Comparison of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of Heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beets
Abstract Background Phenotyping technologies are expected to provide predictive power for a range of applications in plant and crop sciences. Here, we use the disease pressure of Beet Cyst Nematodes (BCN) on sugar beet as an illustrative example to test the specific capabilities of different methods...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2017-09-01
|
| Series: | Plant Methods |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13007-017-0223-1 |
| _version_ | 1811331213837729792 |
|---|---|
| author | Samuel Joalland Claudio Screpanti Frank Liebisch Hubert Vincent Varella Alain Gaume Achim Walter |
| author_facet | Samuel Joalland Claudio Screpanti Frank Liebisch Hubert Vincent Varella Alain Gaume Achim Walter |
| author_sort | Samuel Joalland |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Phenotyping technologies are expected to provide predictive power for a range of applications in plant and crop sciences. Here, we use the disease pressure of Beet Cyst Nematodes (BCN) on sugar beet as an illustrative example to test the specific capabilities of different methods. Strong links between the above and belowground parts of sugar beet plants have made BCN suitable targets for use of non-destructive phenotyping methods. We compared the ability of visible light imaging, thermography and spectrometry to evaluate the effect of BCN on the growth of sugar beet plants. Results Two microplot experiments were sown with the nematode susceptible cultivar Aimanta and the nematode tolerant cultivar BlueFox under semi-field conditions. Visible imaging, thermal imaging and spectrometry were carried out on BCN infested and non-infested plants at different times during the plant development. Effects of a chemical nematicide were also evaluated using the three phenotyping methods. Leaf and beet biomass were measured at harvest. For both susceptible and tolerant cultivar, canopy area extracted from visible images was the earliest nematode stress indicator. Using such canopy area parameter, delay in leaf growth as well as benefit from a chemical nematicide could be detected already 15 days after sowing. Spectrometry was suitable to identify the stress even when the canopy reached full coverage. Thermography could only detect stress on the susceptible cultivar. Spectral Vegetation Indices related to canopy cover (NDVI and MCARI2) and chlorophyll content (CHLG) were correlated with the final yield (R = 0.69 on average for the susceptible cultivar) and the final nematode population in the soil (R = 0.78 on average for the susceptible cultivar). Conclusion In this paper we compare the use of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry over two cultivars and 2 years under outdoor conditions. The three different techniques have their specific strengths in identifying BCN symptoms according to the type of cultivars and the growth stages of the sugar beet plants. Early detection of nematicide benefit and high yield predictability using visible imaging and spectrometry suggests promising applications for agricultural research and precision agriculture. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T16:15:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4efae28e6931428db215b9e0fad7cd45 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1746-4811 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T16:15:38Z |
| publishDate | 2017-09-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Plant Methods |
| spelling | doaj.art-4efae28e6931428db215b9e0fad7cd452022-12-22T02:40:03ZengBMCPlant Methods1746-48112017-09-0113111410.1186/s13007-017-0223-1Comparison of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of Heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beetsSamuel Joalland0Claudio Screpanti1Frank Liebisch2Hubert Vincent Varella3Alain Gaume4Achim Walter5Syngenta Crop Protection Münchwillen AGSyngenta Crop Protection Münchwillen AGInstitute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH ZürichSyngenta Crop Protection Münchwillen AGSyngenta Crop Protection Münchwillen AGInstitute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH ZürichAbstract Background Phenotyping technologies are expected to provide predictive power for a range of applications in plant and crop sciences. Here, we use the disease pressure of Beet Cyst Nematodes (BCN) on sugar beet as an illustrative example to test the specific capabilities of different methods. Strong links between the above and belowground parts of sugar beet plants have made BCN suitable targets for use of non-destructive phenotyping methods. We compared the ability of visible light imaging, thermography and spectrometry to evaluate the effect of BCN on the growth of sugar beet plants. Results Two microplot experiments were sown with the nematode susceptible cultivar Aimanta and the nematode tolerant cultivar BlueFox under semi-field conditions. Visible imaging, thermal imaging and spectrometry were carried out on BCN infested and non-infested plants at different times during the plant development. Effects of a chemical nematicide were also evaluated using the three phenotyping methods. Leaf and beet biomass were measured at harvest. For both susceptible and tolerant cultivar, canopy area extracted from visible images was the earliest nematode stress indicator. Using such canopy area parameter, delay in leaf growth as well as benefit from a chemical nematicide could be detected already 15 days after sowing. Spectrometry was suitable to identify the stress even when the canopy reached full coverage. Thermography could only detect stress on the susceptible cultivar. Spectral Vegetation Indices related to canopy cover (NDVI and MCARI2) and chlorophyll content (CHLG) were correlated with the final yield (R = 0.69 on average for the susceptible cultivar) and the final nematode population in the soil (R = 0.78 on average for the susceptible cultivar). Conclusion In this paper we compare the use of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry over two cultivars and 2 years under outdoor conditions. The three different techniques have their specific strengths in identifying BCN symptoms according to the type of cultivars and the growth stages of the sugar beet plants. Early detection of nematicide benefit and high yield predictability using visible imaging and spectrometry suggests promising applications for agricultural research and precision agriculture.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13007-017-0223-1Plant phenotypingVisible imagingSpectrometryThermographySugar beetNematode |
| spellingShingle | Samuel Joalland Claudio Screpanti Frank Liebisch Hubert Vincent Varella Alain Gaume Achim Walter Comparison of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of Heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beets Plant Methods Plant phenotyping Visible imaging Spectrometry Thermography Sugar beet Nematode |
| title | Comparison of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of Heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beets |
| title_full | Comparison of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of Heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beets |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of Heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beets |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of Heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beets |
| title_short | Comparison of visible imaging, thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of Heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beets |
| title_sort | comparison of visible imaging thermography and spectrometry methods to evaluate the effect of heterodera schachtii inoculation on sugar beets |
| topic | Plant phenotyping Visible imaging Spectrometry Thermography Sugar beet Nematode |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13007-017-0223-1 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT samueljoalland comparisonofvisibleimagingthermographyandspectrometrymethodstoevaluatetheeffectofheteroderaschachtiiinoculationonsugarbeets AT claudioscrepanti comparisonofvisibleimagingthermographyandspectrometrymethodstoevaluatetheeffectofheteroderaschachtiiinoculationonsugarbeets AT frankliebisch comparisonofvisibleimagingthermographyandspectrometrymethodstoevaluatetheeffectofheteroderaschachtiiinoculationonsugarbeets AT hubertvincentvarella comparisonofvisibleimagingthermographyandspectrometrymethodstoevaluatetheeffectofheteroderaschachtiiinoculationonsugarbeets AT alaingaume comparisonofvisibleimagingthermographyandspectrometrymethodstoevaluatetheeffectofheteroderaschachtiiinoculationonsugarbeets AT achimwalter comparisonofvisibleimagingthermographyandspectrometrymethodstoevaluatetheeffectofheteroderaschachtiiinoculationonsugarbeets |