food processing and packaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
5.1. RFID and traceability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
5.2. Data management and execution systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 362
6. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363

1. Introduction
Advances in technology systems encourage the business stake-
holders to apply more automation into the processes [1]. Modern pro-
cess automation has been impacted by the advent of new technology
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: asuprem@mail.fresnostate.edu (A. Suprem).
systems and the agriculture and food sector is not an exception. Some
of the process automation activities in this sector are soil sampling
and variable-rate fertilization (VRF), field and yield mapping [2], crop
scouting, harvesting, traceability data management, execution systems
and applications.
The agriculture and food industry is in a state of technological
changes driven by the need for new interfaces, standardized plat-
forms, and wireless networking technology and their implementation

0920-5489/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2012.09.002
356 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364
methodologies in order to improve process automation and hence, pro-
ductivity [3]. This paper focuses on recent developments in process au-
tomation in terms of the application of mapping technology, sensor
network, technology interfaces and methods in agriculture and ad-
dresses the most current issues and challenges. It includes the applica-
tion of OMAC standards for distributed automation and control, RFID
technology for the record and assessment of real-time data, use of GPS
and interfacings for VRF and yield monitoring, unmanned aerial vehicle
for crops scouting and mapping, open-system and intrinsic safety stan-
dards for packaging, and agricultural machineries. The research work
and review papers cited in this paper demonstrate contributions from a
fundamental, methodological, design-based, and application perspective.
The food and agricultural sector uses machinery, networking tech-
nology and software systems significantly. Starting from farming, irriga-
tion, monitoring, yield mapping, cultivation, storage, food processing,
delivery to consumption, the application of technology in this sector
has been enormous [4]. Humans started cultivating crops 10,000 years
ago. Though simple tools like sticks and stones were used in the begin-
ning of agricultural history, some 5000 years ago i.e., during the Bronze
Age, humans started manufacturing metal tools [5]. With recent ad-
vances in mechanical designs, electronics, and embedded technology,
even simple machines such as threshing machine, plows (turns and
breaks up soil, helping in controlling weeds and burying crop residues),
seed drills (allows an even distribution of seeds into a soil groove with a
metal plough), and sprayer type (spread liquid herbicides, pesticides
and fertilizers on crops) machines have drastically improved, although
the early versions of these tools are still used in some parts of the
world. Thus, farm machineries have been evolving since long. Some
other complex machines include soil-cultivators, transplanters, har-
vesters, and pruning machines [6]. These machines comprise of several
machines used for different purposes. The advanced agricultural ma-
chines are also capable of in situ processing the crops. The types of
technology used in agriculture vary greatly. Intricate machines
with high-tech equipment including computers and GPS (Global Po-
sitioning Systems) are being used to help improve the productivity
in a more efficient manner. A machine system is able to link to a sys-
tem of satellites and receive pinpointed location to within inches.
The receiver in the machine analyzes information that helps the
farmer decide where to plant and even apply fertilizers or pesticides.
The machine systems are not only being used in agricultural or
harvesting applications, but also post-harvesting processing and
food processing and packaging applications [7]. Packaging is one of
the most important processes in the food industry to maintain the qual-
ity of food products for storage and transportation until the final con-
sumption by the customer. A good package can not only preserve the
food quality but also considerably contribute to a business profit. One
can find food processing equipment, vacuum packaging and vacuum
sealers, shrink wrap machines and other types of bag sealing machines
used by industry. Similarly, the application of networking technology is
found to be significant in food agriculture. One of the recent examples of
precision agriculture via networking is AIN (Agricultural Information
Network). The system connects agricultural information databases to
the agricultural development banking system to help in automating
and making informed timely decisions [8]. Farmers in the Czech Repub-
lic are also able to plan their crops efficiently and other processes
through computer based networking technology. The Agrikiosk project
in Pakistan is capable of providing vital information to the farmers
about watering schedules based on weather forecast [9]. In advanced
countries like USA, Canada, Australia, etc. the farmers are using portable
mobile networking systems such as PDAs to disseminate information to
the stakeholders of the supply chain. Reliable, robust and ubiquitous
networking infrastructure includes collaborative tools such as hardware
and software interfacings and services for agriculture. Some of the
important research activities are (a) data mining and warehousing,
(b) multimedia applications for agriculture, (c) digital elevation models
for agriculture and crop yield, (d) weather forecasting and modeling,
(e) remote sensing, and (f) Geographical Positioning Systems/
Geographic Information System (GPS/GIS) applications [10]. Further,
software plays an important role in food and agriculture. For instance,
the Packaging Execution System (PES), a derivative of its parent,
Manufacturing Execution System (MES), is geared towards packaging
operations into the organization's overall operations management sys-
tem, which can provide a holistic view of the entire organization [11].
An efficient supply chain management strategy right from procurement
to distribution is indispensable in this industry. This provides numerous
benefits such as improved quality, better process control and better use
of raw materials. RFID technology is becoming increasingly popular due
to the advantages they offer. RFID tags differ from barcodes in that the
information on RFID tags can be automatically read using sensors that
can unobtrusively blend into the different systems. RFID tag helps im-
prove the efficiency of the supply chain and also helps ensure that
only genuine products reach the customer [12].
2. Soil sampling and mapping methods and technology applications
The important factor that determines the application of new tech-
nology into the process is profitability. Precision agriculture consti-
tutes application of technology into each process involved. Starting
from soil sampling to product packaging, scientific methods and tech-
nology applications are seen to be significant. Soil sampling is the
foremost process in the field of precision agriculture and about 60%
of farmers in advanced countries such as USA, UK, Canada, Australia,
etc. have already adopted it into their agricultural activities. Soil sam-
pling is simply analyzing and providing an estimate of the capacity of
the soil to supply nutrients such as sulfur, boron, zinc, etc. to meet the
needs of growing crops by applying scientific theory into technology
systems. Careful soil sampling that provides nutrient and contami-
nant content, composition and other characteristics such as volatile
organic compounds, acidity, and pH level plays important role in de-
termining accurate fertilizer recommendation and application to the
soil [13]. The standard soil test measures organic matter, phosphorus,
potassium, calcium, magnesium, and sodium. This is the predominant
requirement for achieving high yield agriculture and is indispensable
in precision farming [14]. A good sampling process should consider
field area per sample, procedural method including depth, time of
sampling, tools, handling, information record form, and transporta-
tion. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) has de-
veloped a number of methods that have direct application to soil
sampling. Taking soil samples may be done either by hand or by ma-
chine. A sampling probe, an auger or a shovel, either stainless steel or
chrome-plated, is used for manual sampling (brass, bronze, or galva-
nized tools are not used because they contaminate with copper, zinc.,
etc.) (Fig. 1a,b). However, several manufacturers have developed au-
tomated soil sampling equipment with latest techniques for in situ
soil investigation as shown in the Fig. 1(c and d). For example, the
Walter Nietfeld Company offers soil sampling equipment with the latest
available technology and the optimum transport vehicles (c). Further,
the AgRobotics AutoProbe (Fig. 1d) is a precision-agriculture tool that
uses data and analysis to deliver a modern soil service [15]. It claims
that the machine delivers accurate, consistent and efficient soil analysis
faster than any other equipment on the market today. The benchmark
site should be marked with a Global Positioning System (GPS) or
other means so that one can return there for consequent years' sam-
pling. Sampling from the same area will reduce sampling variability
and create a better picture of year-to-year changes.
Once the sampling is done, the subsequent procedure is the appli-
cation of fertilizer. Further, besides data generated from the sampling,
there also exist several factors that contribute to field variability.
These are topography, soil physical properties, cropping history, his-
torical cropping patterns and field uses. An automated fertilization
database is created based on the map generated from soil sampling
and other variability analysis resources. This map is then fed to the
 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364
Fig. 1. (a, b) Soil sampling under special tillage conditions (Reference: Soil Sampling as a Basis for Fertilizer Application, North Dakota State University, D.W. Franzen and
L.J. Cihacek, published in Creative Commons); (c) Universal soil sample extractor from Walter Nietfeld; (d) AutoProbe from AgRobotics; (e) a machine with VRT system; (f) GPS
in VRT system; (g) the complex logical controller of the VRT; and (h) the field map.
automated system that delivers the fertilizer to the field. Fertilizer ap-
plication maps are prepared from zone maps to indicate the amount
of fertilizer needed for crop production in each zone. The technology
used to realize this procedure is known as variable-rate fertilization
technology (VRT). VRT uses GPS integrated with a computer in the
tractor cab to change rates in each field management zone [16]. The
VRT system maintains constant positions by allowing the in-cab com-
puter to signal rate changes as the equipment moves from one field
management zone to the next. Advances in computer software tech-
nology and improvements in fertilizer application equipment that reli-
ably deliver when and where the fertilizer is desired are now available.
For spreading, the technology system is integrated with vehicle that
uses swath control technology for boom-section or nozzle-section con-
trol. The system has in-situ antenna, receiver, monitor, and a controller
capable of controlling various nutritional materials based on the record
and saved fertilizer application maps. The controller performs several
functions including operating a software program to display the fertiliz-
er application map, recording the GPS signal to recognize the vehicle
real-time position on the map, communicating signals with the rate
control device to alter the fertilizer rate, monitoring vehicle speed and
recording the fertilizer application map [17]. The core of the VRT system
is the flow rate controller. The automatic control system adopts indus-
trial control computer for controlling the machine and a controller
chip for flow rate control [18]. Essentially, the flow control system re-
ceives the setpoint flow rate from the application system such as GPS/
GIS system on-board and then manipulates a number of actuators in
an attempt to adjust the actual flowrate to match the setpoint. This is
a challenge because anytime the setpoint changes, there is immediately
an error. Usually, with closed-loop control, the feedback is used to cor-
rect actual rate. Digital technique is used for determine motor and
pump speeds, wheel rotation speeds, belt and shaft speed. The cost of
spreading of fertilizer based on sampling and VRT a technique is always
be greater. However, it is a fact that excessive use of fertilizers can lead
to increased emissions of nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas. Im-
proving efficient crop production through the use of VRT has received
widespread attention [19,20].
2.1. WAAS interface and precision agriculture
GPS and GIS (Geographical Information System) integrated systems
have changed the agricultural operations in a dramatic way. The applica-
tions of GPS system in agriculture are thus mapping of important
357
locations of field such as high yield field, diseased plants, weed, and in-
festations. For instance, weeds compete with crops for nutrients, water,
light and space. Technology helps in identifying weed and subsequently
applying weed-control strategy into the corps. Field scouting is the back-
bone of all mapping management programs. A detailed assessment of
the field is obtained utilizing technology systems. Productive scouting re-
quires correct sampling methods. Fig. 2(e) shows a map of weeds by the
use of advanced technology. A satellite-based software augmentation
system has already been developed. The U.S. Federal Aviation Adminis-
tration and Department of Transportation developed a satellite-based
correction system called WAAS for wide area augmentation system
[21]. Although the primary commercial market for these low-cost hand-
held units is for travel and recreational navigation, the technology has
many practical applications in crop scouting. Handheld GPS units
equipped to use the WAAS signal are currently commercially available
in the $200 range. Also, mapping of other important field information
such as rocks, tree lines, power cables, irrigation regions and other im-
portant land marks are possible. As stated, GPS is used to mark the loca-
tions of soil samples to help producers to fertilize accordingly. For this,
GIS will be required. Different types of map layers are added that can fa-
cilitate analyzing and making decision on farming [22]. Figure shows that
most of the agricultural operations now need GPS/GIS integration. For in-
stance, remotely sensed images can allow farmer to identify nutrient de-
ficiencies, water deficiency, hail damage, weed infestations, diseases,
insect damage, wind damage, herbicide damage, and plant populations
[23]. Remote sensing is possible by taking images from satellites and air-
crafts high above the field. Further, crop management using Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle (UAV) is possible remotely by ground control stations.
UAVs fly autonomously on a pre-programmed path created using GPS
systems. The images taken from the UAV are usually stored and then
combined into a color pattern that shows the growth of the crops and
also pinpoints the diseased plants. The GPS/GIS integrated mapping tech-
nology allows formers to understand overall appearance of plants and
plant condition. The UAV is also used to measure moisture level in soil,
the amount of plant life, or ant damage because of over-fertilization or
any other viable reason. Ability to store, display and analyze images re-
motely makes the agricultural processes a powerful technology driven
sector. Commercial products such as AISA instrument and supporting
software are available for fast and timely operational remote sensing ac-
tivities [24]. The default wavelength range of the AISA instrument is
430 nm–900 nm. For automatic image rectification and geo-referencing,
the AISA system also includes a miniature, high-precision integrated
358 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364
Fig. 2. (a) Applications of GPS/GIS in farming (Nowatzki, et al.,2008), (b) An UAV with a VRT sparyer used for pest management, (c) The WASS system, (d) ASIA instrument for
remote sensing, (e) A weed map based on remote sensing.
unit. The AISA features in-flight band configuration in most combinations
for different measurement missions and reconfiguration of the instru-
ment. Data collected by the instrument can be pre-processed using the
same PC used for office tasks. The output from the pre-processing pro-
gram is a calibrated, rectified and geo-referenced hyper-spectral image
with an ENVI header file for data analysis.
2.2. Yield mapping for crops grading
Yield mapping is a process of gathering data on crop yield and char-
acteristics with reference to geographical location of the crop-field area
[25]. Several methods and procedures are used in order to establish a
map. Yield mapping was initially introduced in early 1990s. Basic com-
ponents of a yield mapping system are sensors (e.g. flow, moisture,
speed, etc.), GPS antenna, computing platform, and display. Each sensor
is calibrated to convert the physical parameters. The system is also
known as yield monitoring system or YMS. In real-time, it is set-up on
the harvester. Several types of sensors are used for obtaining the infor-
mation from the field. The yield calculated at each field can be displayed
on a map using GIS. This file can be converted to a text format or
displayed as a yield map. The GPS system works based on satellite nav-
igation made up of several satellites that orbits around the earth. Satel-
lites send the signal information to the earth and the receiver in GPS
takes the information and used to calculate the accurate location. The
software calculates the time span between signal transmitted from
the satellite to the receiver and receiver to the satellite which in turn
used to calculate the distance to earth. Mounting of sensors depends
on the type of crop and the way the harvesting is performed. In some
cases, sensors are mounted at the end of the grain elevator. It records
the yield based on the weight of the grain that strikes the sensors.
Most U.S. grain YMS measure grain flowing through the clean grain
auger into the hopper continuously in the grain flow. Some sensors
used in the grain tank also calculate the moisture levels of the crop. A
raw log file is created during the harvest to record the output of all sen-
sors as a function of time. The recorded data is displayed on the GPS
monitor to create the yield maps for future analysis. Yield monitors
should be calibrated at regular intervals for verifying conditions. The
YMS works well for Differential Harvesting (DH) applications. Differen-
tial harvesting concept involves harvesting selected areas of crops that
meet the certain quality requirements. Examples are to harvest fruits
and vegetables that meet size, color, and nutrition criteria. Such a selec-
tive harvesting concept allows formers to gain more profits from the
same crop. Essentially, two criteria are needed for DH: the ability to
sense quality factors of the crop before harvest, and to harvest the
crop without damaging the remaining field to mature and dry [26]. It
is also possible to apply DH i.e., separating the crop based on quality,
color and size, after the crops are harvested, however, at the cost of an-
other lead time (Figs. 3 and 4).
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) tracks yield mon-
itor usage. It was reported that US has more than 150 YMS per million
acres of grain or oilseeds. The numbers suggest that there should be
about 45,000 combines equipped with yield monitor, with about
46% of corn, 36% of soybeans and 15% of wheat harvested with a com-
bine so equipped [27]. The YMS is fully integrated with computer
software to help analyze yield data, however, the growers in many
applications prefer to conduct their own analyses using commonly
available data management software and geographic information
software (GIS) programs. Therefore, the YMS should have standard-
ized hardware and software interfacings in order to be open system.
No standardization of YMS is yet proposed by any standardization
agency or professional society.
3. Harvesters and Ag robots
One of the important phases of agriculture is harvesting. Presently,
most of the harvesting, either crops or fruits, is carried out manually.
Farmers have been dragging machines into their fields since the
mid-19th century [28]. As global competition is high, modern harvesting
has been the cornerstone of agricultural activities. Mechanization of
harvesting can not only increase productivity but also provide quality
index. In Florida the mechanical shakers harvest about half of the 40
million pounds of oranges annually from its 10 K acres. The harvesting
of fruits in California (world's most productive agricultural area) has in-
creased to a high level due to the labor cost. Declining returns coupled
 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364 359

Fig. 3. (a) An example of DH, (b) a DH machine, (c) the electronics interfacings of YMS, (d) the GIS map information about the crop location (in this case grape) for DH (prior to
harvesting), (e) the yield map after the harvesting.

with mounting regulatory hurdles drives the stakeholders to develop
value-added methods such as application of advanced technology. The
research and development in mechanized agriculture are going in two
directions: large machine based mechanical design, and small robotic
manipulator based design. The large machine are good when the field
is open, but are not suitable for greenhouse applications.
Robots are used in a wide spectrum of applications. However, the
main applications still are, welding (25%) and assembly (35%). Many
of these robots are used in the automotive and electronics industries.
Application of robotic systems in agriculture and food are however,
increasing and it is forecasted that this sector will use robotic systems
accounting for about 20% [29]. Accordingly, the research and develop-
ment is growing due to the following reasons. (1) Robots improve
productivity, (2) scarcity of labor, and (3) practicable to design and
easier to handle. The design and development of agricultural robotic
technology for harvesting applications involves several issues such
(1) mechanical design, (2) implementation of robust control archi-
tecture and embedded technology for sensing and measurement,
and (3) integration of communication systems and computing platform.
Apart from its mechanical structure needed for specific application, the

Fig. 4. Images of mechanical and robotic harvesters (top to bottom: A cucumber harvester, a tomato harvester, a cotton harvester, a cucumber harvesting robot, a tomato harvesting
robot, a potato harvester.
360 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364
integration of sensors into the embedded electronic automation and con-
trol system is a challenge because of (1) required precision measure-
ments for the level control of the harvester itself, and (2) the use of
electronic system in a harsh and rugged environment. Most of the robots
developed so far can be classified into two categories: agricultural robot
and food processing and packaging robots. For agricultural applications,
robot uses distinct mechanical configuration and embedded technology
to match with the crops in question. Therefore, unlike industrial robots,
to some extent they are unique. Most of the robot arm is coated with rub-
ber to minimize any damage to the tree. The main functions of robot is to
harvest the targeted ripen fruit without damaging the branches or leaves
of the tree. The robots used for the later applications are very sophisticat-
ed. Most of them have 5 degrees of freedom, allowing it to move, in, out,
and up, down and spherical or cylindrical motion. A review in respect to
latest developments of harvester for various applications is highlighted
below.
• Henten et. al, developed the concept of an autonomous robot for
harvesting cucumbers in greenhouses [30]. They reported on a mod-
ular concept of a configurable autonomous robot for harvesting vege-
table fruits suited for Dutch horticultural practice. The accuracy of the
7-DOF manipulator seems sufficient for picking cucumbers within the
prescribed harvest region. The end-effector was able to handle the
delicate produce without loss of quality. The robotic platform has 3D
vision systems to locate the cucumber. Also, it is embedded with an
algorithm for collision-free motion planning.
• Pik Rite Series 3000 from PikRite is a cucumber harvester. Its operating
efficiency is 2–3 MPH and the machine can fill trucks with clean and
green fruit. A bristle belt called hedge-hog system removes trash and
dirt. A large bottom bin is attached for fast on-the-go unloading [31].
• The tomato harvester robot includes a sensing unit and a hand inte-
grated with a commercial robotic manipulator. The sensing unit, or ro-
botic eye, scans the tomato plant and determines the number and
position of red fruits. This information is required to move the finger
based prosthetic hand in the direction of the fruit. The fingers then
open around the tomato and get a hold. Then a torsion movement is
applied to detach it. Monta et. al, developed two types of robotic
end-effectors capable of harvesting tomato based on the physical
properties of fruits [32]. The first prototype end-effector consisted of
two parallel plate fingers and a suction pad. The fingers pick a fruit
off at the joint of its peduncle after the suction cup simulates it by vac-
uum from other fruits in the same cluster.
• The California Tomato Machinery (CTM) company is leader in the
commercial tomato harvester equipment industry. It markets three
distinct harvesters, designed to meet the specific grower's needs and
production environments. The machines are manufactured with the
highest quality materials, advanced technology and are supported by
an experienced service team [33].
• High capacity grape harvesting Braud S.D.C system from Euro Ma-
chines allows to harvest with maximum output, while avoiding dam-
age to the vineyard and safeguarding the quality of the harvested
grapes. The shakers of this system are produced of a very flexible ma-
terial and bent into an arc. The distance between the shakers can also
be adapted, with a consequent reduction in the number of shakers re-
quired in a given fruit-bearing zone. A drive mechanism varies the
curves of the shakers in an alternating cycle to ensure that one shaker
reaches its maximum curvature when the other is in its straightest po-
sition [34].
• Robotics research group at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev have
a $1.3 M grant project to develop intelligent sensing and manipula-
tion algorithms for robotic platform capable of sensing and picking
high value crops such as greenhouse peppers, orchard fruits and pre-
mium wine grapes [35].
• Potato harvesters from Advanced Farm Equipment, LLC are very ad-
vanced. The growers are involved their design and manufacturing
process. The Advanced Farm Equipment's on-going commitment to
research and development contributes to their reputation as an inno-
vative, forward-thinking organization. The harvester has self-leveling
air heads, all hydraulically driven [36].
• In the U.S., cotton is harvested using machines called stripper har-
vesters. They have mechanical rollers which have brushes that re-
move the boll from the plant. On the belt spindle pickers are used.
The cotton pickers pull the cotton from the open bolls using revolving
barbed spindles that twist the fiber and release it after it is separated
from the bolls. Once harvested, seeds must be removed and stored
before it is delivered. Seed cotton is removed from the harvester
and placed in modules, relatively compact units of seed cotton [37].
3.1. Future research in robotic based harvester design
The design and nature of the control architecture in such systems
have a major influence on the operational functionality. The possibility
to realize effective control solutions using device (sensor, actuator,
drive, switch etc.) level distributed intelligence has opened a challeng-
ing new domain. Whilst there is an abundance of literature available
on approaches to the design of individual control elements and their as-
sociated software for a simple lab based robotic system, there is mini-
mal help for involved underlying problems of a complex machine
such as agricultural robot. The entire control architecture of such a ro-
botic system requires a strongly modular and highly configurable con-
cept for both hardware and software to achieve fast and cost effective
adoption to configurable problems. For example, a peach harvesting
robot should be capable of harvesting apples and oranges. The research
emphases in this area have been on (i) mechanical design and
configurability, (ii) system integration and modularity, (iii) embedded
automation and control, (iv) GUI application software and human ma-
chine interface, (v) wireless communication strategy, and (vi) standards
and interfaces. The other prime research considerations are as follows
[38–42].
• Integration of machine and control system design so as to deter-
mine optimized combinations of mechanical and control system
elements.
• Design of machine control application software, which can improve
flexibility while developing run-time architecture.
• Specification and implementation of workbench for the system
builder that would provide an integrated tool-set for design, imple-
mentation, installation, and modification of control systems.
• Design requirements for modifications and additions with mini-
mum disruption to the existing system.
• Development of generic data models for traceability purposes, which
can embody emerging standards with regard to information storage
methods and mechanisms.
• Distribution of runtime functionality across the systems based on ap-
propriate multi-processor network technology, with the ability to
support an integrated production environment with instances and
interaction.
• Dynamic configuration and re-configuration of run-time systems
over a distributed hardware platform, providing the flexibility to ac-
commodate change.
3.2. Fieldbus and other interfaces for automation and control
Open system standardization and system integration is a dominant
attribute in automation and control. The fieldbus standards are very
suitable for automation and control application in a harsh and rugged
environment. Some of the fieldbus standards meet IS 78 standards
[43]. Fieldbus, a control networking system, is used for connecting
field devices such as sensors, actuators, regulators, controllers, and
man–machine interfaces with each other for automation applications.
The technology is designed to implement distributed control strategy,
a demanding requirement in almost types of implementation. Some of
 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364
the important fieldbus standards are ModBus, PROFIBUS DP, PROFIBUS
PA, DNP3, CANbus, P-NET, EIB, DeviceNet, LonWorks, FOUNDATION
Fieldbus, WorldFIP, AS-I, Smart Distributed Systems, SERCOS, InterBus,
etc. [44–46]. At the farm level, special local agricultural networks defined
by DIN 9684 and ISO 11783 are put into action. CANbus (Controller Area
Network fieldbus) is very popular for automotive engine applications.
Therefore, it is expected that this technology would be the preferred
choice for precision agriculture applications. CAN is a layer 2
implementation: higher layers are implemented in software. CiA is the
international users’ and manufacturers’ group that develops and sup-
ports CANopen and other CAN-based higher-layer protocols. Some
of the more popular higher-layer CAN bus protocols are CANopen
and DeviceNet [47]. The LBS (Landwirtschaftliches Bus-System)
standard, or DIN 9684 – agricultural tractors and machinery –
interfaces for signal transfer, also known as Agricultural Bus System,
was developed in Germany and is the first to be completed for agri-
cultural applications [48]. It is based on CAN 2.0A and was created to
address the immediate need of the agricultural equipment industry
for a communication standard [49]. For comparison of parts of the
standards in ISO 11783 and DIN 9684 refer [50].
4. Application of sensor network technology
Sensor networking concept has recently emerged as the technolo-
gy platform that are applied for any kinds of monitoring applications.
It is a sensing, computing and communication infrastructure capable
of observing the phenomena and making decision in order to forward
the quality information through cyber transportation method. Jiang et
al. [26] presented a setup of the Lofar Agro project that concentrates
on monitoring micro-climates in a crop field. A group of sensors
were deployed in the experimentation potato field to deal with fighting
phytophtora, a fungal disease. In addition to the agronomic experiment,
the researchers also gathered data and statistics on the behavior of a
wireless sensor network to test the robustness of the energy-efficient
T-MAC protocol. Langendoen et al. implemented a wireless sensor net-
work (WSN) sensing nodes for the application of tea drought monitor-
ing. Each of the sensing nodes was composed of an ATmegal28L
micro-processor for data processing and controlling, SHT11 and TDR-3
sensor modules for data measurements, and an nRF905 transceiver
module for data transmission and reception [51]. Results indicated
that the system can collect the temperature, humidity and soil water
content, and transmit data remotely to the base station, provided with
the characteristics of working stability and reliability. In regard to
WSN, the researchers investigated protocol solutions for efficient,
high-data-rate, adaptive wireless sensor networking systems for a
wide range of applications in health and medicine, geophysics, environ-
ment, weather, defense, and agriculture. Sensor Networks are primarily
wireless, hence, they are called Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) [52]
and they consist of an autonomous entities, each containing a sensor
and computing power, spatially distributed in order to monitor envi-
ronmental conditions such as humidity, temperature, sound, acoustic
signal, light intensity, vibration, pressure, motion, surveillance parame-
ters, pollutants, etc. It is much needed that in many applications, the
WSN should operate for long periods of time because the entities
(nodes) are wireless and the available energy limits the overall opera-
tion. To minimize energy consumption, most of the nodes components,
including the radio transmitter are turned off most of the time. Each
node has sufficient processing power to process and make a decision
and capable of broadcasting this decision to the other nodes in the net-
work cluster. One node may act as the network master (sink), and it
could contain a longer range radio system by the use of IEEE 802.11 or
Bluetooth type protocol. In spite of the diverse applications, the devel-
opment of WSN technology deals with a number of challenges which
are rather broadly categorized into components due to four distinct fac-
tors such as deployment, unattended operation, untethered and dy-
namic changes.
361
5. Food processing and packaging
A survey on the use of computer-integrated manufacturing in food
processing companies indicate that the food industry has been rather
slow to adopt new automation technology and standards, yet is con-
sidering utilizing such technologies in the near future. Automating a
portion of a supply chain can lead to considerable increase in produc-
tion rate and decrease in the projected costs. As there is a need of in-
creased production rate and quality control, many food producers are
now heavily relying on automated process control. OMAC is the orga-
nization for automation and manufacturing professionals that is ded-
icated to supporting the machine automation and operation needs of
manufacturing. OMAC provides the guidelines for control and auto-
mation of the packaging machinery.
OMAC Users Group (UG) solutions for technical and non-technical
issues in the development, implementation, and commercialization of
open, modular architecture control (OMAC) technology for food
manufacturing is emerging. OMAC Packaging Working Group takes
care of packaging machinery automation guidelines. The objective
is to enhance flexibility, capability, and reduce integration costs.
There are five packaging sub-groups and their dedicated activities
are (1) PackSoft: Guidelines for machinery programming languages,
(2) PackConnect: Define control architecture platforms and connec-
tivity, (3) PackAdvantage: Identify the benefits of connect & pack
guidelines, (4) PackML: Naming convention communications, and
(5) PackLearn: Educational and training needs of the industry [11,53–55].
Implementing the OMAC standards in the industry user can re-
duce engineering cost, training, and eliminate the packaging waste.
Fig. 5(a) shows the number of packaging machines used on typical
packaging line in food manufacturing industry. Figure (b) shows
how machines are connected in a packaging line together control
wise. Figure (c) shows what benefits they achieve through the auto-
mated packaging systems.
5.1. RFID and traceability
Electronic Product Code (EPC) is an emerging system that uses
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) for the automatic identification
of any products [58] including food packaging. The RFID tag uses radio
frequency communication to automatically identify, track and man-
age objects, people or animals. The research and developments in
RFID technology has not yet been matured although the technology
is already in use since more than a decade. It is programmed with in-
formation. Based on the information loaded into the tag, it is easier to
track exactly who produced the coffee, when, and how. It can help tell
the origin story and roasters could also read the tagged food bags as
they arrive at destination. A RFID system has a scanning antenna, a
transceiver with a decoder to interpret the data and a transponder.
The antenna radiates signals in a relatively short range. It does not
need a battery. The main benefit of RFID is that the line of sight not
required — i.e., rather than using light to collect or read a number
from a bar code, radio waves are used. Using RFID to identify all the
ingredients that go into a particular batch of food package, for exam-
ple, allows for targeted recalls to minimize public health hazards,
limit the financial impact and protect the brand. So, traceability is
the additional features of RFID technology.
RFID system has three layers — application, communication and
physical. The application layer abstraction and formulation is a new
research direction in regard to futuristic RFID network to be used
for traceability applications. In contrast to recent developments in
wireless sensor network (WSN), the RFID networking will have po-
tential impact in traceability areas. Traditional one-to-one RFID tag
versus RFID reader type platform will soon get obsolete because of
impact of networking scenario. The widespread adoption of RFID re-
quires not only low cost tags and readers, but also the appropriate
networking infrastructure [59]. Therefore, there is a pressing need
362 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364
Fig. 5. Number of machines on a typical packaging line; Percentage of machines connected together in control wise; benefits of implementing the packaging automation [53,56,57].
to formulate the abstraction layer model in order to foresee the
expected demand. Many researchers have already explored the sys-
tem keeping in view of futuristic applications of the networking as-
pect of this technology. However, no research has been reported in
regard to application layer abstraction and formulation of RFID net-
work. Since RFID technology is expected to become an important
and ubiquitous infrastructure technology of supply chain processes
and customer service, a great amount of research should be undertak-
en. A rudimentary review on RFID network can be found in [60]. A
brief review in the field of RFID networking technology follows. In
[61] the authors reported work on resource constraints vs. privacy is-
sues requirements and restrictions of security implementation. They
also examined the features and issues pertinent to several existing
RFID security solution. Hsu et. al [62] developed the distributed
self-scheduling scheme, a simple mechanism for coordinating simul-
taneous transmissions. Their 2-ϕ dynamic modulation (TPDM) tech-
nique shows efficient communication performance in high density
and mobile RFID networks [63]. The experimental results show that
the TPDM scheduling techniques provide superior and stable perfor-
mance in both static and dynamic circumstance. Optimal localization
of RFID is challenging. The research work presented in [64] used an
enhanced formulation of the maximal covering location problem
along with a new criticality index analysis metric in order to deter-
mine the optimal placement of the limited number of RFID readers.
They tested the scheme in a healthcare facility where the RFID system
coverage has improved by 72% compared to the currently utilized
heuristic-based placement strategy. The RFID network design prob-
lem can be categorized under two perspectives: network and signal
processing. The network design deals with the protocol, topology,
scalability, configurability, and physical layer model of the system.
On the other hand, the signal processing concentrates on information
theoretic bounds of the communication systems such as detection, cod-
ing, estimation, channel capacity and performance tradeoffs therein.
Research efforts have focused on scalable, robust, and distributed algo-
rithms for the inference tasks related to product tracking which includes
localization, data association, and track maintenance. Wang et. al.,
discussed the real-time availability of RFID data that is critical for
manufacturing automation systems. Also in [65] the implementation of
a ZigBee [66] based integrated WSN and RFID system suitable for an in-
dustrial environment is explained. The integrated system consists of a
central monitoring station connected to local stations through Ethernet.
Active RFID tags as well as sensors associated with ZigBee have wireless
communication with coordinator through ZigBee routers. It is also inter-
esting to see the research title combining the RFID technology with sen-
sor network that justifies the fact that both the research areas such as
RFID network and sensor network are not mutually exclusive [66].
Much like sensor network, the limited communication capabilities and
energy resources of RFID networks pose the additional difficulty of con-
sidering the tradeoff between the communication cost and the accuracy
of the result. Also the network structure and the information structure
are different aspects of the problem and a mapping between the physical
entities and the information structure is needed [67]. It is imperative to
develop solutions that are energy efficient and computationally simple.
In a network without energy replenishment, a distributed solution
of the optimal policy, as well as heuristics to build the set of
pre-computed paths is also essential. Although, the conventional
static data routing scheme outperforms leading dynamic routing al-
gorithms in the literature, and is close to the optimal solution when
the energy claimed by each packet is relatively small compared to the
battery capacity, however dynamic routing algorithms entails tradeoffs
between performance and network life-time. The other requirement
issues are signal processing in RFID network. In this paper, our focus is
on analysis information theoretic bounds of RFID network which is
under areas of signal processing. The information theoretic bounds
(ITB) analyses are considered as a super application layer of the layered
architecture of any kind of network meant for reliable and safe commu-
nication. The importance of ITB analyses is significant in the sense that
the target is unpredicted environment.
5.2. Data management and execution systems
Success of any business depends on planning and requires wealth
of information. The overall objective of the strategic information
management in agriculture is to coordinate and support the sustain-
able network for developing a system for common data exchange
and to share and promote the common methodologies and tools.
 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364
This system allows formers to understand the key decisions with the
right information available to the right people at the right time and
using technology to collect, process, and distribute information in
ways that improve the delivery of crop products. Because of lack of
education and training the adoption of precision farming is compara-
tively slow. Also lack of research support, high human capital cost and
lack of support and consulting are some of the major fundamental
constrains for adoption of the precision farming. Indeed, the adoption
of precision farming is high where the labor cost is high, but land and
capital cost are relatively less. Although in North America Formers
tend to use key technologies from precision agriculture, like location
determination, computerized information system, computer guided
controllers for variable rate applications seeding and pesticide spraying,
sensing technologies for mapping.
The concept of execution systems (ES) is derived from a data man-
agement scheme called as Manufacturing Execution System [68,69], a
software system that resides between MRP/ERP (Materials/ Enterprise
Resource Planning) systems and manufacturing control systems. A
Packaging Execution System consists of packaged software designed
to capture safety data and performance from monitoring devices and
disparate automation across a packaging line or lines. The data is then
synthesized into actionable intelligence and shares the data for decision
making in real time at the line, plant and enterprise levels. On the
manufacturing floor, the information between MRP/ERP systems, dis-
tributed control systems and programmable logic controllers (PLCs) is
shared by making use of the Manufacturing Execution System. The
ERP system of the organization with real time information important
for the overseeing packaging lines and plant personnel operating lines
can be communicated directly by making use of PES. The infrastructure
of the line required for collecting packaging data which is essential for
PES is already in place. The emerging requirements for RFID, product se-
rialization or other product-tracking functions can be handled by the
software included in a PES by modifying it to the requirements of any
specific packaging line. A fully integrated solution can be achieved by
the advent of productized software designed to function within a PES.
In order to achieve positive business results, protect customers, elimi-
nate factors related to loss of revenue, the manufacturers can adopt
the PES approach. PES makes it sure that the quality, performance, avail-
ability and packaging efficiency is good and that the products are deliv-
ered on time and in good quality [70,71].
6. Conclusions
This paper presented a review on application of technology sys-
tems in agriculture and food. The development in technology system
for this sector is considered to be tremendous. Most of the research
activities include the use of new methods and procedures for preci-
sion agriculture so that the latest technology can serve the process
automation in an improved and productive way. The design attributes
such as modularity, flexibility, scalability extendibility, programma-
bility, integrability configurability and interoperability are the key
concerns in developing the new and innovation technology systems
for agriculture and food. The paper provides latest information in re-
gard to application of technology for soil sampling, field and crop
mapping, mechanical harvesters and agricultural robots, packaging
and role of RFID and traceability, software execution system and sen-
sor network. Further, the role of standards and interfaces are de-
scribed where necessary.
References
[1] Simon Blackmore, New concepts in agricultural automation, in: HGCA Conference
on precision in arable farming - current practice and future potential, Greece,
October 2009.
[2] Balaji Sethuramasamyraja, Harvinder Singh, George Mathew Mazhuvancheriparambath,
Geospatial modeling of wine grape quality (anthocyanin) for optimum sampling
363
strategy in mechanized on-the-go differential harvesting programs, International
Journal of Engineering Science and Technology 2 (11) (2010) 6058–6073.
[3] Ning Wang, Naiqian Zhang, Maohua Wang, in: Wireless sensors in agriculture
and food industry—recent development and future perspective, Computers and
Electronics in Agriculture, 50, Elsevier Science, 2006, pp. 1–14.
[4] Agricultural Engineering and Technology Working Group, Vision 2020 and strate-
gic research of the European Machinery Industry and Research Community, in:
7th framework program for research of the European community manufacture
report, October 2006.
[5] P.K. Balasankari, V.M. Salokhe, A case study of tractor utilization by farmers,
Coimbatore district, India, Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin
America 30(3) (1999) 14–18.
[6] Johan Baeten, Kevin Donn, Sven Boedrij, Wim Beckers, Eric Claesen, Autonomous
fruit picking machine: a robotic apple harvester, in: 6th International Conference
on Field and Service Robotics - FSR 2007, Chamonix : France, 2007.
[7] Chiyoda-ku Hirakawacho, in: Report by Asian Productivity Organization,
Postharvest Management of Fruit and Vegetables in the Asia-Pacific Region,
ISBN: 92-833-7051-1, 2006, (APO, Tokyo 102–0093, Japan).
[8] J. Bouma, J.W. Jones, An international collaborative network for agricultural systems
applications (ICASA), Agricultural Systems 70 (2–3) (December 2001) 355–368.
[9] http://cisedu.us/storage/docs/cts/08/sessions/SS4-CollaborationAndAgriculture.pdf.
[10] Spatial Data Infrastructure, Asia and the Pacific Newsletter 2 (4) (May 2005).
[11] N.P. Mahalik, Arun Nambiar, Trends in food packaging and manufacturing systems
and technology, Trends in Food Science and Technology Journal 21 (3) (2010)
115–164.
[12] Mehmet Erkan Yüksel, Asım Sinan Yüksel, RFID technology in business systems and
supply chain management, Journal of Economic and Social Studies 1 (1) (2011).
[13] D. Asha Devi, K. Malakondaiah, M. Suresh Babu, Measurement of potassium levels in
the soil using embedded system based soil analyzer, International Journal of Innova-
tive Technology & Creative Engineering 1 (1) (January 2011) (ISSN:2045–8711).
[14] http://www.bodenprobetechnik.de/startpage.html.
[15] B. Blackmore, W. Stout, M. Wang, B. Runov, Robotic agriculture — the future of agricul-
ture, in: 5th European Conference on Precision Agriculture, Wageningen Academic
Publishers, 2001, pp. 621–628.
[16] D. Franzen, Site-specifi c Farming — Number 2, Developing Zone Soil Sampling
Maps (Revised), SF-1176-2, NDSU Extension Service, Fargo, N.D., 2008.
[17] http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/ageng/machine/ae1445.pdf.
[18] Wang Xinzhong, Wang Xi, Design and test of variable-rate fertilization control
device of precision planter for soybean, in: International Conference on, Zibo,
China, May 2011, New Technology of Agricultural Engineering (ICAE), 2011.
[19] L.W. Murdock, P. Howe, Profitability of variable rate fertilization on a Kentucky
Soil (a theoretical analysis), Soil Science News & Views, vol. 18, No 10, Univ. of
Kentucky, College of Agriculture, Agronomy Department, 1997.
[20] Kurt D. Nolte, The integration of variable rate technologies for a soilapplied her-
bicide in leafy green production, Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Man-
agement 2 (6) (June 2011) 159–166.
[21] R.D. Till, W. Wanner, J.R. Evangelos, Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS)
test and evaluation concepts, in: Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace and Electron-
ics Conference, vol. 1, FAA Tech. Center, USA, 1995, pp. 169–174.
[22] J. Nowatzki, V. Hofman, L. Disrud, K. Nelson, GPS applications in crop production.
Retrieved August 02, 2010 from work of extension: http://www.extension.org/
pages/gps_applications_in_crop_production, 2008.
[23] F. Robert, New packaging technologies, Food and Drug Law Journal 50 (1995)
575–579.
[24] D.G. Goodenough, K.O. Niemann, A. Dyk, G. Hobart, P. Gordon, M. Loisel, Hao Chen,
Comparison of Aviris and AISA airborne hyperspectral sensing for above-ground forest
carbon mapping, in: IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium,
IGARSS 2008, 2008, (pp. II-129 - II-132).
[25] K. Shannon, Precision Agriculture: Global Positioning System (GPS). Retrieved June
15, 2010 fromUniveristy of Missouri Extension: http://extension.missouri.edu/
publications/displaypub.aspx?p=wq452, 1998.
[26] Sheng Jiang, Guokun Xiao, Weixing Wang, Zhen Li, Design of wireless sensor node for
drought monitoring in tea plantation, in: International Conference on Electric Infor-
mation and Control Engineering (ICEICE), 2011, April 15–17 2011, pp. 1328–1332.
[27] Ping Zhang, B. Anderson, B. Tan, M. Barlow, R. Myneni, Monitoring crop yield in USA
using a satellite-based climate-variability Impact Index, in: IEEE International Geo-
science and Remote Sensing Symposium, Honolulu, HI, 2010, pp. 1815–1818.
[28] N.P. Mahalik, Internal Report on Feasibility study on orange and peach harvesting
robot, ARI proposal, California State University, Fresno, 2011.
[29] F. Sistler, Robotics and intelligent machines in agriculture, IEEE Journal of Robot-
ics and Automation, IEEE Robotics and Automation Society 3 (1) (2003) 3–6.
[30] E.J. Van Henten, J. Hemming, B.A.J. Van Tuijl, J.G. Kornet, J. Meuleman, J. Bontsema,
E.A. Van Os, in: An Autonomous Robot for Harvesting Cucumbers in Greenhouses,
13, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Autonomous Robots, 2002, pp. 241–258.
[31] Pik Rite Inc., http://www.pikrite.com/content/3000-cucumber-harvester.
[32] M. Monta, N. Kondo, K.C. Ting, End-effectors for tomato harvesting robot, in: Journal
of Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 12 Issue 1–3, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Feb. 1998.
[33] California Tomato Machinery (CTM), www.tomatoharvester.com/.
[34] Euro Machines, http://www.euromachinesusa.com/.
[35] http://www.aabgu.org/media-center/news-releases/robot-picks-fruit.html.
[36] Advanced Farm Equipment, LLC, http://www.lenco-harvesters.com/.
[37] http://www.cotton.org/pubs/cottoncounts/story/how.cfm.
[38] United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Precision agriculture: NRCS support
for emerging technologies, in: Agronomy Technical Note No. 1, Greensboro/North
Carolina, 2007.
364 A. Suprem et al. / Computer Standards & Interfaces 35 (2013) 355–364
[39] S. Blackmore, A systems view of agricultural robotics, in: Precision Agriculture
conference, Wageningen Academic Publishers, the Netherlands, 2007, pp. 23–31.
[40] S. Neethirajan, C. Karunakaran, D. Jayas, Biosensors – an emerging technology for
the agricultural and food industry. The Canadian Society for Food and Agriculture,
in: CSAE Publisher, Winnipeg Manitoba, 2005, pp. 1–8.
[41] Toru Torii, Research in autonomous agriculture vehicles in Japan, Computers and
Electronics in Agriculture 25 (1–2) (2000) 133–153.
[42] Denny Oetomo, John Billingsley, in: Editorial, Special issue on agricultural robot-
ics, Intelligent Service Robotics, Springer, vol. 3, Number 4, (2010) pp 207–208,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11370-010-0079-y.
[43] Ernest C. Magison, Intrinsically safe systems-trends in design and installation
standards, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications IA-14 (1) (1978).
[44] Ian Verhappen, Fieldbus Safety: Calculating your Safety Integrity Level, Manufacturing
Automation, in: CLB Media Inc., Nov./Dec. 2006, pp. 1–3.
[45] In: N.P. Mahalik (Ed.), Fieldbus technology; industrial network standard for
real-time distributed control, Springer-Verlag, June-2003, 3540401830.
[46] R.T. Qu, R. Lim, An architecture for the interconnecting heterogeneous fieldbuses
in industrial automation, in: Proceedings IEEE International Symposium on Com-
putational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation, vol. 1, July 16–20 2003,
pp. 396–400.
[47] Feng-Li Lian, J.R. Moyne, D.M. Tilbury, Performance evaluation of control networks:
ethernet, ControlNet, and DeviceNet, IEEE Control Systems Magazine 21 (1)
(Feb 2001) 66–83.
[48] LAV - Landtechnik-Vereinigung, LBS Documentation, v.2.0-08.1988, Landtechnik-
Vereinigung, Frankfurt, Germany, 1998.
[49] Carlos E. Cugnasca, Antonio M. Saraiva, André R. Hirakawa, Cesar Strauss, Communica-
tion protocols for application in agricultural vehicles, in: Mahalik (Fieldbus Technology)
(Ed.), Fieldbus technology; industrial network standard for real-time distributed con-
trol, Springer-Verlag, June 2003, 3540401830.
[50] ISO 11783, An electronic communications protocol for agricultural equipment:
ASAE distinguished lecture # 23, in: Agricultural Equipment Technology Confer-
ence, February 7–10 1999, pp. 1–17.
[51] Koen Langendoen, Aline Baggio, O. Visser, Murphy loves potatoes: experiences
from a pilot sensor network deployment in precision agriculture, in: 20th IEEE In-
ternational Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium. IPDPS 2006 will be held
Tuesday, 25 April - Saturday, 29 April 2006 on Rhodes Island, Greece.
[52] T. Wark, P. Corke, P. Sikka, L. Klingbeil, Y. Guo, Ch. Crossman, Ph. Valencia, D. Swain,
G. Bishop-Hurley, Transforming Agriculture through Pervasive Wireless Networks,
Pervasive Computing, April–June, 2007. 50–57.
[53] http://www.omac.org/.
[54] Flavio Roberti, Carlos Soria, Emanuel Slawiñski, Vicente Mut, Ricardo Carelli,
Robot manipulators, trends and development, in: Open Software Structure for
Controlling Industrial Robot Manipulators, internal report, Universidad Nacional
de San Juan, Argentina, 2006, pp. 498–520.
[55] J.G. Garcia, J.G. Ortega, L.N. Nicto, A.S. Garcia, Design and validation of an open ar-
chitecture for an industrial robot, in: IEEE International Symposium on Industrial
Electronics, 2007, pp. 2004–2009.
[56] Ravinder Guda, MS Project report on Study on next generation technology sys-
tems and their developments for food and agriculture, California State University,
Fresno, 2010.
[57] Ravinder Guda, in: Study on next generation technology systems and their devel-
opments for food and agriculture in the 31st Central CA research symposium,
April 23 2010.
[58] A.N. Nambiar, Traceability in agri-food sector using RFID, in: To appear in the Pro-
ceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Information Technology (ITSIM),
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, June 14–17 2010.
[59] A. Sarac, N. Absi, S. Dauzere-Peres, A literature review on the impact of RFID tech-
nologies on supply chain management, International Journal of Production Eco-
nomics 128 (1) (2010) 77–95 (Elsevier).
[60] K.S. Leong, M.L. Ng, D.W. Engels, P.H. Cole, A distributed architecture for a ubiquitous
RFID sensing network, in: Proceedings of the 2005 Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Net-
works & Information Processing Conference : 5–8 December, Melbourne, Australia,
2005, pp. 7–12.
[61] Zongwei Luo, Terry Chan, Jenny S. Li, A lightweight mutual authentication proto-
col for RFID networks, in: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on
e-Business Engineering (ICEBE'05), 2005.
[62] Ching-Hsien Hsu, Shih-Chang Chen, Chia-Hao Yu, Jong Hyuk Park, Alleviating
reader collision problem in mobile RFID networks, Personal and Ubiquitous Com-
puting 13 (7) (2009) 489–497.
[63] W. Wang, D.C. McFarlane, J.P. Brusey, Timing analysis of real-time networked
RFID systems, in: 17th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS05)
4th Workshop on Real-Time Networks (RTN05), Palma de Mallorca, Spain, July,
2005.
[64] Asil Oztekin, Foad M. Pajouh, Dursun Delen, Leva K. Swim, in: An RFID network de-
sign methodology for asset tracking in healthcare, vol. 49 Issue 1, Elsevier Science,
2010, pp. 100–109.
[65] M. Sumi, Ebrahim A. Soujeri, Rahim Rajan, A.I. Harikrishnan, Design of a
zigbee-based RFID network for industry applications, in: Proceedings of the 2nd
International Conference on Security of Information and Networks, Famagusta,
2009, pp. 111–116.
[66] Michael Buettner, Richa Prasad, Alanson Sample, Daniel Yeager, Ben Greenstein,
Joshua R. Smith, David Wetherall, RFID sensor networks with the Intel WISP, in:
Proceedings of the 6th ACM conference on Embedded network sensor systems,
Raleigh, 2008, pp. 393–394.
[67] Murat Uneyyz, Mujdat Cetiny, Graphical Model-based Approaches to Target
Tracking in Sensor Networks: An Overview of Some Recent Work and Challenges,
in: Report for Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey and by the
European Commission Grant, 2007.
[68] Sean Michael Alsop, John Wesley Anderson, Kevin Paul Bell, Satnam Singh, Nicholas
Jeffrey Wong, Robert Michalk, A new approach to facilitating system integration:
Case study through the development of a food processing and packaging automation
laboratory, accepted for presentation in the 29th Annual Central California Research
Symposium, April 16, 2008.
[69] Fan-Tien Cheng, Chih-Feng Chang, Shang-Lun Wu, Development of holonic
manufacturing execution systems, manufacturing the future, concepts –
technologies – visions, in: V. Kordic, A. Lazinica, M. Merdan (Eds.), ARS/plV,
Germany, July 2006, p. 908.
[70] N.P. Mahalik, Processing and packaging automation systems: a review, special
issue on “advances in food automation”, Journal of Sensing and Instrumentation
for Food Quality and Safety 3 (1) (March 2009) 12–25.
[71] ARC Advisory Group, Packaging Execution Systems Benefit Lean Manufacturing
Initiatives, in: 2007, 2007, pp. 2–11, (available at http://www.systech-tips.com/
pes/pdfs/pes-english.pdf).