In-field high throughput phenotyping and cotton plant growth analysis using LiDAR

Frontiers in Plant Science

Volumn 9, Issue , 2018, Pages

  Sun, Shangpeng ^a   Li, Changying ^a   Paterson, Andrew H ^b,c   Jiang, Yu ^a   Xu, Rui ^a   Robertson, Jon S ^b   Snider, John L ^b   Chee, Peng W ^b  

^a University of Georgia   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

3D point cloud; Field based high throughput phenotyping; LiDAR; Morphologic traits; Plant growth analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 85043392547     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1664462X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00016     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Awlia, M., Nigro, A., Faikus, J., Schmoeckel, S. M., Negrão, S., Santelia, D., et al. (2016). High-throughput non-destructive phenotyping of traits that contribute to salinity tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Front. Plant Sci. 7:1414. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01414
2. Bac-Molenaar, J. A., Vreugdenhil, D., Granier, C., and Keurentjes, J. J. (2015). Genome-wide association mapping of growth dynamics detects time-specific and general quantitative trait loci. J. Exp. Bot. 66, 5567–5580. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erv176
3. Bietresato, M., Carabin, G., Vidoni, R., Gasparetto, A., and Mazzetto, F. (2016). Evaluation of a LiDAR-based 3D-stereoscopic vision system for crop-monitoring applications. Comput. Electron. Agric. 124, 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2016.03.017
4. Busemeyer, L., Ruckelshausen, A., Möller, K., Melchinger, A. E., Alheit, K. V., Maurer, H. P., et al. (2013). Precision phenotyping of biomass accumulation in triticale reveals temporal genetic patterns of regulation. Sci. Rep. 3:2442. doi: 10.1038/srep02442
5. Cobb, J. N., DeClerck, G., Greenberg, A., Clark, R., and McCouch, S. (2013). Next-generation phenotyping: requirements and strategies for enhancing our understanding of genotype–phenotype relationships and its relevance to crop improvement. Theor. Appl. Genet. 126, 867–887. doi: 10.1007/s00122-013-2066-0
6. Collins, G. (2013). Plant Growth Regulator (PGR) Management Considerations for the 2013 Crop. Available online at: http://www.ugacotton.com/2013/07/plant-growth-regulator-pgr-management-considerations-for-the-2013-crop-collins-and-whitaker/
7. Constable, G. A., and Bange, M. P. (2015). The yield potential of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Field Crops Res. 182(Suppl C), 98–106. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.07.017
8. Cui, T.-T., He, K.-H., Chang, L.-G., Zhang, X.-H., Xue, J.-Q., and Liu, J.-C. (2017). QTL mapping for leaf area in maize (Zea mays L.) under multi-environments. J. Integr. Agric. 16, 800–808. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61524-1
9. Deery, D., Jimenez-Berni, J., Jones, H., Sirault, X., and Furbank, R. (2014). Proximal remote sensing buggies and potential applications for field-based phenotyping. Agronomy 4, 349–379. doi: 10.3390/agronomy4030349
10. Dhondt, S., Wuyts, N., and Inzé, D. (2013). Cell to whole-plant phenotyping: the best is yet to come. Trends Plant Sci. 18, 433–444. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2013.04.008
11. Dodds, D. M., Banks, J., Barber, L. T., Boman, R. K., Brown, S. M., Edmisten, K. L., et al. (2010). Beltwide evaluation of commercially available plant growth regulators. J. Cotton Sci. 14, 119–130. Available online at: http://www.cotton. org/journal/2010-14/3/upload/JCS14-119.pdf
12. Duan, T., Chapman, S. C., Holland, E., Rebetzke, G. J., Guo, Y., and Zheng, B. (2016). Dynamic quantification of canopy structure to characterize early plant vigour in wheat genotypes. J. Exp. Bot. 67, 4523–4534. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erw227
13. Earl, H. J., and Davis, R. F. (2003). Effect of drought stress on leaf and whole canopy radiation use efficiency and yield of maize. Agron. J. 95, 688–696. doi: 10.2134/agronj2003.0688
14. Friedli, M., Kirchgessner, N., Grieder, C., Liebisch, F., Mannale, M., and Walter, A. (2016). Terrestrial 3D laser scanning to track the increase in canopy height of both monocot and dicot crop species under field conditions. Plant Methods 12:15. doi: 10.1186/s13007-016-0109-7
15. Furbank, R. T., and Tester, M. (2011). Phenomics – technologies to relieve the phenotyping bottleneck. Trends Plant Sci. 16, 635–644. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2011.09.005
16. Gardner, M. P. (1985). Mood states and consumer behavior: a critical review. J. Consum. Res. 12, 281–300. doi: 10.1086/208516
17. Gebbers, R., Ehlert, D., and Adamek, R. (2011). Rapid mapping of the leaf area index in agricultural crops. Agron. J. 103, 1532–1541. doi: 10.2134/agronj2011.0201
18. Gerland, P., Raftery, A. E., Sevcíková, H., Li, N., Gu, D., Spoorenberg, T., et al. (2014). World population stabilization unlikely this century. Science 346, 234–237. doi: 10.1126/science.1257469
19. Gibbs, J. A., Pound, M., French, A. P., Wells, D. M., Murchie, E., and Pridmore, T. (2017). Approaches to three-dimensional reconstruction of plant shoot topology and geometry. Funct. Plant Biol. 44, 62–75. doi: 10.1071/FP16167
20. Goggin, F. L., Lorence, A., and Topp, C. N. (2015). Applying high-throughput phenotyping to plant–insect interactions: picturing more resistant crops. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 9, 69–76. doi: 10.1016/j.cois.2015.03.002
21. Großkinsky, D. K., Pieruschka, R., Svensgaard, J., Rascher, U., Christensen, S., Schurr, U., et al. (2015). Phenotyping in the fields: dissecting the genetics of quantitative traits and digital farming. New Phytol. 207, 950–952. doi: 10.1111/nph.13529
22. Hosoi, F., and Omasa, K. (2012). Estimation of vertical plant area density profiles in a rice canopy at different growth stages by high-resolution portable scanning lidar with a lightweight mirror. Isprs J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 74, 11–19. doi: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2012.08.001
23. Jiang, Y., Li, C., and Paterson, A. H. (2016). High throughput phenotyping of cotton plant height using depth images under field conditions. Comput. Electron. Agric. 130, 57–68. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2016.09.017
24. Krieg, D. R., and Sung, J. (1986). “Source-sink relations as affected by water stress during boll development,” in Cotton Physiology, eds J. Mauney and J. Stewart (Memphis, TN: The Cotton Foundation), 73–78.
25. Li, L., Zhang, Q., and Huang, D. (2014). A review of imaging techniques for plant phenotyping. Sensors 14, 20078–20111. doi: 10.3390/s141120078
26. Li, Y., Cao, Z., Lu, H., Xiao, Y., Zhu, Y., and Cremers, A. B. (2016). In-field cotton detection via region-based semantic image segmentation. Comput. Electron. Agric.127, 475–486. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2016.07.006
27. Lin, Y. (2015). LiDAR: an important tool for next-generation phenotyping technology of high potential for plant phenomics? Comput. Electron. Agric. 119, 61–73. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2015.10.011
28. Llorens, J., Gil, E., and Llop, J. (2011). Ultrasonic and LIDAR sensors for electronic canopy characterization in vineyards: advances to improve pesticide application methods. Sensors 11, 2177–2194. doi: 10.3390/s110202177
29. Monteith, J. L. (1994). Validity of the correlation betweenintercepted radiation and biomass. Agric. For. Meteorol. 68, 213–220. doi: 10.1016/0168-1923(94)90037-X
30. Monteith, J. L., and Moss, C. (1977). Climate and the efficiency of crop production in Britain. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 281, 277–294. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1977.0140
31. Nuske, S., Wilshusen, K., Achar, S., Yoder, L., and Singh, S. (2014). Automated visual yield estimation in Vineyards. J. Field Robot. 31, 837–860. doi: 10.1002/rob.21541
32. Paproki, A., Sirault, X., Berry, S., Furbank, R., and Fripp, J. (2012). A novel mesh processing based technique for 3Dplant analysis. BMC Plant Biol. 12:63. doi: 10.1186/1471-2229-12-63
33. Pastrana, J. C., and Rath, T. (2013). Novel image processing approach for solving the overlapping problem in agriculture. Biosyst. Eng. 115, 106–115. doi: 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2012.12.006
34. Paulus, S., Dupuis, J., Riedel, S., and Kuhlmann, H. (2014a). Automated analysis of barley organs using 3D laser scanning: an approach for high throughput phenotyping. Sensors 14, 12670–12686. doi: 10.3390/s1407 12670
35. Paulus, S., Schumann, H., Kuhlmann, H., and Léon, J. (2014b). High-precision laser scanning system for capturing 3D plant architecture and analysing growth of cereal plants. Biosyst. Eng. 121, 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2014.01.010
36. Rahaman, M. M., Chen, D., Gillani, Z., Klukas, C., and Chen, M. (2015). Advanced phenotyping and phenotype data analysis for the study of plant growth and development. Front. Plant Sci. 6:619. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015. 00619
37. Remagnino, P., Mayo, S., Wilkin, P., Cope, J., and Kirkup, D. (2016). Computational Botany: Methods for Automated Species Identification. Berlin: Springer.
38. Ritchie, G. L., Bednarz, C. W., Jost, P. H., and Brown, S. M. (2007). Cotton Growth and Development. Available online at: http://cotton.tamu.edu/General %20Production/Georgia%20Cotton%20Growth%20and%20Development %20B1252-1.pdf
39. Rosell-Polo, J. R., Llorens, J., Sanz, R., Arnó, J., Ribes-Dasi, M., Masip, J., et al. (2009). Obtaining the three-dimensional structure of tree orchards from remote 2D terrestrial LIDAR scanning. Agric. For. Meteorol. 149, 1505–1515. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2009.04.008
40. Rusu, R. B., Marton, Z. C., Blodow, N., Dolha, M., and Beetz, M. (2008). Towards 3D point cloud based object maps for household environments. Robot. Auton. Syst. 56, 927–941. doi: 10.1016/j.robot.2008. 08.005
41. Sharma, B., Mills, C. I., Snowden, C., and Ritchie, G. L. (2015). Contribution of boll mass and boll number to irrigated cotton yield. Agron. J. 107, 1845–1853. doi: 10.2134/agronj15.0024
42. Sharma, B., and Ritchie, G. L. (2015). High-Throughput Phenotyping of cotton in multiple irrigation environments. Crop Sci. 55, 958–969. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2014.04.0310
43. Si, Y., Liu, G., and Feng, J. (2015). Location of apples in trees using stereoscopic vision. Comput. Electron. Agric. 112, 68–74. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2015.01.010
44. Simko, I., Jimenez-Berni, J. A., and Sirault, X. R. (2016). Phenomic approaches and tools for phytopathologists. Phytopathology 107, 6–17. doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-02-16-0082-RVW
45. Stöckle, C., and Kemanian, A. (2009). “Crop radiation capture and use efficiency: a framework for crop growth analysis,” in Crop Physiology: Applications for Genetic Improvement and Agronomy (San Diego, CA: Academic Press), 145–170. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-374431-9.00007-4
46. Sui, R., Fisher, D. K., and Reddy, K. N. (2012). Cotton yield assessment using plant height mapping system. J. Agric. Sci. 5:23. doi: 10.5539/jas.v5n1p23
47. Sun, S., Li, C., and Paterson, A. H. (2017). In-field high-throughput phenotyping of cotton plant height using LiDAR. Remote Sens. 9:377. doi: 10.3390/rs90 40377
48. Taheriazad, L., Moghadas, H., and Sanchez-Azofeifa, A. (2016). “A new approach to calculate Plant Area Density (PAD) using 3D ground-based LiDAR,” in Earth Resources and Environmental Remote Sensing/Gis Applications VII, eds U. Michel, K. Schulz, M. Ehlers, K.G. Nikolakopoulos, and D. Civco (Bellingham, WA: Spie-Int Soc Optical Engineering), 1000518-1–1000518-10.
49. Tessmer, O. L., Jiao, Y., Cruz, J. A., Kramer, D. M., and Chen, J. (2013). Functional approach to high-throughput plant growth analysis. BMC Syst. Biol. 7:S17. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-7-S6-S17
50. Nguyen T. T., Slaughter, D. C., Max, N., Maloof, J. N., and Sinha, N. (2015). Structured light-based 3D reconstruction system for plants. Sensors 15, 18587–18612. doi: 10.3390/s150818587
51. Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J., and Befort, B. L. (2011). Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 20260–20264. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1116437108
52. Vazquez-Arellano, M., Griepentrog, H. W., Reiser, D., and Paraforos, D. S. (2016). 3-D imaging systems for agricultural applications-a review. Sensors 16:24. doi: 10.3390/s16050618
53. Watanabe, K., Guo, W., Arai, K., Takanashi, H., Kajiya-Kanegae, H., Kobayashi, M., et al. (2017). High-throughput phenotyping of sorghum plant height using an unmanned aerial vehicle and its application to genomic prediction modeling. Front. Plant Sci. 8:421. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017. 00421
54. Weiss, U., and Biber, P. (2011). Plant detection and mapping for agricultural robots using a 3D LIDAR sensor. Rob. Auton. Syst. 59, 265–273. doi: 10.1016/j.robot.2011.02.011
55. Weraduwage, S. M., Chen, J., Anozie, F. C., Morales, A., Weise, S. E., and Sharkey, T. D. (2015). The relationship between leaf area growth and biomass accumulation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Front. Plant Sci. 6:167. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00167
56. Xiong, X., Yu, L., Yang, W. N., Liu, M., Jiang, N., Wu, D., et al. (2017). A high-throughput stereo-imaging system for quantifying rape leaf traits during the seedling stage. Plant Methods 13:17. doi: 10.1186/s13007-017-0157-7