Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31708956›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2019

In-Field Detection and Quantification of

Jonas Anderegg, Andreas Hund, Petteri Karisto, Alexey Mikaberidze

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Field Phenomics: Will It Enable Crop Improvement?Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.) · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jonas AndereggCrop Science Group, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Andreas HundCrop Science Group, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Petteri KaristoPlant Pathology Group, Institute of Integrative Biology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Alexey MikaberidzePlant Pathology Group, Institute of Integrative Biology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hyperspectral remote sensing holds the potential to detect and quantify crop diseases in a rapid and non-invasive manner. Such tools could greatly benefit resistance breeding, but their adoption is hampered by i) a lack of specificity to disease-related effects and ii) insufficient robustness to variation in reflectance caused by genotypic diversity and varying environmental conditions, which are fundamental elements of resistance breeding. We hypothesized that relying exclusively on temporal changes in canopy reflectance during pathogenesis may allow to specifically detect and quantify crop diseases while minimizing the confounding effects of genotype and environment. To test this hypothesis, we collected time-resolved canopy hyperspectral reflectance data for 18 diverse genotypes on infected and disease-free plots and engineered spectral-temporal features representing this hypothesis. Our results confirm the lack of specificity and robustness of disease assessments based on reflectance spectra at individual time points. We show that changes in spectral reflectance over time are indicative of the presence and severity of

Indexed as

feature engineeringfeature selectionfield-based phenotypinghigh-throughput phenotypingspectral vegetation index

Identifiers

PMID31708956
PMCPMC6824235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.