ArticleScientific reports2020
Leaf versus whole-canopy remote sensing methodologies for crop monitoring under conservation agriculture: a case of study with maize in Zimbabwe.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Field phenotyping for African crops: overview and perspectives.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enhancing nitrogen fertilization efficiency for improving yield is a major challenge for smallholder farming systems. Rapid and cost-effective methodologies with the capability to assess the effects of fertilization are required to facilitate smallholder farm management. This study compares maize leaf and canopy-based approaches for assessing N fertilization performance under different tillage, residue coverage and top-dressing conditions in Zimbabwe. Among the measurements made on individual leaves, chlorophyll readings were the best indicators for both N content in leaves (R < 0.700) and grain yield (GY) (R < 0.800). Canopy indices reported even higher correlation coefficients when assessing GY, especially those based on the measurements of the vegetation density as the green area indices (R < 0.850). Canopy measurements from both ground and aerial platforms performed very similar, but indices assessed from the UAV performed best in capturing the most relevant information from the whole plot and correlations with GY and leaf N content were slightly higher. Leaf-based measurements demonstrated utility in monitoring N leaf content, though canopy measurements outperformed the leaf readings in assessing GY parameters, while providing the additional value derived from the affordability and easiness of using a pheno-pole system or the high-throughput capacities of the UAVs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.