Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34250506›Full record

ArticlePlant phenomics (Washington, D.C.)2021

Impact of Varying Light and Dew on Ground Cover Estimates from Active NDVI, RGB, and LiDAR.

David M Deery, David J Smith, Robert Davy, Jose A Jimenez-Berni, Greg J Rebetzke, Richard A James

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

David M DeeryCSIRO Agriculture and Food, Canberra, ACT, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5486-6625
David J SmithCSIRO Agriculture and Food, Yanco, NSW, Australia.
Robert DavyCSIRO Information Management and Technology, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Jose A Jimenez-BerniCSIRO Agriculture and Food, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Greg J RebetzkeCSIRO Agriculture and Food, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Richard A JamesCSIRO Agriculture and Food, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Canopy ground cover (GC) is an important agronomic measure for evaluating crop establishment and early growth. This study evaluates the reliability of GC estimates, in the presence of varying light and dew on leaves, from three different ground-based sensors: (1) normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) from the commercially available GreenSeeker®; (2) RGB images from a digital camera, where GC was determined as the portion of pixels from each image meeting a greenness criterion (i.e., (Green - Red)/(Green + Red) > 0); and (3) LiDAR using two separate approaches: (a) GC from LiDAR red reflectance (whereby red reflectance less than five was classified as vegetation) and (b) GC from LiDAR height (whereby height greater than 10 cm was classified as vegetation). Hourly measurements were made early in the season at two different growth stages (tillering and stem elongation), among wheat genotypes highly diverse for canopy characteristics. The active NDVI showed the least variation through time and was particularly stable, regardless of the available light or the presence of dew. In addition, between-sample-time Pearson correlations for NDVI were consistently high and significant (

Identifiers

PMID34250506
PMCPMC8240513

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.