ArticleGigaScience2024
A 3D printed plant model for accurate and reliable 3D plant phenotyping.
Article in GigaScience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Dataset of Temporally Consistent Instance Annotations for 4D Plant Phenotyping.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Advancements in 3D Reconstruction for Plant Phenotyping: Technologies, Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Robust estimation of rice flag leaf inclination angle from SfM-MVS point clouds via ensemble skeleton extraction: validation in field and pot experiments.Plant methods · 2026Article
- Improving 3D reconstruction quality for root phenotyping: assessing the impact of camera calibration and imaging parameters.Plant methods · 2026Article
- Article
- Can the Dimensional Optimisation of 3D FDM-Manufactured Parts Be a Solution for a Correct Design?Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A 3D printed plant model for accurate and reliable 3D plant phenotyping.GigaScience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study addresses the importance of precise referencing in 3-dimensional (3D) plant phenotyping, which is crucial for advancing plant breeding and improving crop production. Traditionally, reference data in plant phenotyping rely on invasive methods. Recent advancements in 3D sensing technologies offer the possibility to collect parameters that cannot be referenced by manual measurements. This work focuses on evaluating a 3D printed sugar beet plant model as a referencing tool.
resultsFused deposition modeling has turned out to be a suitable 3D printing technique for creating reference objects in 3D plant phenotyping. Production deviations of the created reference model were in a low and acceptable range. We were able to achieve deviations ranging from -10 mm to +5 mm. In parallel, we demonstrated a high-dimensional stability of the reference model, reaching only ±4 mm deformation over the course of 1 year. Detailed print files, assembly descriptions, and benchmark parameters are provided, facilitating replication and benefiting the research community.
conclusionConsumer-grade 3D printing was utilized to create a stable and reproducible 3D reference model of a sugar beet plant, addressing challenges in referencing morphological parameters in 3D plant phenotyping. The reference model is applicable in 3 demonstrated use cases: evaluating and comparing 3D sensor systems, investigating the potential accuracy of parameter extraction algorithms, and continuously monitoring these algorithms in practical experiments in greenhouse and field experiments. Using this approach, it is possible to monitor the extraction of a nonverifiable parameter and create reference data. The process serves as a model for developing reference models for other agricultural crops.
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.