Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Review Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp1 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

A comprehensive bibliometric review of remote sensing and machine learning applications in maize yield prediction

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.13990
Submitted
4 February 2026
Published
08-04-2026

Abstract

Maize plays a vital role in global food security, making accurate and timely yield prediction essential for effective agricultural planning, policy formulation and resource management. In recent decades, advances in remote sensing and machine learning have transformed crop yield forecasting by enabling scalable, data-driven and high-resolution assessments that outperform conventional agronomic approaches. This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive assessment of global research trends, collaboration patterns and thematic evolution in remote sensing and machine learning-based maize yield prediction from 2000–2025. A total of 493 peer-reviewed articles indexed in the Scopus database were analysed using established bibliometric techniques. The results reveal a strong annual growth rate of 15.34 %, with an exponential increase in publications after 2018, reflecting rapidly growing interest in digital and AI-driven agriculture. The United States and China emerge as dominant contributors, forming a highly influential collaborative core, while countries such as India and Brazil show increasing research engagement. Remote Sensing emerges as the most productive and influential journal in this field. Thematic analysis reveals a clear shift from traditional vegetation indices toward advanced non-linear approaches, including Random Forest, deep learning models and UAV. The growing emphasis on multi-source data fusion and artificial intelligence reflects the fields’ response to climate variability and the needs of precision agriculture. Overall, the integration of satellite observations with machine learning has become central to modern maize yield forecasting. Furthermore, these advancements hold strong potential to enhance sustainable farm management, climate resilience and global food security.

References

  1. 1. Erenstein O, Jaleta M, Sonder K, Mottaleb K, Prasanna BM. Global maize production, consumption and trade: trends and R&D implications. Food Secur. 2022;14(5):1295–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-022-01288-7
  2. 2. Chitsiko RJ, Mutanga O, Dube T, Kutywayo D. Review of current models and approaches used for maize crop yield forecasting in sub-Saharan Africa and their potential use in early warning systems. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C. 2022;127:103199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2022.103199
  3. 3. Zelenák A, Szabó A, Nagy J, Nyéki A. Using the CERES-Maize model to simulate crop yield in a long-term field experiment in Hungary. Agronomy. 2022;12(4):785. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12040785
  4. 4. Jabed MA, Azmi Murad MA. Crop yield prediction in agriculture: a comprehensive review of machine learning and deep learning approaches, with insights for future research and sustainability. Heliyon. 2024;10(24):e40836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40836
  5. 5. Khaki S, Wang L. Crop yield prediction using deep neural networks. Front Plant Sci. 2019;10:621. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00621
  6. 6. Lizaso JI, Ruiz-Ramos M, Rodríguez L, Gabaldon-Leal C, Oliveira JA, Lorite IJ, et al. Modeling the response of maize phenology, kernel set and yield components to heat stress and heat shock with CSM-IXIM. Field Crops Res. 2017;214:239–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.09.019
  7. 7. Chang Y, Latham J, Licht M, Wang L. A data-driven crop model for maize yield prediction. Commun Biol. 2023;6(1):439. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-023-04833-y
  8. 8. Sharma A, Jain A, Gupta P, Chowdary V. Machine learning applications for precision agriculture: a comprehensive review. IEEE Access. 2021;9:4843–73. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3048415
  9. 9. Van Klompenburg T, Kassahun A, Catal C. Crop yield prediction using machine learning: a systematic literature review. Comput Electron Agric. 2020;177:105709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105709
  10. 10. Paudel D, Boogaard H, De Wit A, Janssen S, Osinga S, Pylianidis C, et al. Machine learning for large-scale crop yield forecasting. Agric Syst. 2021;187:103016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.103016
  11. 11. Lobell DB, Thau D, Seifert C, Engle E, Little B. A scalable satellite-based crop yield mapper. Remote Sens Environ. 2015;164:324–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2015.04.021
  12. 12. Becker-Reshef I, Justice C, Sullivan M, Vermote E, Tucker C, Anyamba A, et al. Monitoring global croplands with coarse resolution earth observations: the Global Agriculture Monitoring (GLAM) project. Remote Sens. 2010;2(6):1589–609. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs2061589
  13. 13. Momenpour SE, Bazgeer S, Moghbel M. A bibliometric analysis of the literature on crop yield prediction: insights from previous findings and prospects for future research. Int J Biometeorol. 2024;68(5):829–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-024-02628-2
  14. 14. Xu J, Song Y, Rui Z, Zhang Z, Hu C, Wang L, et al. Trend analysis of the application of multispectral technology in plant yield prediction: a bibliometric visualization analysis (2003–2024). Front Sustain Food Syst. 2025;9:1513690. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2025.1513690
  15. 15. Matyukira C, Mhangara P. Advances in vegetation mapping through remote sensing and machine learning techniques: a scientometric review. Eur J Remote Sens. 2024;57(1):2422330. https://doi.org/10.1080/22797254.2024.2422330
  16. 16. Ali A, Perna S. Sustainability indicators in agriculture: a review and bibliometric analysis using Scopus database. J Agric Environ Int Dev (JAEID). 2021;115(2):5–21. https://doi.org/10.36253/jaeid-12083
  17. 17. Abiola WA, Diogo RVC, Tovihoudji PG, Mien AK, Schalla A. Research trends on biochar-based smart fertilizers as an option for the sustainable agricultural land management: bibliometric analysis and review. Front Soil Sci. 2023;3:1136327. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoil.2023.1136327
  18. 18. Pan X, Yan E, Cui M, Hua W. Examining the usage, citation and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: a comparative study of three tools. J Informetr. 2018;12(2):481–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.005
  19. 19. Chen Z, Gao Y, Chen J, Yang L, Zeng S, Su Y, et al. Global bibliometric analysis of research on the application of biochar in forest soils. Forests. 2023;14(11):2238. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14112238
  20. 20. Aria M, Cuccurullo C. bibliometrix: an R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informetr. 2017;11(4):959–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  21. 21. Visser M, Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref and Microsoft Academic. Quant Sci Stud. 2021;2(1):20–41. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00112
  22. 22. Pavithra G, Sakthivel S, Kalaimathi V, Hariprasanth T, Ajith D, Adhisankaran K, et al. Global research trends of natural fibers: a bibliometric review from 2000 to 2023. Plant Sci Today. 2025;12(sp4). https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.8668
  23. 23. Kalaimathi V, Geethalakshmi V, Parasuraman P, Kathirvelan P, Swaminathan C. A bibliometric analysis of the Journal of Agrometeorology (JAM) from 2008 to 2022. J Agrometeorol. 2024;26(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.54386/jam.v26i1.2525
  24. 24. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  25. 25. Yang JM, Tseng SF, Won YL. A bibliometric analysis on data mining using Bradfords’ Law. In: Juang J, editor. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Technologies and Engineering Systems (ICITES2014). (Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering). Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 613–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17314-6_78
  26. 26. Amanullah A, Rajeswari S, Gul S. Testing the applicability of Lotka’s Law, Bradfords’ Law and Zipfs’ Law on gastritis research output. DESIDOC J Libr Inf Technol. 2025;45(4):378–94. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.21019
  27. 27. Perianes-Rodriguez A, Waltman L, Van Eck NJ. Constructing bibliometric networks: a comparison between full and fractional counting. J Informetr. 2016;10(4):1178–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.006
  28. 28. Ines AVM, Das NN, Hansen JW, Njoku EG. Assimilation of remotely sensed soil moisture and vegetation with a crop simulation model for maize yield prediction. Remote Sens Environ. 2013;138:149–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.07.018
  29. 29. Liu S, Yang JY, Zhang XY, Drury CF, Reynolds WD, Hoogenboom G. Modelling crop yield, soil water content and soil temperature for a soybean–maize rotation under conventional and conservation tillage systems in Northeast China. Agric Water Manag. 2013;123:32–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2013.03.001
  30. 30. Jiang H, Hu H, Zhong R, Xu J, Xu J, Huang J, et al. A deep learning approach to conflating heterogeneous geospatial data for corn yield estimation: a case study of the US Corn Belt at the county level. Glob Chang Biol. 2020;26(3):1754–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14885
  31. 31. Shahhosseini M, Hu G, Archontoulis SV. Forecasting corn yield with machine learning ensembles. Front Plant Sci. 2020;11:1120. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.01120
  32. 32. Marques Ramos AP, Prado Osco L, Elis Garcia Furuya D, Nunes Gonçalves W, Cordeiro Santana D, Pereira Ribeiro Teodoro L, et al. A random forest ranking approach to predict yield in maize with UAV-based vegetation spectral indices. Comput Electron Agric. 2020;178:105791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105791
  33. 33. Rigden AJ, Mueller ND, Holbrook NM, Pillai N, Huybers P. Combined influence of soil moisture and atmospheric evaporative demand is important for accurately predicting US maize yields. Nat Food. 2020;1(2):127–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0028-7
  34. 34. Kang Y, Ozdogan M, Zhu X, Ye Z, Hain C anderson M. Comparative assessment of environmental variables and machine learning algorithms for maize yield prediction in the US Midwest. Environ Res Lett. 2020;15(6):064005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab7df9
  35. 35. Kushairi N, Ahmi A. Flipped classroom in the second decade of the millennia: a bibliometrics analysis with Lotka’s law. Educ Inf Technol. 2021;26(4):4401–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10457-8
  36. 36. Zhang L, Zhang Z, Luo Y, Cao J, Xie R, Li S. Integrating satellite-derived climatic and vegetation indices to predict smallholder maize yield using deep learning. Agric For Meteorol. 2021;311:108666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2021.108666
  37. 37. Ma Y, Zhang Z, Kang Y, Özdoğan M. Corn yield prediction and uncertainty analysis based on remotely sensed variables using a Bayesian neural network approach. Remote Sens Environ. 2021;259:112408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2021.112408
  38. 38. Guo Y, Wang H, Wu Z, Wang S, Sun H, Senthilnath J, et al. Modified red blue vegetation index for chlorophyll estimation and yield prediction of maize from visible images captured by UAV. Sensors. 2020;20(18):5055. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20185055
  39. 39. Johnson DM. An assessment of pre- and within-season remotely sensed variables for forecasting corn and soybean yields in the United States. Remote Sens Environ. 2014;141:116–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.10.027
  40. 40. Shahhosseini M, Hu G, Huber I, Archontoulis SV. Coupling machine learning and crop modeling improves crop yield prediction in the US Corn Belt. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):1606. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80820-1
  41. 41. Jin Z, Azzari G, You C, Di Tommaso S, Aston S, Burke M, et al. Smallholder maize area and yield mapping at national scales with Google Earth Engine. Remote Sens Environ. 2019;228:115–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.04.016
  42. 42. Khanal S, Fulton J, Klopfenstein A, Douridas N, Shearer S. Integration of high-resolution remotely sensed data and machine learning techniques for spatial prediction of soil properties and corn yield. Comput Electron Agric. 2018;153:213–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2018.07.016
  43. 43. Baek C, Doleck T. A bibliometric analysis of the papers published in the Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education from 2015-2019. Int J Artif Intell. 2020;2(1):67. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijai.v2i1.14481
  44. 44. Geipel J, Link J, Claupein W. Combined spectral and spatial modeling of corn yield based on aerial images and crop surface models acquired with an unmanned aircraft system. Remote Sens. 2014;6(11):10335–55. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs61110335
  45. 45. Battude M, Al Bitar A, Morin D, Cros J, Huc M, Marais Sicre C, et al. Estimating maize biomass and yield over large areas using high spatial and temporal resolution Sentinel-2 like remote sensing data. Remote Sens Environ. 2016;184:668–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.07.030
  46. 46. Uno Y, Prasher SO, Lacroix R, Goel PK, Karimi Y, Viau A, et al. Artificial neural networks to predict corn yield from Compact Airborne Spectrographic Imager data. Comput Electron Agric. 2005;47(2):149–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2004.11.014

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.