An infrared-based coefficient to screen plant environmental stress: concept, test and applications
Guo Yu Qiu A D , Kenji Omasa B and Sadanori Sase CA School of Environment and Energy, Shenzhen Graduate School, Peking University, Shenzhen 518055, China.
B Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan.
C National Institute for Rural Engineering, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8609, Japan.
D Corresponding author. Email: qiugy@szpku.edu.cn
This paper originates from a presentation at the 1st International Plant Phenomics Symposium, Canberra, Australia, April 2009.
Functional Plant Biology 36(11) 990-997 https://doi.org/10.1071/FP09132
Submitted: 3 June 2009 Accepted: 5 September 2009 Published: 5 November 2009
Abstract
By introducing a reference dry leaf (a leaf without transpiration), a formerly proposed plant transpiration transfer coefficient (hat) was applied to detect environmental stress caused by water shortage and high temperature on melon, tomato and lettuce plants under various conditions. Results showed that there were obvious differences between leaf temperature, dry reference leaf temperature and air temperature. The proposed coefficient hat could integrate the three temperatures and quantitatively evaluate the environmental stress of plants. Experimental results showed that the water stress of melon plants under two irrigation treatments was clearly distinguished by using the coefficient. The water stress of a tomato plant as the soil dried under a controlled environmental condition was sensitively detected by using hat. A linear relationship between hat and conventional crop water stress index was revealed with a regression determination coefficient R2 = 0.97. Further, hat was used to detect the heat stress of lettuce plants under high air temperature conditions (28.7°C) with three root temperature treatments (21.5, 25.9 and 29.5°C). The canopy temperature under these treatments was respectively 26.44, 27.15 and 27.46°C and the corresponding hat value was –1.11, –0.74 and –0.59. Heat stress was also sensitively detected using hat. The main advantage of hat is its simplicity for use in infrared applications.
Additional keywords: heat stress, IR, lettuce, melon, plant transpiration transfer coefficient, remote sensing, tomato, transpiration, water stress.
Acknowledgement
This study was jointly supported by the National Basic Research Program of China (2009CB421308), National Natural Science Foundation of China (40771037), Ministry of Education, Cultural, Sports, Science and Technology-Japan and the University of Tokyo.
Ben-Asher J,
Phene CJ, Kinarti A
(1992) Canopy temperature to assess daily evapotranspiration and management of high frequency drip irrigation systems. Agricultural Water Management 22, 379–390.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[Verified 22 September 2009]
Grant OM,
Tronina L,
Jones HG, Chaves MM
(2007) Exploring thermal imaging variables for the detection of stress responses in grapevine under different irrigation regimes. Journal of Experimental Botany 58, 815–825.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
PubMed |
[Verified 22 September 2009]
Karnieli A,
Kaufman YJ,
Remer L, Wald A
(2001) AFRI – aerosol free vegetation index. Remote Sensing of Environment 77, 10–21.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[Verified 22 September 2009]
Suleiman AA, Crago R
(2004) Hourly and daytime evapotranspiration from grassland using radiometric surface temperature. Agronomy Journal 96, 384–390.
Thompson HC,
Langhans RW,
Both AJ, Algight LD
(1998) Shoot and root temperature effects on lettuce growth in a floating hydroponic system. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 123(3), 361–364.
Weng ES, Luo Y
(2008) Soil hydrological properties regulate grassland ecosystem responses to multifactor global change: a modeling analysis. Journal of Geophysical Research – Biogeosciences 113, G03003.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Weyers JBD, Lawson T
(1997) Heterogeneity in stomatal characteristics. Advances in Botanical Research 26, 317–352.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
