Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 21, 2026.

Crop Phenomics: Current Status and Perspectives

Chunjiang Zhao, Ying Zhang, Jianjun Du and 5 more

Frontiers in Plant Science · 2019 · Review · CC BY

doi:10.3389/fpls.2019.00714

Abstract

Reliable, automatic, multifunctional, and high-throughput phenotypic technologies are increasingly considered important tools for rapid advancement of genetic gain in breeding programs. With the rapid development in high-throughput phenotyping technologies, research in this area is entering a new era called 'phenomics.' The crop phenotyping community not only needs to build a multi-domain, multi-level, and multi-scale crop phenotyping big database, but also to research technical systems for phenotypic traits identification and develop bioinformatics technologies for information extraction from the overwhelming amounts of omics data. Here, we provide an overview of crop phenomics research, focusing on two parts, from phenotypic data collection through various sensors to phenomics analysis. Finally, we discussed the challenges and prospective of crop phenomics in order to provide suggestions to develop new methods of mining genes associated with important agronomic traits, and propose new intelligent solutions for precision breeding.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 21, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Introduction

Persistent food and feed supply needs, resources shortages, climate change and energy use are some of the challenges we face in our dependence on plants. Until 2050, crop production will have to double to meet the projected production demands of the global population. Demand for crop production is expected to grow 2.4% a year, but the average rate of increase in crop yield is only 1.3%. Moreover, production yields have stagnated in up to 40% of land under cereal production. Genetic improvements in crop performance remain the key role in improving crop productivity, but the current rate of improvement cannot meet the needs of sustainability and food security.

Molecular breeding strategies pay more attention to selections based on genotypic information, but phenotypic data are still needed (; Araus et al., 2014). Phenotyping is necessary to improve the selection efficiency and reproducibility of results in transgenic studies (Table 1). Considering that molecular breeding populations can include a range from at least 200 to at most 10,000 lines, the ability to accurately and high-throughput characterize hundreds of lines at the same time is still challenging (; Araus et al., 2014). Apparently, compared with the vast genetic information, there is a phenotyping bottleneck hampering progress in understanding the genetic basis of complex traits. To break this bottleneck and improve the efficiency of molecular breeding, reliable, automatic, and high-throughput phenotypic technologies were urgently needed to provide breeding scientists with new insights in selecting new species to adapt to the resources shortages and global climate change.

During the past decade, plant phenomics has evolved from an emerging niche to a thriving research field, which was defined as the gathering of multi-dimensional phenotypic data at multiple levels from cell level, organ level, plant level to population level. Crop phenotypes are extremely complicated because they are the result of interaction between genotypes (G) and a multitude of envirotypes (E). This interaction influences not only the growth and development process of crops measured by the structural traits on cellular, tissue, organ and plant level, but also the plant functioning measured by the physiological traits. These internal phenotypes in turn determine crop external phenotypes such as morphology, biomass and yield performance (Figure 1). Crop phenomics research integrates agronomy, life sciences, information science, math and engineering sciences, and combines high-performance computing and artificial intelligence technology to explore multifarious phenotypic information of crop growth in a complex environment, of which the ultimate goal is to construct an effective technical system able to phenotype crops in a high-throughput, multi-dimensional, big-data, intelligent and automatically measuring manner, and create a tool comprehensively integrating big data achieved from a multi-modality, multi-scale, phenotypic + environmental + genotypic condition, in order to develop new methods of mining genes associated with important agronomic traits, and propose new intelligent solutions for precision breeding.

Here, we provide an overview of crop phenomics research, focusing on two parts, from phenotypic data collection through various sensors to phenomics analysis. We systematically introduced the crop phenotyping approaches from cellular, tissue, organ, and plant level to field level, discussing application and practical problems in research. Based on overwhelming amounts of phenotypic data, we then discussed the phenotyping extraction, phenotype information analysis and knowledge storage. We emphasize Phenomics is entering the big-data era with multi-domain, multi-level, and multi-scale characteristics. We highlight necessity and importance of building multi-scale, multi-dimensional and trans-regional crop phenotyping big database, researching E-trait depth analysis schemas and technical systems for precise identification of crop phenotypes, realizing functional-structural plant modeling based on phenomics, and developing bioinformatics technologies that integrate genomes and phenotypes.

Crop Phenotypic Data Collection: Various Phenotyping Approaches for Crop Morphology, Structure, and Physiological Data From Cell to Whole-Plant

Currently, the plant phenotyping community seems some-what divided between high-throughput, low-resolution phenotyping and in-depth phenotyping at lower throughput and higher resolution. Phenotyping systems and tools applied in different scales are focused on different key characteristics –automated phenotyping platforms in controllable environment and high-throughput methodologies in field environment highlights high-throughput, while phenotyping covering the organ, tissue and cellular level emphasizes in-depth phenotyping and higher resolution. In this part, we systematically introduced the crop phenotyping approaches covering from cellular and tissue level to field level, and discussed the application and practical problems of which technologies in crop researches.

Alleviating the Micro-Phenotyping Bottleneck

Compared with the whole-plant phenotying technologies, phenotyping at higher spatial and temporal resolutions of tissue and cellar scales is more difficult. To reveal crop micro-phenotypes, the pre-treatment of plant or organ is usually destructive when sampled in a cumbersome and involves multi-step procedure, and the high resolution imaging of samples is also inefficient in view of the output in micron level. More challenging, automated image analysis techniques are urgently needed to quantify cell and tissue traits of crop from the larger high qualified image. In recent years, many emerging algorithms and tools have been proposed to handle with microscopic images from hand-cutting slices, micro-CT, fluorescent, laser, and paraffin sections imaging (Table 2).

Root anatomical traits have important effects on plant function, including acquisition of nutrients and water from the soil and transportation to the aboveground part. Over the last years, novel micro-image acquisition technologies and computer vision have been introduced to improve our understanding of anatomical structure and function of roots. In 2011, computer-aided calculation of wheat root vascular bundle phenotypic information extraction were introduced based on sequence images of paraffin sections. (Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences Roots Lab) have developed a high-throughput, high-resolution phenotyping platform, which combines laser optics and serial imaging with three-dimensional (3D) image reconstruction (RootSlice) and quantification to understand root anatomy by semi-auto RootScan. developed a fully automated RootAnalyzer software for root microscopic phenotypic information extraction to further improve image segmentation efficiency and ensure high accuracy. (Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Plant) introduced X-ray micro-CT into 3D imaging of maize root tissues and developed an image processing scheme for the 3D segmentation of metaxylem vessels. Compared with traditional manual measurement of vascular bundles of maize roots, the proposed protocols significantly improved the efficiency and accuracy of the micron-scale phenotypic quantification.

Different from the root system, crop stalks have a more complex microstructure. The complexity and diversity in microscopic image data poses greater challenges for developing suitable data analysis workflows in the detection and identification of microscopic phenotypes of stalk tissue. and presented semi- automated and automated analysis method for the stained microscopic images of stalk sections. and created an image analysis tool that could operate on images of hand-cut stalk transections to measure anatomical features in high throughput. Those tools have significantly improved the measurement efficiency of vascular bundle, but the anatomical traits corresponding to the rind and the detection accuracy remained a challenge. (Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Plant) introduced micro-computed tomography (CT) technology for stalk imaging and developed the VesselParser 1.0 algorithm, which made it possible to automatically and accurately analyze phenotypic traits of vascular bundles within entire maize stalk cross-sections. So far, Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Plant has built a novel method to improve the X-ray absorption contrast of maize tissue suitable for ordinary micro-CT scanning. Based on CT images, they introduced a set of image processing workflows for maize root, stalk and leaf to effectively extract microscopic phenotypes of vascular bundles.

Phenotyping at tissue and cellar scales still requires complex procedures. The need to simplify the sample preparation process and explore advanced imaging techniques is crucial to accelerate microscopic phenotyping studies. Moreover, image processing is another major bottleneck in micro-phenotyping researches. Due to the specific crop organ and cell phenotypic characteristics of the huge differences, most micro-image analysis algorithms have been developed for specific biological assays currently.

Three-Dimensional Phenotyping at the Organ Level

Most plant phenotyping platforms concentrated the high-throughput of individual plants. Hence the phenotypic accuracy of organs on the plants was always compromised. The most frequently used phenotyping index, such as leaf length, leaf area, and fruit volume, could be obtained in phenotyping platforms simply. The smartphone app platform was developed for field phenotyping by taking pictures and image analysis at organ level. It is very convenient to acquire leaf angles and leaf length using the app in a 2D view. The plants do not need to be destructively sampled indoors. 2D cameras are low cost and were integrated into most of the phenotyping platforms, which provided effective phenotypic solution for branch structured plants, especially for tracking the dynamic growth of organs on plants. However, 2D images lost another dimension data in 3D space, and some of the estimated morphological traits still need to be calibrated. Multi-view stereo (MVS) approach is another popular low-cost alternative for organ level phenotyping. 3D point clouds were reconstructed using multi-view images through structure from motion techniques, and then phenotypic traits were extracted through segmented organs of individual plants. This cost-effective 3D reconstruction method depicts an alternative to an expensive laser scanner in the studied scenarios with potential for automated procedures. There are significant differences between these organ traits within various cultivars, thus tiny errors could be ignored in large scale omics analysis.

However, besides these measured length, area, and volume phenotypic parameters, there are lots of obvious differences that can be observed by humans of plant organs, such as blade profiles, blade folds, vein curves, and leaf colors, of which are difficult to obtain the morphological data and quantitatively describe their differences. A series of mathematical approaches need to be developed to quantitatively describe these differences in order to discover more detailed phenotyping traits with high precision phenotyping data of organ level. Researchers use high resolution 3D scanners to acquire the morphological structure of plant organs. High resolution 3D scanners are relatively expensive while the acquired morphological data are more accurate than MVS reconstructed organs, especially for non-planner surface plants. 2D LiDAR scanners and depth sensors were also used, combined with turn table and translation devices to estimate phenotypic traits through 3D recovery of point clouds. Most 2D or 3D imaging could solve the 3D organ scale phenotyping data acquisition problems, except for tall plants for which it is difficult due to a limited field of vision. High resolution 3D point clouds of plant organs are quite complicated in order to extract more phenotypic traits, thus computer graphics algorithms, such as skeleton extraction, surface reconstruction, and feature-preserving remeshing, need to be applied to process the high-resolution morphological data for 3D phenotypic trait extraction. Because of the difficulty and complexity of detailed organ data acquisition and analysis, proposed a data acquisition standard and constructed a resource database of plant organs using measured in situ morphological data, to realize the integration and sharing of high quality data of plant organs.

Automated Phenotyping Platforms in Controllable Environment

Automation and robotics, new sensors, and imaging technologies (hardware and software) have provided an opportunity for high-throughput plant phenotyping platforms (HTPPs) development. In the past 10 years, great improvements have been made in researching and developing HTPPs. Depending on the overall design, HTPPs in a growth chamber or greenhouse can generally be classified as sensor-to-plant or plant-to-sensor based on whether the plants occupy a fixed position during a measurement routine and an imaging setup moves to each of those positions or the plants are transported to an imaging station, respectively. Collectively, the techniques used in HTPPs in the growth chamber or greenhouse mainly include (Table 3):

RGB imaging, which obtains the phenotypes of plant morphology, color, and texture.

Chlorophyll fluorescence imaging, which obtains photosynthetic phenotypes.

Hyperspectral imaging, which obtains phenotypes such as pigment composition, biochemical composition, nitrogen content, and moisture content.

Thermal imaging, which obtains the plant surface temperature distribution, stomatal conductance and transpiration phenotype.

Lidar, which obtains the three-dimensional structure phenotype of plants.

Moreover, other advanced imaging techniques widely used in medicine, such as MRI, PET, and CT, have also been introduced into HTPPs in the growth chamber or greenhouse. The following table lists the major imaging techniques used in the HTPPs in the growth chamber or greenhouse.

After integration of information technology, digital technology and platform equipment with plant phenotyping, several HTPPs in growth chamber or greenhouse have been listed in Table 4. Such high-throughput phenotyping platforms are characterized by automation, high-throughput, and high precision, which greatly improve plant data collection efficiency and accuracy, in order to improve the efficiency of crop breeding.

However, most HTPPs still have high construction, operating, and maintenance costs, and most academic and research institutions do not have access to these techniques as a result. For example, the number of fully automatic and high-throughput phenotyping platforms is limited in China: one was developed by the Crop Phenotyping Center (CPC), http://plantphenomics.hzau.edu.cn/, and the others were introduced by LemnaTec, such as http://bri.caas.net.cn/, http://www.kenfeng.com/, and http://www.zealquest.com/. Because of this, there has been increased research into developing affordable, small-scale plant phenotyping platforms and technology. In fact, affordable phenotypic acquisition techniques or platforms are constantly being updated, such as the imaging system developed by that uses wireless-connected consumer digital cameras, and the low-cost Glyph phenotyping platform. Lowering the cost of these platforms could, therefore, significantly increase the scope of phenotypic research and advance the rapid expansion of phenotypic–genotypes analysis for complex traits.

High-Throughput Methodologies for Crop Phenotyping in Field Environment

Field-based phenotyping (FBP) is a critical component of crop improvement through genetics, as it is the ultimate expression of the relative effects of genetic factors, environmental factors, and their interaction on critical production traits, such as yield potential and tolerance to abiotic/biotic stresses. Currently, the most commonly field-based phenotyping platforms (FBPPs) use ground wheeled, rigid motorized gantry or aerial vehicles, combined with a wide range of cameras, sensors and high-performance computing, to capture deep phenotyping data in time (throughout the crop cycle) and space (at the canopy level) in field environments (Table 5). It cannot be denied that the efficiency of ground wheeled phenotyping system is quite low if the plot area is too large. In 2016, FIELD SCANALYZERS, with rigid motorized gantry supporting a weather proof measuring platform that incorporates a wide range of cameras, sensors and illumination systems, were developed. The facility, equipped with high-resolution visible, chlorophyll fluorescence and thermal infrared camera, hyperspectral imager, and 3D laser scanner. Crops within a 10–20 m × 110–200 m area can be monitored, which realizes the continuous, automatic, and high-throughput detection of crop phenotyping detection in field. Meanwhile, the cable-suspended field phenotyping platform covering an area of ∼1 ha was also developed for rapid and non-destructive monitoring of crop traits. However, these large ground-based field phenotyping platforms also have high construction, operating, and maintenance costs, and it has to be located at certain sites limiting the scale at which it can be used. Furthermore, the ground-based FBPPs are not very suitable for large crops, such as maize, except in the early stages.

In recent years, manned aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicle remote sensing platforms (UAV-RSPs) are becoming a high-throughput tool for crop phenotyping in the field environment, which meet the demands of spatial, spectral, and temporal resolutions (Table 5). For example, thermal sensors fitted to manned aircraft were used to measure canopy temperature. The sensors that UAV-RSPs carried typically included digital cameras, infrared thermal imagers, light detection and ranging (LIDAR), multispectral cameras, and hyperspectral sensors, which are applied to: canopy surface modeling and crop biomass estimation based on visible imaging; crop physiological status monitor, such as chlorophyll fluorescence and N levels, based on visible–near-infrared spectroscopy and high-resolution hyperspectral imaging; plant water status detection based on thermal imaging; and crop fine-scale geometric traits analysis based on LIDAR point clouds. There are definite advantages for UAV-RSPs, including portable, high monitoring efficiency, low-cost, and suitability for field environments. On the other hand, some limiting factors for UAV-RSPs also exist, including the lack of methods for fast and automatic data processing and modeling, the strict airspace regulations, and vulnerable to different weather conditions. Recently, combining ground-based platforms and aerial platforms for phenotyping offers flexibility. For example, the tractor-based proximal crop-sensing platform, combined with UAV-based platform, was used to target complex traits such as growth and RUE in sorghum.

Crop Phenomics: From Phenotyping Extraction, Data Storage to Knowledge Analysis

Phenomic experiments are not directly reproducible because of the multi-model of sensors (structure, morphology, color, and physiology information), multi-scales phenotypic data (from cellular to population level), and variability of environmental conditions. Crop phenotypic data collection is only the first step in Phenomic research. How to extract phenotypic traits from raw data? How to realize phenotype data standardization and storage? How to make cross-scale, cross-dimensionality meta-analyses? Finally, based on the phenotypic big data, how to realize the model-assisted phenotyping and phenotypic-genomic selection? Hereby this part focuses on hot topics in crop phenomics analysis raised above. We then suggest that research in this area is entering a new stage of development using artificial intelligence technology, such as deep learning methods, in which can help researchers transform large numbers of omic-data into knowledge.

Phenotype Extraction

Image-based phenotyping, as an important and all-purpose technique, has been applied to measure and quantify vision-based and model-based traits of plant in the laboratory, greenhouse and field environments. So far, lots of image analysis methods and softwares have been developed to perform image-based plant phenotyping. From image analysis perspective, phenotypic traits of plant can be classified into 4 categories, i.e., quantity, geometry, color and texture, and are also classified into linear and non-linear features related to the pixel representation. Moreover, some valuable agronomic and physiological traits can be derived from image features. Generally, image techniques are specially designed according to specific crop varieties and phenotypic traits of interest, and always require with prior knowledge of research objects, as well as more or less man-machine interaction. Under highly controlled conditions, the classic image processing pipeline can provide acceptable phenotyping results, such as biomass, NDVI, chlorophyll responses, and compactness etc. However, the simple image processing pipeline is still very difficult to handle with non-linear, non-geometric phenotyping tasks. Facing species and environment diversities, fully automated and intelligent image analysis will remain a long-term challenge.

Machine learning techniques, such as support vector machines, clustering algorithms, and neural networks, have been widely utilized to image-based phenotyping, which not only improve the robustness of image analysis tasks, also relieve tedious manual intervention. There is no doubt that machine learning techniques will have a prominent role in breaking through the bottlenecks of plant phenotyping. In a broad category of machine learning techniques, deep learning demonstrates impressive advantages in many image-based tasks, such as object detection and localization, semantic segmentation, image classification, and others. In essence, deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are well suited to many vision-based computer problems, e.g., recognition, classification, and instance detection and segmentation. Compared with the traditional image analysis methods, CNNs are simultaneously trained from end to end without image feature description and extraction procedures. As far as plant phenotyping, CNNs have been effectively applied to detect and diagnosis, classify fruits and flowers, and count leaf number. It is worth noting that those vision-based phenotyping tasks were driven by the massive captured and annotation plant images. From the view of machine vision perspective, deep learning has been a fundamental technique framework in image-based plant phenotyping.

Phenotype Data Standardization and Storage

A huge amount of complex data and the integration of a wide range of image, spectral and environmental data can be generated through by the above phenotypic technologies, usually up to GB or even petabytes, unstructured “Big Data.” Thus, the efficient storage, management and retrieval of phenotypic data have become the important issues to be considered. The current universally accepted principle of information standardization includes three aspects: (i) the ‘minimum information’ (MI) approach is recommended to define the content of the data set, (ii) ontology terms is applied for the unique and repeatable annotation of data, and in the form of data sharing and meta-analyses, (iii) and proper data formats, such as CSV, XML, RDF, MAGE-TAB, etc., are chosen for the construction of data sets. Up until now, a number of phenotyping resources have been built ranging from phenotypic data of one species to multi-data types. In 2010, PODD was developed for capturing, managing, annotating and distributing the data to support both Australian and international biological research communities; built a PHENOPSIS DB information system for Arabidopsis thaliana phenotypic data acquired by the PHENOPSIS phenotyping platform; Bisque is the first web based, cross-platform, developed into a repository to store, visualize, organize and analyze images in the cloud. In 2014, ClearedLeaves DB, an on open online database, was built to store, manage and access leaf images and phenotypic data; AraPheno1 was the first comprehensive, central repository of population-scale phenotypes (it integrated more than 250 publicly available phenotypes from six independent studies) for A. thaliana inbred lines; PhenoFront was a publicly available dataset of above-ground plant tissue to the LemnaTec Phenotyper platform; in 2016, the plant genomics and phenomics research data repository (PGP) were developed by the Leibniz institute of plant genetics and crop plant research and the German plant phenotyping network to comprehensively publish plant phenotypic and genotypic data. Obviously, from the perspective of database data standardization and storage, the storage scheme based on “cloud technology” is becoming the trend for the development of plant phenotype data storage. Cloud storage system can optimize the design of the system architecture, file structure, high-speed cache, etc., for the plant phenotype platform. At present, all kinds of phenotypic data collection platforms are still relatively independent, and have not been established at the level of regions, countries or continents. Through the advanced technology of artificial intelligence, establishing a typical crop phenotype database based on the multi-layer phenotypic information, for example GDB Human Genome Database, will of interest to a range of stakeholders.

Model-Assisted Phenotyping: Functional–Structural Plant Modeling

Plants are highly plastic to genotypes, environment and management via changing morphological traits and adjusting their physiological behavior. Complex interactions between genotypes, environment and managements at different scales determine the development of plants, but their separate contribution to the phenotype remains unclear. Dynamic models have been proven to be an efficient tool in dissection of abiotic and biotic effects on plant phenotypes. Functional–structural plant (FSP) models simulate plant growth and development in time and three-dimension (3D) space, and quantify complex interactions between architecture and physiological processes. The combination of FSP modeling and phenotyping have been used as a facile technique to address research questions in two ways.

Firstly, FSP models offer a tool to dissect phenotype governed by a set of mechanisms. For example, used a FSP model to dissect net biodiversity effect into the effect induced by interspecific trait differences, and the effect induced by phenotypic plasticity by simulating whole-vegetation light capture for scenarios with and without phenotypic plasticity based on experimental plant trait data. The separate effect of each architectural trait (leaf angle, leaf curvature and internode length etc.) on dry mass production and light interception was quantified by simulating canopy growth using a dynamic FSP model for tomato. Radiation interception and radiation use efficiency were dissected into an environmental and a genetic term via conducting virtual multi-genotype canopies, in which the FSP model for maize was applied to calculate light interception for each plant. FSP modeling has proven to be highly effective for disentangling the relative contribution of each underlying process.

Secondly, high-throughput phenotyping techniques facilitate the automate and precise calibration of FSP models. Image-based analysis was performed daily to reconstruct individual maize architecture, in order to calculate light interception using a FSP model and to estimate leaf area and the fresh plant weight of individual plants. Terrestrial LiDAR scanning was used to reconstruct complex tree canopy for predicting three-dimensional distribution of microclimate-related quantities in terms of net radiation, surface temperature and evapotranspiration. OPENSIMROOT integrated a root model that can simulate growth of a root system with 3D phenotyping techniques, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and X-ray computed tomography (CT). Phenotyping techniques not only provide an efficient method to evaluate the ability of the model to simulate plant architecture and geometry but also help researchers to understand functional responses based on images.

Phenotype–Genotype Association Analysis

Although genomic data has a major role in crop genetic improvements and breeding programs, with the advent of the era of omics, considerable gain can only be achieved by tightly coupling genomic discovery to plant phenomics. In recent years, phenomic researches that combine genomic data with data on quantitative variation in phenotypes have been initiated in many species, which rapidly decoded the function of a mass of unknown genes and improved understanding the G-P map.

Many agronomic traits are complex and controlled by many genes, each with a small effect. Identifying the molecular basis of such complex traits requires genotyping and phenotyping of suitable mapping populations, enabling quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping and genome-wide association studies (GWAS), which have been widely carried out in crop plants. associated phenotypic traits of small grain cereals with genome information to dissect the genetic architecture of biomass accumulation. In 2014, based on 13 traditional agronomic traits and 2 newly defined traits of rice, identified 141 associated loci by GWAS. In 2015, Combining GWAS with 29 leaf traits at three growth stages using high-throughput leaf scoring (HLS), 73 new loci with leaf size, 123 of leaf color, and 177 of leaf shape were detected. In 2017, large-scale quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping was performed, combined with 106 agronomic traits of maize inbred line from seedling to tasselling stage, and a total of 988 QTLs were identified. Also, plant sizes of 252 diverse maize inbred lines were monitored at 11 different developmental time points, and 12 main-effect marker-trait associations were identified.

Obviously, combining the high-throughput phenotyping technology and large-scale QTL or GWAS analysis not only greatly expanded our knowledge of the crop dynamic development process but also provided a novel tool for studies of crop genomics, gene characterization and breeding. We believe that with a complete system of genetic information, combined with crop high-throughput phenotyping technology, phenotypic-genomic analysis will revolutionize how we deal with complex traits and underpin a new era of crop improvement.

Future Challenges and Prospects

Phenomics is entering the era of ‘Big Data,’ thus the crop science community need to combine artificial intelligence technology and collaborative research at the national and international levels, to build a new theory for analyzing crop phenotypic information, construct an effective technical system able to phenotype crops in a high-throughput, multi-dimensional, big-data, intelligent and automatically measuring manner, and create a tool comprehensively integrating big data achieved from a multi-modality, multi-scale, phenotypic + environmental + genotypic condition. There is no denying that there are many challenges that crop phenomics need to address in the next 5–10 years, such as:

Phenomics is entering the big-data era with high-throughput, multi-dimensionality, and multi-scale. We emphasize various phenotyping approaches for crop morphology, structure, and physiological data with three multi- characteristics: multi-domain (phenomics, genomics etc.), multi-level (traditional small to medium scale up to large-scale omics), and multi-scale (crop morphology, structure, and physiological data from cell to whole-plant). The single and individual phenotypic information cannot satisfy the association analysis in the new era called ‘-omics,’ and the systematic and complete phenomics information will be the foundation of future research.

In response to emerging challenges, new methods and techniques based on artificial intelligence shall be introduced to advance image-based phenotyping. An automated phenotyping system and platform result in lots of digital features, which need to prove their values throughout large sample statistics and relationship analysis with traditional agronomic traits. How to precisely and efficiently evaluate, understand and interpret these digital image-based features, and dig out valuable quantitative traits for functional genomes are key problems in the development and application of plant phenotyping.

With the multi-domain, multi-level, and multi-scale phenotypic information, we urgently need to make use of the latest achievements of artificial intelligence in depth learning, data fusion, hybrid intelligence and swarm intelligence to develop big-data management producers for supporting data integration, interoperability, ontologies, shareability and globality.

Modeling is a powerful tool to understand G × E × M interactions, identify key traits of interest for target environments. Nevertheless, several scientific and technical challenges need to be overcome. For example the validity and practicality of the models in terms of modeling processes and their interactions need further verification, and the interaction and feedbacks of multi-scale phenotypes between modeling processes also need to be solved. Only then will we be able to streamline and speed up the tortuous gene-to-phenotype journey through modeling to develop the required agricultural outputs and sustainable environments for everybody.

Crop genotype (G) -phenotype (p) -envirotype (E) information comprehensive analysis and utilization. In short, as said “the future of plant phenotyping lies in synergism at the national and international levels.” We need to seek novel solutions to the grand challenges of multi-omics data, such as intelligent data-mining analytics, which offers a powerful tool to unravel the biological processes governing plant growth and development, and to advance plant breeding for much-needed climate-resilient and high-yielding crops.

Author Contributions

CZ, XG, and YZ conducted the literature survey and drafted the article. JD, WW, SG, JW, and JF provided the data and tables about the crop phenotyping researches by NERCITA. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References 154

  1. 1.

    Amanda D. Doblin M. S. Galletti R. Bacic A. Ingram G. C. Johnson K. L. (2016 ). Defective kernel1 (DEK1) regulates cell walls in the leaf epidermis. Plant Physiol. 172 2204–2218.

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.16.01401

  2. 2.

    Araus J. L. Cairns J. E. (2014 ). Field high-throughput phenotyping: the new crop breeding frontier. Trends Plant Sci. 19 52–61.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2013.09.008

  3. 3.

    Arend D. Junker A. Scholz U. Schüler D. Wylie J. Lange M. (2016a ). PGP repository: a plant phenomics and genomics data publication infrastructure. Database 2016:baw033.

    Not in our library10.1093/database/baw033

  4. 4.

    Arend D. Lange M. Pape J. M. Weigelt-Fischer K. Arana-Ceballos F. Mücke I. (2016b ). Quantitative monitoring of Arabidopsis thaliana growth and development using high-throughput plant phenotyping. Sci. Data 3:160055.

    Not in our library10.1038/sdata.2016.55

  5. 5.

    Bailey B. N. Stoll R. Pardyjak E. R. Miller N. E. (2016 ). A new three-dimensional energy balance model for complex plant canopy geometries: model development and improved validation strategies. Agric. For. Meteorol. 218 146–160.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.agrformet.2015.11.021

  6. 6.

    Berger S. Benediktyová Z. Matous K. Bonfig K. Mueller M. J. Nedbal L. (2007 ). Visualization of dynamics of plant-pathogen interaction by novel combination of chlorophyll fluorescence imaging and statistical analysis: differential effects of virulent and avirulent strains of P. Syringae and of Oxylipins on A. thaliana. J. Exp. Bot. 58 797–806.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erl208

  7. 7.

    Berni J. A. J. Zarco-Tejada P. J. Suarez L. Fereres E. (2009 ). Thermal and narrowband multispectral remote sensing for vegetation monitoring from an unmanned aerial vehicle. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 47 722–738.

    Not in our library10.1109/tgrs.2008.2010457

  8. 8.

    Bolger M. Schwacke R. Gundlach H. Schmutzer T. Chen J. Arend D. (2017 ). From plant genomes to phenotypes. J. Biotechnol. 261 46–52.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jbiotec.2017.06.003

  9. 9.

    Brichet N. Fournier C. Turc O. Strauss O. Artzet S. Pradal C. (2017 ). A robot-assisted imaging pipeline for tracking the growths of maize ear and silks in a high-throughput phenotyping platform. Plant Methods 13:12.

    Not in our library10.1186/s13007-017-0246-7

  10. 10.

    Burton A. L. Williams M. Lynch J. P. Brown K. M. (2012 ). Rootscan: software for high-throughput analysis of root anatomical traits. Plant Soil 357 189–203.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11104-012-1138-2

  11. 11.

    Busemeyer L. Ruckelshausen A. Möller K. Melchinger A. E. Alheit K. V. Maurer H. P. (2013 ). Precision phenotyping of biomass accumulation in triticale reveals temporal genetic patterns of regulation. Sci. Rep. 3:2442.

    Not in our library10.1038/srep02442

  12. 12.

    Cabrera-Bosquet L. Fournier C. Brichet N. Welcker C. Suard B. Tardieu F. (2016 ). High-throughput estimation of incident light, light interception and radiation-use efficiency of thousands of plants in a phenotyping platform. New Phytol. 212 269–281.

    Not in our library10.1111/nph.14027

  13. 13.

    Cai J. Okamoto M. Atieno J. Sutton T. Li Y. Miklavcic S. J. (2016 ). Quantifying the onset and progression of plant senescence by color image analysis for high throughput applications. PLoS One 11:e0157102.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0157102

  14. 14.

    Camino C. González-Dugo V. Hernández P. Sillero J. C. Zarco-Tejada P. J. (2018 ). Improved nitrogen retrievals with airborne-derived fluorescence and plant traits quantified from VNIR-SWIR hyperspectral imagery in the context of precision agriculture. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 70 105–117.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jag.2018.04.013

  15. 15.

    Campbell M. T. Du Q. Liub K. Brien C. J. Berger B. Zhang C. (2017 ). A comprehensive image-based phenomic analysis reveals the complex genetic architecture of shoot growth dynamics in rice (Oryza sativa). Plant Genome 10 1–14.

    Not in our library10.3835/plantgenome2016.07.0064

  16. 16.

    Campbell M. T. Knecht A. C. Berger B. Brien C. J. Wang D. Walia H. (2015 ). Integrating image-based phenomics and association analysis to dissect the genetic architecture of temporal salinity responses in rice. Plant Physiol. 168 1476–1489.

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.15.00450

  17. 17.

    Carrolla A. A. Clarke J. Fahlgrenc N. A. Gehanc M. J. Lawrence-Dilld C. Lorencee L. (2019 ). NAPPN: who we ae, where we are going, and why you should join us! Plant Phenome J. 2:180006.

    Not in our library

  18. 18.

    Chaivivatrakul S. Tang L. Dailey M. N. Nakarmi A. D. (2014 ). Automatic morphological trait characterization for corn plants via 3d holographic reconstruction. Comput. Electron. Agric. 109 109–123.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.compag.2014.09.005

  19. 19.

    Chapman S. C. Merz T. Chan A. Jackway P. Hrabar S. Dreccer M. F. (2014 ). Pheno-copter: a low-altitude, autonomous remote-sensing robotic helicopter for high-throughput field-based phenotyping. Agronomy 4 279–301.

    Not in our library10.3390/agronomy4020279

  20. 20.

    Chen D. Neumann K. Friedel S. Kilian B. Chen M. Altmann T. (2014 ). Dissecting the phenotypic components of crop plant growth and drought responses based on high-throughput image analysis. Plant Cell 26 4636–4655.

    Not in our library10.1105/tpc.114.129601

  21. 21.

    Chen T. W. Nguyen T. M. N. Kahlen K. Stützel H. (2014 ). Quantification of the effects of architectural traits on dry mass production and light interception of tomato canopy under different temperature regimes using a dynamic functional–structural plant model. J. Exp. Bot. 65 6399–6410.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/eru356

  22. 22.

    Chen T.-W. Cabrera-Bosquet L. Prado S. A. Perez R. Artzet S. Pradal C. (2018 ). Genetic and environmental dissection of biomass accumulation in multi-genotype maize canopies. J. Exp. Bot. 70 2523–2534.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/ery309

  23. 23.

    Chimungu J. G. Loades K. W. Lynch J. P. (2015 ). Root anatomical phenes predict root penetration ability and biomechanical properties in maize. J Exp. Bot. 66 3151–3162.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erv121

  24. 24.

    Chopin J. Laga H. Huang C. Y. Heuer S. Miklavcic S. J. (2015 ). Rootanalyzer: a cross-section image analysis tool for automated characterization of root cells and tissues. PLoS One 10:e0137655.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0137655

  25. 25.
  26. 26.

    Confalonieri R. Paleari L. Foi M. Movedi E. Vesely F. M. Thoelke W. (2017 ). Pocketplant3d: analysing canopy structure using a smartphone. Biosys. Eng. 164 1–12.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2017.09.014

  27. 27.

    Coppens F. Wuyts N. Inzé D. Dhondt S. (2017 ). Unlocking the potential of plant phenotyping data through integration and data-driven approaches. Curr. Opin. Syst. Biol. 4 58–63.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.coisb.2017.07.002

  28. 28.

    Das A. Bucksch A. Price C. A. Weitz J. S. (2014 ). Clearedleavesdb: an online database of cleared plant leaf images. Plant Methods 10:8.

    Not in our library10.1186/1746-4811-10-8

  29. 29.

    Deery D. M. Rebetzke G. J. Jimenez-Berni J. A. James R. A. Condon A. G. Bovill W. D. (2016 ). Methodology for high-throughput field phenotyping of canopy temperature using airborne thermography. Front. Plant Sci. 7:e1808.

    Not in our library10.3389/fpls.2016.01808

  30. 30.

    Dhondt S. Wuyts N. Inzé D. (2013 ). Cell to whole-plant phenotyping: the best is yet to come. Trends Plant Sci. 18 428–439.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2013.04.008

  31. 31.

    Diaz-Varela R. A. Zarco-Tejada P. J. Angileri V. Loudjani P. (2014 ). Automatic identification of agricultural terraces through object-oriented analysis of very high resolution DSMs and multispectral imagery obtained from an unmanned aerial vehicle. J. Environ. Manag. 134 117–126.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.01.006

  32. 32.

    Du J. Zhang Y. Guo X. Ma L. Shao M. Pan X. (2016 ). Micron-scale phenotyping quantification and three-dimensional microstructure reconstruction of vascular bundles within maize stems based on micro-CT scanning. Funct. Plant Biol. 44 10–22.

    Not in our library10.1071/fp16117

  33. 33.

    Duan T. Chapman S. C. Holland E. Rebetzke G. J. Guo Y. Zheng B. (2016 ). Dynamic quantification of canopy structure to characterize early plant vigour in wheat genotypes. J. Exp. Bot. 67 4523–4534.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erw227

  34. 34.

    Fabre J. Dauzat M. Nègre V. Wuyts N. Tireau A. Gennari E. (2011 ). Phenopsis DB: an information system for Arabidopsis thaliana phenotypic data in an environmental context. BMC Plant Biol. 11:77.

    Not in our library10.1186/1471-2229-11-77

  35. 35.

    Fahlgren N. Feldman M. Gehan M. A. Wilson M. S. Shyu C. Bryant D. W. (2015a ). A versatile phenotyping system and analytics platform reveals diverse temporal responses to water availability in Setaria. Mol. Plant 8 1520–1535.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.molp.2015.06.005

  36. 36.

    Fahlgren N. Gehan M. A. Baxter I. (2015b ). Lights, camera, action: high-throughput plant phenotyping is ready for a close-up. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 24:93.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.pbi.2015.02.006

  37. 37.

    Feng H. Guo Z. Yang W. Huang C. Chen G. Fang W. (2017 ). An integrated hyperspectral imaging and genome-wide association analysis platform provides spectral and genetic insights into the natural variation in rice. Sci. Rep. 7:4401.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41598-017-04668-8

  38. 38.

    Fiorani F. Schurr U. (2013 ). Future scenarios for plant phenotyping. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 64 267–291.

    Not in our library10.1146/annurev-arplant-050312-120137

  39. 39.

    Fischer R. A. T. Edmeades G. O. (2010 ). Breeding and cereal yield progress. Crop Sci. 50 S85–S98.

    Not in our library

  40. 40.

    Fritsche-Neto R. Borém A. (2015 ). Phenomics How Next-Generation Phenotyping is Revolutionizing Plant Breeding. Switzerland: Springer Press.

    Not in our library

  41. 41.

    Furbank R. T. Jimenez-Berni J. A. George-Jaeggli B. Potgieter A. B. Deery D. M. (2019 ). Field crop phenomics: enabling breeding for radiation use efficiency and biomass in cereal crops. New Phytol. [Epub ahead of print]

    Not in our library10.1111/nph.15817

  42. 42.

    Furbank R. T. Tester M. (2011 ). Phenomics-technologies to relieve the phenotyping bottleneck. Trends Plant Sci. 16 635–644.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2011.09.005

  43. 43.

    Gaudin A. C. M. Henry A. Sparks A. H. Slamet-Loedin I. H. (2013 ). Taking transgenic rice drought screening to the field. J. Exp. Bot. 64 109–117.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/ers313

  44. 44.

    Gennaro S. F. D. Rizza F. Badeck F. W. Berton A. Delbono S. Gioli B. (2017 ). UAV-based high-throughput phenotyping to discriminate barley vigour with visible and near-infrared vegetation indices. Int. J. Remote Sens. 39 5330–5344.

    Not in our library10.1080/01431161.2017.1395974

  45. 45.

    Gibbs J. A. Pound M. French A. P. Wells D. M. Murchie E. Pridmore T. (2017 ). Approaches to three-dimensional reconstruction of plant shoot topology and geometry. Funct. Plant Biol. 44 62–75.

    Not in our library10.1071/fp16167

  46. 46.

    Gibbs J. A. Pound M. French A. P. Wells D. M. Murchie E. Pridmore T. (2018 ). Plant phenotyping: an active vision cell for three-dimensional plant shoot reconstruction. Plant Physiol. 178 524–534.

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.18.00664

  47. 47.

    Girshick R. (2015 ). “Fast R-CNN,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Piscataway, NJ.

    Not in our library

  48. 48.

    Goff S. A. Vaughn M. McKay S. Lyons E. Stapleton A. E. Gessler D. (2011 ). The iPlant collaborative: cyberinfrastructure for plant biology. Front. Plant Sci. 2:34.

    Not in our library10.3389/fpls.2011.00034

  49. 49.
  50. 50.

    Gómez-Candón D. Virlet N. Labbé S. Jolivot A. Regnard J. L. (2016 ). Field phenotyping of water stress at tree scale by UAV-sensed imagery: new insights for thermal acquisition and calibration. Precis. Agric. 17 786–800.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11119-016-9449-6

  51. 51.

    Gonzalez-Dugo V. Hernandez P. Solis I. Zarco-Tejada P. J. (2015 ). Using high-resolution hyperspectral and thermal airborne imagery to assess p-physiological condition in the context of wheat phenotyping. Remote Sens. 7 13586–13605.

    Not in our library10.3390/rs71013586

  52. 52.

    Gonzalez-Dugo V. Zarco-Tejada P. J. Fereres E. (2014 ). Applicability and limitations of using the crop water stress index as an indicator of water deficits in citrus orchards. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 198 94–104.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.08.003

  53. 53.

    Gonzalez-Dugo V. Zarco-Tejada P. Nicolás E. Nortes P. A. Alarcón J. J. Intrigliolo D. S. (2013 ). Using high resolution UAV thermal imagery to assess the variability in the water status of five fruit tree species within a commercial orchard. Precis. Agric. 14 660–678.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11119-013-9322-9

  54. 54.

    Granier C. Aguirrezabal L. Chenu K. Cookson S. J. Dauzat M. Hamard P. (2006 ). PHENOPSIS, an automated platform for reproducible phenotyping of plant responses to soil water deficit in Arabidopsis thaliana permitted the identification of an accession with low sensitivity to soil water deficit. New Phytol. 169 623–635.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01609.x

  55. 55.

    Guo D. Juan J. Chang L. Zhang J. Huang D. (2017 ). Discrimination of plant root zone water status in greenhouse production based on phenotyping and machine learning techniques. Sci. Rep. 7:8303.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41598-017-08235-z

  56. 56.

    Hall H. C. Fakhrzadeh A. Luengo Hendriks C. L. Fischer U. (2016 ). Precision automation of cell type classification and sub-cellular fluorescence quantification from laser scanning confocal images. Front. Plant Sci. 7:119.

    Not in our library10.3389/fpls.2016.00119

  57. 57.

    He J. Q. Harrison R. J. Li B. (2017 ). A novel 3d imaging system for strawberry phenotyping. Plant Methods 13:8.

    Not in our library10.1186/s13007-017-0243-x

  58. 58.

    He K. Zhang X. Ren S. Sun J. (2015 ). Deep residual learning for image recognition. computer vision and pattern recognition (cs.CV). arXiv

    Not in our library

  59. 59.

    Heckwolf S. Heckwolf M. Kaeppler S. M. de Leon N. Spalding E. P. (2015 ). Image analysis of anatomical traits in stem transections of maize and other grasses. Plant Methods 11:26.

    Not in our library10.1186/s13007-015-0070-x

  60. 60.

    Herwitz S. R. Johnson L. F. Dunagan S. E. Higgins R. G. Sullivan D. V. Zheng J. (2004 ). Imaging from an unmanned aerial vehicle: agricultural surveillance and decision support. Comp. Electron. Agric. 44 49–61.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.compag.2004.02.006

  61. 61.

    Houle D. Govindaraju D. R. Omholt S. (2010 ). Phenomics: the next challenge. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11 855–866.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrg2897

  62. 62.

    Hu Y. Wang L. Xiang L. Wu Q. Jiang H. (2018 ). Automatic non-destructive growth measurement of leafy vegetables based on kinect. Sensors 18:806.

    Not in our library10.3390/s18030806

  63. 63.

    Huang H. Wu S. H. Cohen-Or D. Gong M. L. Zhang H. Li G. (2013 ). L1-medial skeleton of point cloud. ACM Trans. Graph. 32:8.

    Not in our library

  64. 64.

    Hui F. Zhu J. Hu P. Meng L. Zhu B. Guo Y. (2018 ). Image-based dynamic quantification and high-accuracy 3d evaluation of canopy structure of plant populations. Ann. Bot. 121 1079–1088.

    Not in our library10.1093/aob/mcy016

  65. 65.

    Jannick J. L. Lorenz A. J. Iwata H. (2010 ). Genomic selection in plant breeding: from theory to practice. Brief. Funct. Genomics 9 166–177.

    Not in our library10.1093/bfgp/elq001

  66. 66.
  67. 67.

    Johannsen W. (2014 ). The genotype conception of heredity. Int. J. Epidemiol. 43 989–1000.

    Not in our library10.1093/ije/dyu063

  68. 68.

    Kirchgessner N. Liebisch F. Yu K. Pfeifer J. Friedli M. Hund A. (2016 ). The ETH field phenotyping platform FIP: a cable-suspended multi-sensor system. Funct. Plant Biol. 44 154–168.

    Not in our library10.1071/fp16165

  69. 69.

    Klukas C. Chen D. J. Pape J. M. (2014 ). Integrated analysis platform: an open-source information system for high-throughput plant phenotyping. Plant Physiol. 165 506–518.

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.113.233932

  70. 70.

    Kolukisaoglu U. Thurow K. (2010 ). Future and frontiers of automated screening in plant sciences. Plant Sci. 178 476–484.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.plantsci.2010.03.006

  71. 71.

    Krajewski P. Chen D. Æwiek H. van Dijk A. D. Fiorani F. Kersey P. (2015 ). Towards recommendations for metadata and data handling in plant phenotyping. J. Exp. Bot. 66 5417–5427.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erv271

  72. 72.

    Kvilekval Das K. Fedorov D. Obara B. Singh A. Manjunath B. S. (2010 ). Bisque: a platform for bioimage analysis and management. Bioinformatics 26 544–552.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btp699

  73. 73.

    Lecun Y. (1990 ). Handwritten digit recognition with a back-propagation network. Adv. Neural Inform. Process. Sys. 2 396–404.

    Not in our library

  74. 74.
    Deep learning · 2015
    No notice
  75. 75.

    Legland D. Devaux M. F. Guillon F. (2014 ). Statistical mapping of maize bundle intensity at the stem scale using spatial normalisation of replicated images. PLoS One 9:e90673.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0090673

  76. 76.

    Legland D. El-Hage F. Méchin V. Reymond M. (2017 ). Histological quantification of maize stem sections from FASGA-stained images. Plant Methods 13:84.

    Not in our library10.1186/s13007-017-0225-z

  77. 77.
  78. 78.

    Li M. Frank M. Coneva V. Mio W. Chitwood D. H. Topp C. N. (2018 ). The persistent homology mathematical framework provides enhanced genotype-to-phenotype associations for plant morphology. Plant Physiol. 177 1382–1395.

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.18.00104

  79. 79.

    Li Y.-F. Kennedy G. Davies F. Hunter J. (2010 ). PODD: an ontology-driven data repository for collaborative phenomics research. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 6102 179–188.

    Not in our library10.1007/978-3-642-13654-2_22

  80. 80.

    Li Z. Chen Z. Wang L. Liu J. Zhou Q. (2014 ). Area extraction of maize lodging based on remote sensing by small unmanned aerial vehicle. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 30 207–213.

    Not in our library

  81. 81.

    Liang Z. Pandey P. Stoerger V. Xu Y. Qiu Y. Ge Y. (2017 ). Conventional and hyperspectral time-series imaging of maize lines widely used in field trials. Gigascience 7 1–11.

    Not in our library10.1093/gigascience/gix117

  82. 82.

    Liebisch F. Kirchgessner N. Schneider D. Walter A. Hund A. (2015 ). Remote, aerial phenotyping of maize traits with a mobile multi-sensor approach. Plant Methods 11:9.

    Not in our library10.1186/s13007-015-0048-8

  83. 83.
  84. 84.

    Lorenz A. J. Chao S. Asoro F. G. Heffner E. L. Hayashi T. Iwata H. (2011 ). Genomic selection in plant breeding: knowledge and prospects. Adv. Agron. 110 77–123.

    Not in our library

  85. 85.

    Majewsky V. Scherr C. Schneider C. Sebastian P. A. Stephan B. (2017 ). Reproducibility of the effects of homeopathically potentised argentum nitricum on the growth of Lemna gibba L. in a randomised and blinded bioassay. Homeopathy. 106 145–154.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.homp.2017.04.001

  86. 86.

    Mathews A. J. Jensen J. L. R. (2013 ). Visualizing and quantifying vineyard canopy LAI using an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) collected high density structure from motion point cloud. Remote Sens. 5 2164–2183.

    Not in our library10.3390/rs5052164

  87. 87.

    Meng R. Saade S. Kurtek S. Berger B. Brien C. Pillen K. (2017 ). Growth curve registration for evaluating salinity tolerance in barley. Plant Methods 13:18.

    Not in our library10.1186/s13007-017-0165-7

  88. 88.
  89. 89.

    Montes J. M. Technow F. Dhillon B. Mauch F. Melchinger A. (2011 ). High-throughput non-destructive biomass determination during early plant development in maize under field conditions. Field Crops Res. 121 268–273.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.fcr.2010.12.017

  90. 90.

    Muraya M. M. Chu J. Zhao Y. Junker A. Klukas C. Reif J. C. (2017 ). Genetic variation of growth dynamics in maize (Zea mays L.). revealed through automated non-invasive phenotyping. Plant J. 89 366–380.

    Not in our library10.1111/tpj.13390

  91. 91.

    Nakhforoosh A. Bodewein T. Fiorani F. Bodner G. (2016 ). Identification of water use strategies at early growth stages in durum wheat from shoot phenotyping and physiological measurements. Front. Plant Sci. 7:1155.

    Not in our library10.3389/fpls.2016.01155

  92. 92.

    Neilson E. H. Edwards A. M. Blomstedt C. K. Berger B. Moller B. L. Gleadow R. M. (2015 ). Utilization of a high-throughput shoot imaging system to examine the dynamic phenotypic responses of a C-4 cereal crop plant to nitrogen and water deficiency over time. J. Exp. Bot. 66 1817–1832.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/eru526

  93. 93.

    Neumann K. Zhao Y. Chu J. Keilwagen J. Reif J. C. Kilian B. (2017 ). Genetic architecture and temporal patterns of biomass accumulation in spring barley revealed by image analysis. BMC Plant Biol. 17:137.

    Not in our library10.1186/s12870-017-1085-4

  94. 94.

    Nigon T. J. Mulla D. J. Rosen C. J. Cohen Y. Alchanatis V. Knight J. (2015 ). Hyperspectral aerial imagery for detecting nitrogen stress in two potatocultivars. Comput. Electron. Agric. 112 36–46.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.compag.2014.12.018

  95. 95.

    Overgaard S. I. Isaksson T. Kvaal K. Korsaeth A. (2010 ). Comparisons of two hand-held, multispectral field radiometers and a hyperspectral airborne imager in terms of predicting spring wheat grain yield and quality by means of powered partial least squares regression. J. Near Infrared Spectrosc. 18 247–261.

    Not in our library10.1255/jnirs.892

  96. 96.

    Pan X. Ma L. Zhang Y. Wang J. Du J. Guo X. (2018 ). Reconstruction of maize roots and quantitative analysis of metaxylem vessels based on X-ray micro-computed tomography. Can. J. Plant Sci. 98 457–466.

    Not in our library

  97. 97.

    Pandey P. Ge Y. Stoerger V. Schnable J. C. (2017 ). High throughput in vivo analysis of plant leaf chemical properties using hyperspectral imaging. Front. Plant Sci. 8:1348.

    Not in our library10.3389/fpls.2017.01348

  98. 98.

    Pape J. M. Klukas C. (2015 ). 3-D histogram-based segmentation and leaf detection for rosette plants. Asia Pac. Conf. Concept. Model. 43107–114.

    Not in our library

  99. 99.
  100. 100.

    Pawara P. Okafor E. Surinta O. Schomaker L. Wiering M. (2017 ). “Comparing local descriptors and bags of visual words to deep convolutional neural networks for plant recognition,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition Applications and Methods, Lisbon.

    Not in our library

  101. 101.

    Pereyra-Irujo G. A. Gasco E. D. Peirone L. S. Aguirrezábal L. A. N. (2012 ). GlyPh: a low-cost platform for phenotyping plant growth and water use. Funct. Plant Biol. 39 905–913.

    Not in our library10.1071/fp12052

  102. 102.
  103. 103.

    Potgieter A. B. Watson J. Eldridge M. Laws K. George-Jaeggli B. Hunt C. (2018 ). “Determining crop growth dynamics in sorghum breeding trials through remote and proximal sensing technologies,” in Proceedings of the IGARSS 2018-2018 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, Valencia.

    Not in our library

  104. 104.
  105. 105.

    Reuzeau C. (2007 ). TraitMill (TM): a high throughput functional genomics platform for the phenotypic analysis of cereals. Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Anim. 43:S4.

    Not in our library

  106. 106.

    Reuzeau C. Pen J. Frankard V. de Wolf J. Peerbolte R. Broekaert W. (2005 ). TraitMill: a discovery engine for identifying yield-enhancement genes in cereals. Mol. Plant Breed. 1 1–6.

    Not in our library

  107. 107.

    Reuzeau C. Pen J. Frankard V. de Wolf J. Peerbolte R. Broekaert W. (2006 ). TraitMill: a discovery engine for identifying yield-enhancement genes in cereals. Plant Genet. Res. 4 20–24.

    Not in our library

  108. 108.

    Reuzeau C. Pen J. Frankard V. Wolf J. Peerbolte R. Broekaert W. (2010 ). TraitMill: a discovery engine for identifying yield-enhancement genes in cereals. Plant Gene Trait. 1 1–6.

    Not in our library10.5376/pgt.2010.01.0001

  109. 109.

    Rist F. Herzog K. Mack J. Richter R. Steinhage V. Töpfer R. (2018 ). High-precision phenotyping of grape bunch architecture using fast 3d sensor and automation. Sensors 18:763.

    Not in our library10.3390/s18030763

  110. 110.

    Roitsch T. Cabrera-Bosquet L. Fournier A. Ghamkhar K. Jiménez-Berni J. Pinto F. (2019 ). Review: new sensors and data-driven approaches-A path to next generation phenomics. Plant Sci. 282 2–10.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.plantsci.2019.01.011

  111. 111.

    Rose J. C. Paulus S. Kuhlmann H. (2015 ). Accuracy analysis of a multi-view stereo approach for phenotyping of tomato plants at the organ level. Sensors 15 9651–9665.

    Not in our library10.3390/s150509651

  112. 112.
  113. 113.

    Sadeghi-Tehran P. Sabermanesh K. Virlet N. Hawkesford M. J. (2017 ). Automated method to determine two critical growth stages of wheat: heading and flowering. Front. Plant Sci. 8:252.

    Not in our library10.3389/fpls.2017.00252

  114. 114.

    Salvi S. Tuberosa R. (2015 ). The crop QTLome comes of age. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 32 179–185.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.copbio.2015.01.001

  115. 115.

    Schork N. J. (1997 ). Genetics of complex disease: approaches, problem, and solutions. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 156 S103–S109.

    Not in our library10.1164/ajrccm.156.4.12-tac-5

  116. 116.

    Seren Ü Grimm D. Fitz I. Weigel D. Nordborg M. Borgwardt K. (2017 ). AraPheno: a public database for Arabidopsis thaliana phenotypes. Nucleic Acids Res. 4 1054–1059.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gkw986

  117. 117.

    Silsbe G. M. Oxborough K. Suggett D. J. Forster R. M. Ihnken S. Komárek O. (2015 ). Toward autonomous measurements of photosynthetic electron transport rates: an evaluation of active fluorescence-based measurements of photochemistry. Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods 13 138–155.

    Not in our library

  118. 118.

    Singh A. Ganapathysubramanian B. Singh A. K. Sarkar S. (2016 ). Machine learning for high-throughput stress phenotyping in plants. Trends Plant Sci. 21:110.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2015.10.015

  119. 119.

    Sugiura R. Noguchi N. Ishii K. (2005 ). Remote-sensing technology for vegetation monitoring using an unmanned helicopter. Biosys. Eng. 90 369–379.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2004.12.011

  120. 120.

    Swain K. C. Thomson S. J. Jayasuriya H. P. W. (2010 ). Adoption of an unmanned helicopter for low-altitude remote sensing to estimate yield and total biomass of a rice crop. Trans. Asabe. 53 21–27.

    Not in our library10.13031/2013.29493

  121. 121.

    Tardieu F. Cabrera-Bosquet L. Pridmore T. Bennett M. (2017 ). Plant phenomics, from sensors to knowledge. Curr. Biol. 27 R770–R783.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2017.05.055

  122. 122.

    Tardieu F. Tuberosa R. (2010 ). Dissection and modelling of abiotic stress tolerance in plants. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 13 206–212.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.pbi.2009.12.012

  123. 123.
  124. 124.

    Thapa S. Zhu F. Walia H. Yu H. Ge Y. (2018 ). A novel lidar-based instrument for high-throughput, 3d measurement of morphological traits in maize and sorghum. Sensors 18:1187.

    Not in our library10.3390/s18041187

  125. 125.

    Tomé F. Jansseune K. Saey B. Grundy J. Vandenbroucke K. Hannah M. A. (2017 ). rosettR: protocol and software for seedling area and growth analysis. Plant Methods. 13:13.

    Not in our library10.1186/s13007-017-0163-9

  126. 126.

    Tsaftaris S. Noutsos C. (2009 ). Plant Phenotyping with Low Cost Digital Cameras and Image Analytics. Berlin: Springer Press.

    Not in our library

  127. 127.

    Tsaftaris S. A. Minervini M. Scharr H. (2016 ). Machine learning for plant phenotyping needs image processing. Trends Plant Sci. 21 989–991.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2016.10.002

  128. 128.
  129. 129.
  130. 130.

    Vadez V. Kholová J. Hummel G. Zhokhavets U. Gupta S. K. Hash C. T. (2015 ). LeasyScan: a novel concept combining 3D imaging and lysimetry for high-throughput phenotyping of traits controlling plant water budget. J. Exp. Bot. 66 5581–5593.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erv251

  131. 131.

    van de Velde K. Chandler P. M. van der Straeten D. Rohde A. (2017 ). Differential coupling of gibberellin responses by Rht-B1c suppressor alleles and Rht-B1b in wheat highlights a unique role for the DELLA N-terminus in dormancy. J. Exp. Bot. 68 443–455.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erw471

  132. 132.

    Vazquez-Arellano M. Griepentrog H. W. Reiser D. Paraforos D. S. (2016 ). 3-d imaging systems for agricultural applications-a review. Sensors 16:24.

    Not in our library10.3390/s16050618

  133. 133.

    Virlet N. Sabermanesh K. Sadeghi-Tehran P. Hawkesford M. J. (2016 ). Field scanalyzer: an automated robotic field phenotyping platform for detailed crop monitoring. Funct. Plant Biol. 44 143–153.

    Not in our library10.1071/fp16163

  134. 134.

    Vos J. Evers J. B. Buck-Sorlin G. H. Andrieu B. Chelle M. de Visser P. H. (2010 ). Functional-structural plant modelling: a new versatile tool in crop science. J. Exp. Bot. 61 2101–2115.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erp345

  135. 135.

    Vylder J. D. Vandenbussche F. Hu Y. Philips W. Straeten D. V. D. (2012 ). Rosette tracker: an open source image analysis tool for automatic quantification of genotype effects. Plant Physiol. 160:1149.

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.112.202762

  136. 136.

    Wallace L. Lucieer A. Watson C. Turner D. (2012 ). Development of a UAV-LiDAR system with application to forest inventory. Remote Sens. 4 1519–1543.

    Not in our library10.3390/rs4061519

  137. 137.
  138. 138.

    Wen W. Guo X. Wang Y. Zhao C. Liao W. (2017 ). Constructing a three-dimensional resource database of plants using measured in situ morphological data. Appl. Eng. Agric. 33 747–756.

    Not in our library10.13031/aea.12135

  139. 139.

    Wen W. Li B. Li B.-J. Guo X. (2018 ). A leaf modeling and multi-scale remeshing method for visual computation via hierarchical parametric vein and margin representation. Front. Plant Sci. 9:783.

    Not in our library10.3389/fpls.2018.00783

  140. 140.

    White J. W. Andrade-Sanchez P. Gore M. A. Bronson K. F. Coffelt T. A. Conley M. M. (2012 ). Field-based phenomics for plant genetics research. Field Crops Res. 133 101–112.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.fcr.2012.04.003

  141. 141.
  142. 142.

    Wu C. (2011 ). Visualsfm: A Visual Structure from Motion System. Available at: http://ccwu.me/vsfm/ (accessed June 11, 2014).

    Not in our library

  143. 143.

    Wu H. Jaeger M. Wang M. Li B. Zhang B. G. (2011 ). Three-dimensional distribution of vessels, passage cells and lateral roots along the root axis of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Ann. Bot. 107 843–853.

    Not in our library10.1093/aob/mcr005

  144. 144.
  145. 145.
  146. 146.
  147. 147.

    Yang W. Guo Z. Huang C. Wang K. Jiang N. Feng H. (2015 ). Genome-wide association study of rice (Oryza sativa L.) leaf traits with a high-throughput leaf scorer. J. Exp. Bot. 66 5605–5615.

    Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erv100

  148. 148.

    Yin K. X. Huang H. Long P. X. Gaissinski A. Gong M. L. Sharf A. (2016 ). Full 3d plant reconstruction via intrusive acquisition. Comput. Graph. Forum 35 272–284.

    Not in our library10.1111/cgf.12724

  149. 149.

    Zarco-Tejada P. J. Diaz-Varela R. Angileri V. Loudjani P. (2014 ). Tree height quantification using very high resolution imagery acquired from an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and automatic 3D photo-reconstruction methods. Eur. J. Agron. 55 89–99.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.eja.2014.01.004

  150. 150.

    Zhang C. H. Kovacs J. M. (2012 ). The application of small unmanned aerial systems for precision agriculture: a review. Precis. Agric. 13 693–712.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11119-012-9274-5

  151. 151.

    Zhang X. Huang C. Wu D. Qiao F. Li W. Duan L. (2017 ). High-throughput phenotyping and QTL mapping reveals the genetic architecture of maize plant growth. Plant Physiol. 173 1554–1564.

    Not in our library10.1104/pp.16.01516

  152. 152.

    Zhang Y. Legay S. Barrière Y. Méchin V. Legland D. (2013 ). Color quantification of stained maize stem section describes lignin spatial distribution within the whole stem. J. Sci. Food Agric. 61 3186–3192.

    Not in our library10.1021/jf400912s

  153. 153.

    Zhang Y. Ma L. Pan X. Wang J. Guo X. Du J. (2018 ). Micron-scale phenotyping techniques of maize vascular bundles based on X-ray microcomputed tomography. J. Vis. Exp. 140:e58501.

    Not in our library10.3791/58501

  154. 154.

    Zhu J. Q. van der Werf W. Anten N. P. R. Vos J. Evers J. B. (2015 ). The contribution of phenotypic plasticity to complementary light capture in plant mixtures. New Phytol. 207 1213–1222.

    Not in our library10.1111/nph.13416

Cited by papers we hold 4

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.