Yem Bitkileri Üreticileri İçin Tarımsal İlaçlama Dronu Seçimi: Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yaklaşımı

Abstract

Tarımsal üretimde iş gücü yetersizliği, artan girdi maliyetleri ve sürdürülebilirlik gereksinimleri, insansız hava araçlarının (İHA) özellikle pestisit uygulamalarında kullanımını hızla yaygınlaştırmıştır. Buna karşın, tarımsal ilaçlama dronu seçimi; teknik performans, operasyonel verimlilik ve maliyet gibi çok sayıda ve birbiriyle çelişebilen kriterin birlikte değerlendirilmesini gerektiren karmaşık bir karar problemidir. Literatürde yem bitkileri üreticilerine odaklanan, sistematik ve bütünleşik karar modellerinin sınırlı olması bu çalışmanın temel çıkış noktasını oluşturmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, yem bitkileri üreticileri için en uygun tarımsal ilaçlama dronunun belirlenmesine yönelik bütünleşik bir Çok Kriterli Karar Verme (ÇKKV) modeli geliştirmektir. Bu kapsamda, İzmir ilinde faaliyet gösteren deneyimli üreticilerden elde edilen uzman görüşleri doğrultusunda kriter ağırlıkları Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP) ve SWARA yöntemleriyle belirlenmiş; drone alternatiflerinin performansı ise ARAS ve TOPSIS yöntemleri kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Analiz sonuçları, her iki ağırlıklandırma yönteminde de püskürtme performansı, uçuş süresi ve menzil/kontrol menzilinin ilk üç sırada yer aldığını göstermiştir. ARAS–AHP ve TOPSIS–SWARA analizlerinde DJI Agras birinci, Mostaş Teknoloji ikinci ve XAG üçüncü sırada yer almıştır. Dört yöntem-ağırlık kombinasyonunda alternatif sıralamasının değişmemesi, yöntemler arası sağlamlığı desteklemiştir. Sonuç olarak çalışma, yem bitkileri üreticilerinin farklı dron alternatiflerini sistematik biçimde karşılaştırmalarına yardımcı olan uygulanabilir bir karar destek çerçevesi sunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Tarımsal İHA
• Tarımsal İlaçlama Dronu
• Yem Bitkileri Üreticileri
• Çok Kriterli Karar Verme
• Dron Seçimi

Ethical Statement

“Yem Bitkileri Üreticileri İçin Tarımsal İlaçlama Dronu Seçimi: Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yaklaşımı” başlıklı çalışmanın yazım sürecinde bilimsel kurallara, etik ve alıntı kurallarına uyulmuş; toplanan veriler üzerinde herhangi bir tahrifat yapılmamış ve bu çalışma herhangi başka bir akademik yayın ortamına değerlendirme için gönderilmemiştir. Gerekli olan etik kurul izinleri Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İnsan Araştırmaları Kurulu’nun 17.12.2025 tarih ve 44 sayılı toplantısında alınmıştır. Çatışma Beyanı: Çalışmada herhangi bir potansiyel çıkar çatışması söz konusu değildir. Finansman: Bu çalışma için herhangi bir kurum veya kuruluştan destek alınmamıştır. Yapay Zeka ve Türleri Kullanım Beyanı: Bu makalenin yazımında yapay zeka ve türleri kullanılmamıştır. Veri Paylaşım Beyanı: Bu çalışmanın verilerini bulguların doğrulanması amacıyla makul bir talep üzerine “etik ilkeler ve yayın politikası”nın ilgili kısmında belirtilen şartlara göre paylaşabileceğimi beyan ederim.

Selection of Agricultural Spraying Drones for Forage Crop Producers: A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach

Abstract

The increasing labor shortages in agriculture, rising input costs, and the growing emphasis on sustainability have accelerated the adoption of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), particularly for pesticide application processes. However, selecting an appropriate agricultural spraying drone constitutes a complex decision-making problem, as it requires the simultaneous evaluation of multiple and often conflicting criteria such as technical performance, operational efficiency, and cost. The limited number of systematic and integrated decision-support studies focusing specifically on forage crop producers highlights the necessity of this research. The aim of this study is to develop a comprehensive Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) framework to determine the most suitable agricultural spraying drone for forage crop producers. In this context, expert evaluations obtained from experienced producers operating in İzmir Province were employed to determine criterion weights using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Step-wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis (SWARA) methods. Subsequently, the performance of alternative drone models was assessed through the Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods. The results showed that spraying performance, flight duration, and operational range were the three most important criteria in both weighting methods. In both the ARAS–AHP and TOPSIS–SWARA analyses, DJI Agras ranked first, Mostaş Teknoloji second, and XAG third. The unchanged alternative ordering across all four weighting–ranking combinations supported cross-method robustness. Overall, this study provides a reliable and practical decision-support tool for forage crop producers and contributes to agricultural modernization strategies as well as the development of domestic UAV technologies.

Keywords

• Agricultural UAV
• Agricultural Spraying Drone
• Forage Crop Producers
• Multi-Criteria Decision-Making
• Drone Selection

Ethical Statement

During the writing process of the study “Selection of Agricultural Spraying Drones for Forage Crop Producers: A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach” scientific rules, ethical and citation rules were followed. No falsification was made on the collected data and this study was not sent to any other academic publication medium for evaluation. Ethics Committee Permission is not required. In addition, permission was obtained from the Dokuz Eylül University Humanities Sciences Ethics Committee (Date: 17/12/2025 and Decision no: 44) to conduct the research. Declaration of Conflict: There is no potential conflict of interest in the study. Funding: No funding was received from any institution or organization for this study. Statement of Use for Artificial Intelligence and Its Types: Artificial intelligence and its various types were not used in the writing of this article. Data Sharing Statement: I declare that, upon reasonable request for the purpose of verifying the findings, I can share the data of this study according to the conditions specified in the relevant section of the "ethical principles and publication policy".

References

1. Abbas, A., et al. (2023). Drones in plant disease assessment, efficient monitoring, and detection: A way forward to smart agriculture. Agronomy, 13(6), 1524. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13061524
2. Acıbuca, V. (2024). The Possibility of Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Agricultural Activities in Turkey. Egyptian Journal of Agronomy, 46(1), 39-49. DOI: 10.21608/agro.2024.260593.1406
3. Ağır, B. K., Ekinci, M. S. ve Çelik, Ş. (2025). Türkiye’de Yem Bitkileri Üretimi ve Hayvan Varlığı Arasındaki İlişki: Faktör Analizi Yaklaşımı. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 137-144. https://doi.org/10.25308/aduziraat.1673063
4. Ahirwar, S., Swarnkar, R., Bhukya, S. ve Namwade, G. (2019). Application of drone in agriculture. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 8(01), 2500- 2505.https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.801.264
5. Akın, F. ve Karakaş, E. (2025). Prioritizing Critical Factors for Agricultural Spraying Drones Adoption: A Multi- Criteria Decision-Making Approach in Adana. Çukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(2), 287- 300. https://doi.org/10.21605/cukurovaumfd.1618713
6. Akkamış, M. ve Çalışkan, S. (2020). İnsansız hava araçları ve tarımsal uygulamalarda kullanımı. Türkiye İnsansız Hava Araçları Dergisi, 2(1), 8– 16. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tiha/issue/54200/70 7831
7. Alkan, B. ve Ertuğrul, G. Ö. (2022). Tarımsal insansız hava araçları ile pestisit uygulamaları. Kırşehir Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(2), 232-238.
8. Altıntaş G, Altıntaş A, Çakmak E (2017) Yem Bitkileri Üretiminde Sürdürülebilirlik Üzerine Bir Çalışma: Sivas İli Örneği. Tarım Ekonomisi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1): 38-51.

9. Altundaş, A., Kurtay, K. G. ve Erol, S. (2022). Sınır güvenliği ve müdahale görevi yapan İHA’ların ÇKKV yöntemleri ile değerlendirilmesi. Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, (42), 155–185. https://doi.org/10.17134/khosbd.1049863
10. Arslan, B. E., Eren, T. ve Güven, E. (2023). Afet durumunda arama kurtarma malzemelerinin sevkiyatı için insansız hava araçlarının seçimi. Resilience, 7(2), 293–303. https://doi.org/10.32569/resilience.1268208
11. Arslan, N. ve Delice, E. K. (2020). KEMIRA-M yöntemi ile kişisel kullanıcılar için dron seçimi: bir uygulama. Endüstri Mühendisliği, 31(2), 159-179. https://doi.org/10.46465/endustrimuhendisligi.706171
12. Azar, A. T., Koubaa, A., Ali Mohamed, N., Ibrahim, H. A., Ibrahim, Z. F., Kazim, M., ... ve Casalino, G. (2021). Drone deep reinforcement learning: A review. Electronics, 10(9), 999.
13. Bendig, J., Bolten, A., Bennertz, S., Broscheit, J., Eichfuss, S. ve Bareth, G. (2014). Estimating biomass of barley using crop surface models (CSMs) derived from UAV-based RGB imaging. Remote Sensing, 6(11), 10395– 10412. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs61110395
14. Boz, E. (2025). Evaluation for the selection of agricultural spraying drones using p, q-Quasirung orthopair fuzzy logic and multi-criteria methods. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 27606. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025- 11656-w
15. Brewster, C., Roussaki, I., Kalatzis, N., Doolin, K. ve Ellis, K. (2017). IoT in agriculture: Designing a Europe-wide large-scale pilot. IEEE communications magazine, 55(9), 26-33. DOI: 10.1109/MCOM.2017.1600528
16. Çakır, E. (2018). Bütünleşik SWARA ve EDAS yöntemi kullanarak fitness merkezlerinin değerlendirilmesi: Örnek bir uygulama. Hitit Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(3), 1907–1923. https://doi.org/10.17218/hititsosbil.408916
17. Carr, P., Cavigelli, M., Darby, H., Delate, K., Eberly, J., Fryer, H., … ve Woodley, A. (2020). Green and animal manure use in organic field crop systems. Agronomy Journal, 112(2), 648-674. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20082
18. Chan, K. W., Nirmal, U. ve Cheaw, W. G., (2018) Progress on drone technology and their applications: A comprehensive review, in AIP conference proceedings, AIP Publishing.
19. Chen, H., Lan, Y., Fritz, B. K., Hoffman, W. C. ve Liu, S. (2021). Review of agricultural spraying technologies for plant protection using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 14(1), 38–49. https://doi.org/10.25165/j.ijabe.20211401.6113
20. Chen, M. F. ve Tzeng, G. H. (2004). Combining grey relation and TOPSIS concepts for selecting an expatriate host country. Mathematical and computer modelling, 40(13), 1473-1490.
21. Chen, S., Lan, Y., Zhou, Z., Deng, X. ve Wang, J. (2021). Research advances of the drift reducing technologies in application of agricultural aviation spraying. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 14(5), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.25165/j.ijabe.20211405.6224
22. Daponte, P., De Vito, L., Glielmo, L., Iannelli, L., Liuzza, D., Picariello, F., and Silano, G. (2019, May). A review on the use of drones for precision agriculture. In IOP conference series: earth and environmental science (Vol. 275, No. 1, p. 012022). IOP Publishing.
23. Deng, L., Mao, Z., Li, X., Hu, Z., Duan, F. ve Yan, Y. (2018). UAV-based multispectral remote sensing for precision agriculture: A comparison between different cameras. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 146, 124– 136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2018.09.008
24. Dulia, Esrat F., Mir S. Sabuj, and Syed A. M. Shihab. 2022. "Benefits of Advanced Air Mobility for Society and Environment: A Case Study of Ohio" Applied Sciences 12, no. 1: 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12010207
25. Dutta, G. ve Goswami, P. (2020). Application of drone in agriculture: A review. International Journal of Chemical Studies, 8(5), 181-187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22271/chemi.2020.v8.i5d.10529
26. Ercan, Ş., Öztep, R., Güler, D. ve Saner, G. (2019). Tarım 4.0 ve Türkiye’de uygulanabilirliğinin değerlendirilmesi. Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, 25(2), 259-265. https://doi.org/10.24181/tarekoder.650762
27. Ervural, B. Ç. (2025). Entropi Tabanlı Gri İlişkisel Analiz Modeliyle En Uygun İHA Modelinin Tarım Faaliyetleri İçin Değerlendirilmesi. International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Pure Sciences, 37(3), 340-355.
28. Fawcett, D., et al. (2020). Multi-scale evaluation of drone-based multispectral surface reflectance and vegetation indices in operational conditions. Remote Sensing, 12(3), 514. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12030514
29. Gago, J., et al. (2015). UAVs challenge to assess water stress for sustainable agriculture. Agricultural Water Management, 153, 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2015.01.020
30. Gao, P., Zhang, Y., Zhang, L., Noguchi, R. ve Ahamed, T. (2019). Development of a recognition system for spraying areas from unmanned aerial vehicles using a machine learning approach. Sensors, 19(2), 313. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19020313
31. García-Munguía, A., Guerra-Ávila, P. L., Islas-Ojeda, E., Flores-Sánchez, J. L., Vázquez-Martínez, O., García- Munguía, A. M. ve García-Munguía, O. (2024). A review of drone technology and operation processes in agricultural crop spraying. Drones, 8(11), 674. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones8110674
32. Gašparović, M., Zrinjski, M., Barković, İ. ve Radočaj, D. (2020). An automatic method for weed mapping in oat fields based on UAV imagery. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 173, 105385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105385
33. Ghazali, M. H. M., Azmin, A. ve Rahiman,(20222) Implementation in Precision Agriculture–A Survey. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, Volume 12, Issue 04,67-77 DOI: 10.46338/ijetae0422_10
34. Göncü, K. K. (2024). Çeltik Üreticilerinin Tarımsal İlaçlamada Kullandıkları Dron Tercihlerini Etkileyen Faktörlerin Değerlendirilmesi. JOEEP: Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 9(2), 38-46.
35. Guan, S., et al. (2019). Assessing correlation of high-resolution NDVI with fertilizer application level and yield of rice and wheat crops using small UAVs. Remote Sensing, 11(2), 112. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11020112
36. Ho, W., Xu, X. ve Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision-making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review, European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 16-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.05.009
37. Hunter III, J. E., Gannon, T. W., Richardson, R. J., Yelverton, F. H. ve Leon, R. G. (2020). Integration of remote‐weed mapping and an autonomous spraying unmanned aerial vehicle for site‐specific weed management. Pest Management Science, 76(4), 1386-1392. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5651
38. Hwang, C. L. ve Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey (pp. 58-191). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
39. İnan M. ve Karcı A. (2021) Tarımda Ağaç İlaçlamanın Drone’larla Yapılmasında Yeni bir Yöntemin Geliştirilmesi ve Uygulanması, Anatolian Journal of Computer Sciences, Volume:6 No:2, pp:72-89.
40. Inoue, Y. (2020). Satellite- and drone-based remote sensing of crops and soils for smart farming – A review. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 66(6), 798–810. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380768.2020.1738899
41. İren, Z. ve Yeşilay, R. B. (2025). Tarımda Drone Kullanımının Potansiyel Faydaları. Ege Üniversitesi Ulaştırma Yönetimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 50-64.
42. Jemal, T., Astatke, H., Terfe, A. ve Mekonen, S. (2023). Effect of conventional and household water treatment technologies on the removal of pesticide residues in drinking water, jimma town, southwestern, ethiopia. Plos One, 18(7), e0288086. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288086
43. Kalischuk, M., (2019). An improved crop scouting technique incorporating unmanned aerial vehicle-assisted multispectral crop imaging into conventional scouting practice for gummy stem blight in watermelon. Plant Disease, 103(7), 1642–1650. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-08-18- 1373-RE
44. Kara, M. ve Eren, T. (2023). Hasar tespit çalışmalarında görevlendirilebilecek dronların bulanık karar verme yöntemleri ile değerlendirilmesi. Politeknik Dergisi, 1–1.
45. Kara, M., Yumuşak, R. ve Eren, T. (2022). Acil yardım müdahalesi yapan birimler için çok ölçütlü karar verme yöntemleri ile kargo drone seçimi. Türkiye İnsansız Hava Araçları Dergisi, 4(2), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.51534/tiha.1148876
46. Kara, M., Yumuşak, R. ve Eren, T. (2023). Anız yangınlarına müdahale için itfaiye drone seçimi: Giresun örneği. Journal of Aviation Research, 5(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.51785/jar.1180613
47. Karar, M. E., Alotaibi, F., Rasheed, A. A., and Reyad, O. (2021). A pilot study of smart agricultural irrigation using unmanned aerial vehicles and IoT-based cloud system. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.01851.
48. Kardasz, P., Doskocz, J., Hejduk, M., Wiejkut, P. ve Zarzycki, H. (2016). Drones and possibilities of their using. J. Civ. Environ. Eng, 6(3), 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2165-784X.1000233
49. Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E. K. ve Turskis, Z. (2010). Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step‐wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA). Journal of business economics and management, 11(2), 243-258. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.12
50. Khan, M. S., Shah, S. I. A., Javed, A., Qadri, N. M. ve Hussain, N. (2021). Drone selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods. In 2021 International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences and Technologies (IBCAST), January, 256-270. DOI: 10.1109/IBCAST51254.2021.9393291
51. Kılavuz, E. ve Erdem, İ. (2019). Dünyada tarım 4.0 uygulamaları ve Türk tarımının dönüşümü. Social Sciences, 14(4), 133-157. http://dx.doi.org/10.12739/NWSA.2019.14.4.3C0189
52. Kim, J., Kim, S., Ju, C. ve Son, H. I. (2019). Unmanned aerial vehicles in agriculture: A review of perspective of platform, control, and applications. Ieee Access, 7, 105100-105115. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2932119
53. Kumar, C., Ramawat, N. ve Verma, A. (2021). Organic fertigation system in saline‐sodic soils: a new paradigm for the restoration of soil health. Agronomy Journal, 114(1), 317-330. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20957
54. Liu, Q., Huang, G., Zhang, Z., Lin, Z., Deng, X., Dong, X., ... ve Cao, X. (2025). Forage Crop Research in the Modern Age. Advanced Science, 2415631. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202415631
55. Liu, Z. ve Li, J. (2023). Application of unmanned aerial vehicles in precision agriculture. Agriculture, 13(7), 1375. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13071375
56. López-Granados, F., Torres-Sánchez, J., SerranoPérez, A., de Castro, A. I., Mesas-Carrascosa, F. J. ve Peña, J. M. (2016). Early season weed mapping in sunflower using UAV technology: Variability of herbicide treatment maps against weed thresholds. Precision Agriculture, 17(2), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-015-9415-8
57. Maimaitijiang, M., et al. (2017). Unmanned aerial system (UAS)-based phenotyping of soybean using multi- sensor data fusion and extreme learning machine. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 134, 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2017.10.011
58. Marzouk, M. ve Sabbah, M. (2021). AHP-TOPSIS social sustainability approach for selecting supplier in construction supply chain. Cleaner environmental systems, 2, 100034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2021.100034
59. Matache, M. G., Gageanu, I., Gheorghe, G. V., Persu, C., Chiristescu, M. ve Nitu, M. (2023). Development of a tricopter-hexarotor agricultural UAV destined for the realization of precision spraying works. INMATEH – Agricultural Engineering, 70(2), 11–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35633/inmateh-70-01
60. McGourty Glenn T, John PR (2005) Managing Vineyard Soil Organic Matter With Cover Crops. Proceedings of the Soil Environment and Vine Mineral Nutrition Symposium. Davis, CA: American Society for Enology and Viticulture, 2005
61. Melville, B., Lucieer, A. ve Aryal, J. (2019). Classification of lowland native grassland communities using hyperspectral unmanned aircraft system (UAS) imagery in the Tasmanian Midlands. Drones, 3(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones3010005
62. Merkepçi, H. ve Baransel, M. M. C. (2020). A Multi–Criteria Decision–Making framework based on neutrosophic evamix with critic approach for drone selection problem. Biology and Life Sciences.
63. Merkert, R. ve Bushell, J. (2020). Managing the drone revolution: A systematic literature review into the current use of airborne drones and future strategic directions for their effective control. Journal of air transport management, 89, 101929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101929
64. Mogili, U. R. ve Deepak, B. B. V. L. (2018). Review on application of drone systems in precision agriculture. Procedia computer science, 133, 502-509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.07.063
65. Mogili, U. R. ve Deepak, B. B. V. L. (2020). An intelligent drone for agriculture applications with the aid of the MAVlink protocol. In Innovative Product Design and Intelligent Manufacturing Systems: Select Proceedings of ICIPDIMS 2019 (pp. 195-205). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
66. Moharana, S. ve Dutta, S. (2016). Spatial variability of chlorophyll and nitrogen content of rice from hyperspectral imagery. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 122, 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2016.09.002
67. Monjezi, M., Dehghani, H., Singh, T. N., Sayadi, A. R. ve Gholinejad, A. (2012). Application of TOPSIS method for selecting the most appropriate blast design. Arabian journal of geosciences, 5(1), 95-101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-010-0133-2
68. Nahiyoon, S. A., Ren, Z., Wei, P., Li, X., Li, X., Xu, J., Yan, X. ve Yuan, H. (2024). Recent Development Trends in Plant Protection UAVs: A Journey from Conventional Practices to Cutting-Edge Technologies—A Comprehensive Review. Drones, 8(9), 457. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones8090457
69. Narzari, R., Burhan, U., Choudhury, G., Singhal, K. ve Choudhary, K. K. (2025). A critical review of how UAVs can transform precision agriculture in the realm of agroecology. Discover Soil, 2(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44378-025-00055- 2
70. Nath, S. (2024). A vision of precision agriculture: Balance between agricultural sustainability and environmental stewardship. Agronomy Journal, 116(3), 1126-1143. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.21405
71. Nebati, E. E., Vatansever, E. N. ve Makas, G. (2023). SWARA, ARAS ve WASPAS yöntemleri ile yeni şube yeri seçimi: Bir kargo firması örneği. Fırat Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 35(1), 217–237. https://doi.org/10.35234/fumbd.1187200
72. Negash, L., Kim, H. Y. ve Choi, H. L. (2019). Emerging UAV applications in agriculture. In 2019 7th International Conference on Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications (RiTA) (pp. 254–257). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RITAPP.2019.8932853
73. Ntalakas, A., Dimoulas, C., Kalliris, G. ve Veglis, A. (2017). Drone journalism: Generating immersive experiences. Journal of Media Critiques, 3(11), 187-199. DOI:10.17349/jmc117317
74. Nur, F., Alrahahleh, A., Burch, R., Babski-Reeves, K. ve Marufuzzaman, M. (2020). Last mile delivery drone selection and evaluation using the interval-valued inferential fuzzy TOPSIS. Journal of Computational Design and Engineering, 7(4), 397-411. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcde/qwaa033
75. Özgüven, M. M., Altaş, Z., Güven, D. ve Arif, Ç. A. M. (2022). Tarımda drone kullanımı ve geleceği. Ordu Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 12(1), 64-83. https://doi.org/10.54370/ordubtd.1097519
76. Özyurt, H. B., Duran, H. ve Çelen, I. H. (2022). Determination of the application parameters of spraying drones for crop production in hazelnut orchards. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(4), 819-828. https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.1105420
77. Panday, U. S., Pratihast, A. K., Aryal, J. ve Kayastha, R. B. (2020). A review on drone-based data solutions for cereal crops. Drones, 4(3), 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones4030041
78. Puri, V., Nayyar, A. ve Raja, L. (2017). Agriculture drones: A modern breakthrough in precision agriculture. Journal of Statistics and Management Systems, 20(4), 507-518. DOI:10.1080/09720510.2017.1395171
79. Qin, W., Chen, P. ve He, R. (2023). Study on the dynamic distribution of spores of powdery mildew pathogen in wheat by rotor airflow of plant protection UAV. Plos One, 18(11), e0293457. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293457
80. Rakhade, R. D., Patil, N. V., Pardeshi, M. R. ve Mhasde, C. S. (2021). Optimal choice of agricultural drone using MADM methods. International Journal of Technological Innovation in Modern Engineering and Science (IJTIMES), e-ISSN, 2455, 2585.
81. Rao, I., Peters, M., Castro, A., Schultze‐Kraft, R., White, D., Fisher, M., … ve Rudel, T. (2015). Livestockplus - the sustainable intensification of forage-based agricultural systems to improve livelihoods and ecosystem services in the tropics. Tropical Grasslands - Forrajes Tropicales, 3(2), 59. https://doi.org/10.17138/tgft(3)59-82
82. Ritchie, H. ve Roser, M. (2018). Water use and stress. Our World in Data. https://doi.org/10.4060/CB6241EN
83. Saaty TL, Vargas LG., (2012) Models, Methods, Concepts ve Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. 2nd ed. New York, USA, Springer Science ve Business Media.
84. Saaty, R. W. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used. Mathematical modelling, 9(3-5), 161-176.
85. Saaty, T. L. (2013). Analytic hierarchy process. In Encyclopedia of operations research and management science (pp. 52-64). Springer, Boston, MA.
86. Sapkota, R., Stenger, J., Ostlie, M. ve Flores, P. (2023). Towards reducing chemical usage for weed control in agriculture using UAS imagery analysis and computer vision techniques. Scientific reports, 13(1), 6548.
87. Shahrooz, M., Talaeizadeh, A. ve Alasty, A. (2020, November). Agricultural spraying drones: Advantages and disadvantages. In 2020 Virtual symposium in plant omics sciences (OMICAS) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
88. Sigorta Medya, (2020). TARSİM’in Drone Eğitimleri başladı. https://sigortamedya.com.tr/tarsim-drone- egitimleri/, 07 Kasım 2025.
89. Stanujkic, D. ve Jovanovic, R. (2012). Measuring a quality of faculty website using ARAS method.
90. Stanujkic, D., Karabasevic, D., Popovic, G., Stanimirovic, P. S., Muzafer, S., Smarandache, F. ve Ulutaş, A. (2021). A new grey approach for using SWARA and PIPRECIA methods in a group decision-making environment. Mathematics, 9(13), 1554. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9131554
91. Su, J., Coombes, M., Liu, C., Guo, L. ve Chen, W. H. (2018). Wheat drought assessment by remote sensing imagery using unmanned aerial vehicle. In 2018 Chinese Control Conference (CCC) (pp. 10340–10344). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/CHICC.2018.8484005
92. Sunar, B., Yalçın, B., Ergene, B. ve Önal, A. (2024). Akıllı Tarım Uygulamalarında Kullanılan İlaçlama Sistemlerinin Araştırılması. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Uluslararası Mühendislik Teknolojileri ve Uygulamalı Bilimler Dergisi, 7(1), 58-72.
93. T.C. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı İzmir İl Tarım ve Orman Müdürlüğü, Brifing Raporu 2024, https://izmir.tarimorman.gov.tr/Menu/122/Brifing-Raporu, Erişim Tarihi: 14/11/2025
94. Tan, M., Özgüven, M. M. ve Tarhan, S. (2015). Drone sistemlerin hassas tarımda kullanımı, 29. Tarımsal Mekanizasyon Kongresi ve Enerji Kongresi, 2-5
95. Triantaphyllou, E., Kovalerchuk, B., Mann, L. ve Knapp, G. M. (1997). Determining the most important criteria in maintenance decision making. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 3(1), 16-28.
96. Türkiye Bankalar Birliği (TBB), 2023. https://www.tbb.org.tr/Content/Upload/Dokuman/8960/Tarim_Sektor_ Raporu_130723.pdf
97. Türkseven, S., Kızmaz, M. Z., Tekin, A. B., Urkan, E. ve Serim, A. T. (2016). Tarımda dijital dönüşüm; insansız hava araçları kullanımı. Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi, 12(4), 267-271.
98. Ul Haq SI, Zheng D, Feng N, Jiang X, Qiao F, He JS, Qiu QS (2022) Progresses of CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in forage crops. Journal of Plant Physiology, 279: 153860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2022.153860
99. Ulutaş, A. (2019). SWARA ve MAIRCA yöntemleri ile catering firması seçimi. Business ve Management Studies: An International Journal, 7(4), 1467–1479. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v7i4.1187
100. Ünal, Y. (2024). Tarımda ve İlaçlamada Drone Ve Püskürtme Sistemleri Uygulamaları. Iconil 2024 Spring, 91.
101. Wang, L., et al. (2022). Progress in agricultural unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) applied in China and prospects for Poland. Agriculture, 12(3), 397. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12030397
102. Wang, X., He, X., Song, J., Wang, Z., Wang, C., Wang, S. ve Meng, Y. (2018). Drift potential of UAV with adjuvants in aerial applications. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 11(5), 54–58. https://doi.org/10.25165/j.ijabe.20181105.3413
103. Xia, W. ve Wu, Z. (2007). Supplier selection with multiple criteria in volume discount environments. Omega, 35(5), 494-504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.09.002
104. Yangal, H. S., Karakoç, A., Akbulut, A. ve Gedikağaoğlu, M. (2022). Kil topu ile uygulamalı drone destekli akıllı tohumlama ve ağaçlandırma. Uluslararası Biyosistem Mühendisliği Dergisi, 3(1), 18-31.
105. Yeşilay, R. B. ve Macit, A. (2020). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de drone ekonomisi: Geleceğe yönelik beklentiler. Beykoz Akademi Dergisi, 8(1), 239–251. https://doi.org/10.14514/byk.m.26515393.2020.8/1.239-251
106. Zavadskas, E. K., Stević, Ž., Tanackov, I. ve Prentkovskis, O. (2018). A novel multicriteria approach–rough step- wise weight assessment ratio analysis method (R-SWARA) and its application in logistics. Studies in Informatics and Control, 27(1), 97-106. DOI:10.24846/v27i1y201810
107. Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z. ve Vilutiene, T. (2010). Multiple criteria analysis of foundation instalment alternatives by applying Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) method. Archives of civil and mechanical engineering, 10(3), 123-141.
108. Zolfani, S. H., ve Saparauskas, J. (2013). New application of SWARA method in prioritizing sustainability assessment indicators of energy system. Engineering Economics, 24(5), 408–414. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.24.5.2860