Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘Sensors’

Measuring NDVI in a Greenhouse Presents Challenges (Part 2)

University of Georgia researcher, Shuyang Zhen, wanted to find out if she could optimize greenhouse irrigation with reference evapotranspiration calculated from environmental factors and a crop coefficient, using NDVI measurements to adjust for canopy size (see part 1). Learn the results of the experiment and how fast growth and flowering caused problems with the NDVI measurement.

Researchers measuring the NDVI of green plants in a greenhouse

Shuyang’s experimental setup.

Fast Growth Causes Problems

Shuyang says because the plants grew so large, the canopy filled in beyond what the sensor could see.  That meant there was additional leaf area that participated in vapor loss which wasn’t identified by the NDVI sensor.  As the canopies approached moderate-to-high canopy densities, Shuyang observed that the NDVI readings became less responsive to increases in canopy size. To work around this problem, Shuyang tried to calculate a vegetation index called the Wide Dynamic Range Vegetation index with the spectral reflectance outputs of the two wavebands measured by the NDVI sensor. Shuyang says, “This index was supposed to improve the sensitivity at higher canopy density, so I transformed all my data and was surprised that it actually improved the sensitivity when the canopy density was lower.  But at a higher canopy density it wasn’t as effective.”

Researchers measuring NDVI of petunias in a greenhouse

The red flowers reflected a lot of red light compared to the leaves, which confused the NDVI measurement.

Plant flowering also caused problems with the NDVI measurement.   Shuyang explains, “We had one cultivar of petunia with red flowers which formed on top of the canopy. The red flowers reflected a lot of red light compared to the leaves, which confused the NDVI measurement.  The NDVI value gradually decreased when the plants started to flower. There was no way I could get around that issue, so in some of the replicates, I removed the flowers, and in some I kept the flowers so I could compare the different responses and characterize why it happened.”

Poinsettia plant with red small flowers

The NDVI was very sensitive to the increase in crop size when the canopy was relatively small, but when you reach a certain canopy size and the canopy closure was nearly complete, then the sensitivity decreased.

Summary and Future Studies

During the early stages of growth, the research team saw a linear relationship between NDVI and crop coefficient. However, when the crop coefficient reached higher values, the response leveled off.  Shuyang says, “The response failed to change with further increases in the crop coefficient. The NDVI was very sensitive to the increase in crop size when the canopy was relatively small, but when you reach a certain canopy size and the canopy closure was nearly complete, then the sensitivity decreased.”  

Six poinsettia plants with small flowers arranged with one in the middle and five around the middle one in a circle

Lack of NDVI sensitivity during canopy closure and flowering translated to a problem with under-irrigation,

Shuyang adds that the lack of NDVI sensitivity during canopy closure and flowering translated to a problem with under-irrigation, so the team is thinking about developing separate models for different canopy stages.  She explains, “When the canopy reaches high canopy closure we may have to add an additional coefficient to compensate for that underestimation, but it’s difficult to evaluate what kind of coefficient we should use without more data. We need to do more studies to get an idea of what kind of adjustments will make the prediction more precise.”

Learn more about Shuyang’s work on the University of Georgia horticulture blog.

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Measuring Light and Photosynthesis (PAR): Complicated, but Worth It

Dr. Gaylon S. Campbell discusses how to measure light and photosynthesis (PAR) in canopies and why it’s helpful to researchers.

Dandelion with a bright sun shining on it

The source of all energy on earth is the sun.

The ultimate source of all energy on earth is the sun. Availability of this energy to most organisms occurs through photosynthesis, the conversion of CO2 and H2O to carbohydrates (stored energy) and O2. Photosynthesis occurs when pigments in photosynthesizers absorb the energy of photons, initiating a chain of photochemical and chemical events. Where does this energy and material exchange occur? In plant canopies. The amount of photosynthesis that occurs in canopies depends on the amount of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) intercepted by leaves in canopies.

Leaf in sunlight on a tree

In canopies, leaves function collectively.

It’s More Complicated Than You Might Think

The rate at which photosynthesis occurs in one leaf might be calculated, but in canopies, leaves function collectively. Extrapolating photosynthesis from individual leaves to entire canopies is complex; the sheer numbers of leaves and their arrangement in the canopy structure can be overwhelming. Leaf area, inclination, and orientation all affect the degree to which light is captured and used in a canopy.

Tree canopy with sunlight breaking through the leaves

Average light level decreases exponentially downward through the canopy.

What Happens to Light in a Canopy?

Light varies dramatically both spatially and temporally through canopies. The average light level decreases more or less exponentially downward through the canopy, as the amount of leaf surface encountered increases. For some canopies, the greatest amount of leaf area occurs near the center. Therefore, canopy structure analysis becomes increasingly complex as one proceeds from a single plant to stands of the same plant, or to plant communities because of the variety of plants and growth forms.

Picture looking up from the ground at a tree canopy with sunlight breaking through the leaves

Photosynthesis depends on leaf orientation.

Absorption of radiation and resulting photosynthesis depend on leaf orientation, sun elevation in the sky, spectral distribution and multiple reflections of light, and the arrangement of leaves. Patterns of light and shaded areas can be complicated and change with the sun’s position. In addition, seasonality of foliage can result in fairly small canopy interception of PAR for much of the year. PAR might also be intercepted by non-photosynthetic parts of plants (bark, flowers, etc).

In two weeks:  Dr. Campbell discusses the impact of leaf arrangement, measuring light in a canopy, and why we measure PAR.

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to leaf area index (LAI)”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Can Canopy Measurements Determine Soil Moisture? (Part 2)

Dr. Y. Osroosh, now a researcher at Washington State University, believes that plants are the best soil moisture sensors (see part 1).  He and his team have developed a new model for interpreting plant canopy signals to indirectly determine soil moisture in a Fuji apple orchard.  Below are the results of their efforts and what he sees as the future of this research.

Close up of flower blooming

Could plants be the best indicators of soil moisture?

The Results

Osroosh says they expected to see correlations, but such strong relationships were unexpected. The team found that soil water deficit was highly correlated with thermal-based water stress indices in drip-irrigated apple orchard in the mildly-stressed range. The relationships were time-sensitive, meaning that they were valid only at a specific time of day. The measurements taken between 10:00am and 11:00am (late morning, time of maximum transpiration) were highly correlated with soil water deficit, but the “coefficient of determination” decreased quickly and significantly beyond this time window (about half in just one hour, and reached zero in the afternoon hours).  Osroosh says this is a very important finding because researchers still think midday is the best time to measure canopy water stress index (CWSI). He adds, “The apple trees showed an interesting behavior which was nothing like what we are used to seeing in row crops. They regulate their stomata in a way that transpiration rate is intense late in the morning (maximum) and late in the afternoon. During the hot hours of afternoon, they close their stomata to minimize water loss.”

Picture of a corn field

Researchers have found good relationships between CWSI and soil water content in the root zone near the end of the season at high soil water deficits in row crops.

Other Research

Osroosh points to other efforts which have tried to correlate remotely-sensed satellite-based thermal or NIR measurements to soil water content. He says, “The closest studies to ours have been able to find good relationships between CWSI and soil water content in the root zone near the end of the season at high soil water deficits in row crops. Paul Colaizzi, a research agricultural engineer did his PhD research in part on the relationship between canopy temperature, CWSI, and soil water status in Maricopa, Arizona; also motivated by Jackson et al. (1981). Steve Evett and his team at Bushland, Texas are continuing that research as they try to develop a relationship between CWSI and soil water status that will hold up. They are using a CWSI that is integrated over the daylight hours and have found good relationships between CWSI and soil water content in the root zone near the end of the season when plots irrigated at deficits begin to develop big deficits.”

Picture of a green apple on a tree

Osroosh wants to study other apple cultivars, tree species, and perhaps even row crops, under other irrigation systems and climates.

What’s The Future?

In the future, Osroosh hopes to study the limitations of this approach and to find a better way to monitor a large volume of soil in the root zone in real-time (as reference). He says, “We would like to see how universal these equations can be. Right now, I suspect they are crop and soil-specific, but by how much we don’t know. We want to study other apple cultivars, tree species, and perhaps even row crops, under other irrigation systems and climates. We need to monitor crops for health, as well, to make sure what we are measuring is purely a water stress signal. One of our major goals is to develop a sensor-based setup which, after calibration, can be used for “precise non-contact sensing of soil water content” and “stem water potential” in real-time by measuring canopy temperature and micrometeorological parameters.”

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to water potential”—>

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to leaf area index (LAI)”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Can Canopy Measurements Determine Soil Moisture?

As a young university student, Dr. Y. Osroosh, now a researcher at Washington State University, wanted to design the most accurate soil moisture sensor.  Over the years, however, he began to realize the complexity and difficulty of the task.  Inspired by the work of Jackson et al. (1981) and researchers in Bushland, TX, he now believes that plants are the best soil moisture sensors.  He and his team developed a new model for interpreting plant canopy signals to indirectly determine soil moisture.

Apples on an open air tree

The team measured microclimatic data in an apple orchard.

How Can Plants Indicate Water in Soil?

Osroosh and his team wanted to use plant stress instead of soil sensors to make irrigation decisions in a drip-irrigated Fuji apple tree orchard. But, the current practice of using the crop water stress index (CWSI) for detecting water stress presented some problems, Osroosh comments, “Currently, scientists use either an empirical CWSI or a theoretical one developed using equations from FAO-56, but the basis for FAO-56 equations is alfalfa or grass, which isn’t similar to apple trees.”  One of the main differences between grass and apple trees is that apple tree leaves are highly linked to atmospheric conditions. They control their stomata to avoid water loss.  

Apple tree canopy in an open air field

There is high degree of coupling between apple leaves and the humidity of the surrounding air.

So Osroosh borrowed a leaf porometer to measure the stomatal conductance of apple trees, and he developed his own crop water stress index, based on what he found.  He explains,We developed a new theoretical crop water stress index specifically for apple trees. It accounts for stomatal regulations in apple trees using a canopy conductance sub-model. It also estimates average actual and potential transpiration rates for the canopy area which is viewed by a thermal infrared sensor (IRT).”

Fuji open air apple orchard (Roza Farm, Prosser, WA).

Fuji apple orchard (Roza Farm, Prosser, WA) where Osroosh performed his research.

What Data Was Used?

Osroosh says they established their new “Apple Tree” CWSI based on the energy budget of a single apple leaf, so “soil heat flux” was not a component in their modeling. He and his team measured soil water deficit using a neutron probe in the top 60 cm of the profile, and they collected canopy surface temperature data using thermal infrared sensors. The team also measured microclimatic data in the orchard.  

Close up of an apple on a tree

Neutron probes were problematic, as they did not allow collection of data in real time.

Osroosh comments, “The accuracy of this approach greatly depends on the accuracy of reference soil moisture measurement methods.  To establish a relationship between CWSI and soil water, we needed to measure soil water content in the root zone precisely. We used a neutron probe, which provides enough precision and volume of influence to meet our requirements.  However, it was a labor and time intensive method which did not allow for real-time measurements, posing a serious limitation.”

Next week: Learn the results of Dr. Osroosh’s experiments, the future of this research, and about other researchers who are trying to achieve similar goals.

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to water potential”—>

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to leaf area index (LAI)”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Do Soil Microbes Influence Plant Response to Heat Waves? (Part II)

Rachel Rubin, PhD candidate at Northern Arizona University and her team at Northern Arizona University are investigating the role soil microbes play in plant response to heat waves, including associated impacts to microbial-available and plant-available water (see part 1). Because heat waves threaten plant productivity, they present a growing challenge for agriculture, rangeland management, and restoration. Below are the results of Rachel’s experiments, some of the challenges the team faced, and the future of this research.

A herd of cows grazing in a pasture

Heat waves present a growing challenge for agriculture, rangeland management, and restoration.

Challenges

Rachel says the experiment was not without its difficulties. After devoting weeks towards custom wiring the electrical array, the team had to splice heat-resistant romex wire leading from the lamps to the dimmer switches, because the wires inside the lamp fixtures kept melting. Also, automation was not possible with this system. She explains, “We were out there multiple times a day, checking the treatment, making sure the lamps were still on, and repairing lamps with our multi-tools. We used an infrared camera and an infrared thermometer in the field, so we could constantly see how the heating footprint was being applied to keep it consistent across all the plots.”

Arizona Fescue plant

Arizona Fescue (image: wickipedia.com)

Some Grass was Heat Resistant

Rachel says her biggest finding was that all of the C4 grasses survived the field heat wave, whereas only a third of the Arizona Fescue plants survived. She adds that the initially strong inoculum effects in the greenhouse diminished after outplanting, with no differences between intact, heat-primed inoculum or sterilized inoculum for either plant species in the field. “It may be related to inoculum fatigue,” she explains, “the microbes in the intact treatment may have become exhausted by the time the plants were placed in the field, or maybe they became replaced, consumed, or outcompeted by other microbes within the field site”. Rachel emphasizes that it’s important to conduct more field experiments on plant-microbe interactions. She says, “Field experiments can be more difficult than greenhouse studies, because less is under our control, but we need to embrace this complexity. In practice, inoculants will have to contend with whatever is already present in the field. It’s an exciting time to be in microbial ecology because we are just starting to address how microbes influence each other in real soil communities.”

Grass going to seed in an open-air field

Diminished effects may be related to inoculum fatigue.

What’s In Store?

Now that the team has collected data from the greenhouse and from the heat wave itself, they have started looking at mycorrhizal colonization of plant roots, as well as sequencing of bacterial and archaeal communities from the greenhouse study. Rachel says, “It’s quite an endeavor to link ‘ruler science’ plant restoration to bacterial communities at the cellular level. I’m curious to see if heat waves simply reduce all taxa equally or if there is a re-sorting of the community, favoring genera or species that are really good at handling harsh conditions.”

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Do Soil Microbes Influence Plant Response to Heat Waves?

Rachel Rubin, PhD candidate at Northern Arizona University, is interested in the intersection of extreme climate events and disturbance, which together have a much greater impact on plant communities. She and her team at Northern Arizona University are investigating the role soil microbes play in plant response to heat waves, including associated impacts to microbial-available and plant-available water.

Wheat with sun shining through it

Plants have a tight co-evolutionary history with soil microbes. It has been said that there is no microbe-free plant on earth.

Because heat waves threaten plant productivity, they present a growing challenge for agriculture, rangeland management, and restoration.

Can Soil Microbes Increase Heat Resistance?

Many plants maintain mutualistic associations with a diverse microbiome found within the rhizosphere, the region of soil that directly surrounds plant roots. These “plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria” and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi provision limiting resources including water, phosphorus and nitrogen in exchange for photosynthetically derived sugars. However, we understand very little about whether extreme events can disrupt these interactions.

Tubes of layered dirt

Fig. 1. Fine roots exploring the inoculum that was added as a band between layers of potting mixture.

Rachel and her team exposed rhizosphere communities to heat stress and evaluated the performance of native grasses both in the greenhouse, and transplanted under an artificial heat wave. They hypothesized that locally-sourced inoculum (a sample of local soil containing the right microbes) or even heat-primed inoculum would help alleviate water stress and improve survival of native grasses.

The Experiments

Rubin started in the greenhouse by planting Blue Grama (Bouteloua gracilis, C4 grass) and Arizona Fescue (Festuca arizonica, C3 grass) and assessed their responsiveness to locally collected soil inoculum that had either been left intact, pre-heated or sterilized (Fig. 1). Rubin says, “We expected that our plants would benefit the most from having intact soil microbe communities. But, we were surprised to find very large differences between plant species. Blue Grama performed the best with intact inoculum, whereas Arizona Fescue performed better with pre-heated or sterilized soil”. This could mean that Blue Grama is more dependent on its microbiome, whereas Arizona Fescue engineers a rhizosphere that contains more parasitic microbes rather than mutualistic microbes. Rachel says that understanding this relationship is important for tailoring plant restoration projects to local conditions. Plants that exhibit high levels of mutualisms with their rhizosphere might require an extra inoculum “boost” in order to successfully establish in highly degraded soil, whereas we should not bother to inoculate plants that tend to harbor parasites within their rhizosphere.

Research plot using infrared sensors and METER soil water content and soil water potential sensors

Fig. 2. A heated plot in the foreground connected to infrared lamps, water content and matric potential sensors, and EM50 data loggers.

After the team studied these responses, they planted the grasses into a degraded section of a grassland and installed an array of 1000-Watt ceramic infrared lamps mounted on steel frames (Fig. 2) to address whether inoculation influenced plant performance and survival. With help from a savvy undergraduate electrical engineering major (Rebecca Valencia), Rubin simulated a two-week heat wave while monitoring soil temperature and moisture using water content and water potential sensors.  She also measured plant performance (height, leaf number and chlorophyll content) before, during, and after the event. Control plots had aluminum “dummy lamps” to account for shading.

An infrared photo of the expirement

An infrared photo, which is how Rachel determined that the heating footprint was evenly distributed on all the plants. The scale bar on the right is in degrees C.

Data obtained from soil sensors helped Rachel to measure heating treatment effects as well as rule out a potential cause for plant mortality: soil moisture. “Soil temperature was on average 10 degrees hotter in heated plots than control plots, but matric potential and soil water content were completely unaffected by heating. This tells us that the grasses died from reasons other than water stress– perhaps a top-kill effect.” Although growing concern over heat waves in agriculture is centered around accompanying droughts, this experiment demonstrates that heating can produce negative effects on some species even when water is in plentiful supply.

Next week:  Learn the results of Rachel’s experiments, some of the challenges the team faced, and the future of this research.

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to water potential”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Which Factors Make Rain Gardens More Effective? (Part 2)

Scientists often evaluate Low Impact Development (LID) design by quantifying how much stormwater rain garden systems (cells) can divert from the sewer system.  But Dr. Amanda Cording and her research team want to understand what’s happening inside the cell in order to improve the effectiveness of rain garden design (see part 1).  Below are the results of their research.

Picture of yellow flowers

Deep rooted systems were found to have a much better ability to hold the soil in place and remove nutrients.

Key Findings

Cording says that some of her key findings were that the soil media and vegetation selection is absolutely crucial to the performance of these systems. Cording’s team looked at the root layering perspective in three dimensions and found that deep rooted systems were found to have a much better ability to hold the soil in place and remove nutrients throughout the life cycle of the cell. The more surface area the roots covered, the more pollutants the cell would remove.  She adds, “Cells with deep-rooted plants were found to be resilient during increased precipitation due to climate change, did well at retaining peak flow rates, and performed well at removing total suspended solids and nutrients predominantly associated with particulates.”  Labile nutrients, Cording says, were a completely different story. She says the bioretention systems have to be specifically designed to remove  those nutrients through sorption (P) and denitrification (N).

Researcher holding dirt in cupped hand

Compost was found to have a negative effect on water quality.

Compost, which is often used as an organic amendment in the soil media to help remove heavy metals and provide nutrients for the plants, was found to have a negative effect on water quality overall, due to the high pre-existing labile N and P content. She says, “It’s intuitive, but at the same time, a lot of these systems are designed based on bloom time and color, and not necessarily on the physical and chemical pollutant removal mechanisms at work.”

Green algal bloom in a freshwater lake

Green algal bloom in a small freshwater lake in New Zealand. (Image: Massey University)

What Lies Ahead?

Cording also tested a proprietary bioengineered media in two of her cells which was designed to remove the phosphorous that causes algal blooms in the rivers and streams.  She says, “It did a phenomenal job. There was very little phosphorous coming out compared to the traditionally-designed retention cells.  Cording, who is now based in Honolulu and works for an ecological engineering company called EcoSolutions, is looking at how to use natural, highly-leached iron rich soils, to get a similar amount of phosphorous removal, and how bioretention can be designed with anoxic storage zones to remove nitrate via denitrification. She says, “These nutrients can be easily removed from stormwater with a little conscious design effort and a splash of chemistry.”

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Which Factors Make Rain Gardens More Effective?

Low Impact Development (LID) is an approach to development (or re-development) that mimics pre-development hydrology and uses ecological engineering to remove pollutants in stormwater and wastewater so it can be reused or replenish groundwater supplies. Examples of LID features include porous pavement, constructed wetlands, green roofs, and rain gardens. LID stormwater bioretention systems such as rain gardens have been proven to work, but are they designed as effectively as they could be?  Dr. Amanda Cording (formerly at the University of Vermont) and her team wanted to understand which design factors would make rain gardens more resilient, increase phosphorus adsorption, and reduce nitrates.

Rain Garden aerial view

Cording and her team wanted to understand what was happening inside bioretention cells.

What’s Happening Inside?

Scientists often evaluate LID design by quantifying how much stormwater the systems (cells) can divert from the sewer system.  But Cording and her team wanted to understand what was happening inside the cell.  They wondered which types of soil media and infrastructure would optimize a stormwater bioretention system’s ability to improve water quality.  She says, “We wanted to gather water quality information coming in and going out of the system. I designed inflow and outflow monitoring infrastructure to measure nutrient and sediment pollution.”   The system monitored pollution by sampling stormwater runoff from a paved road surface before and after it went through bioretention cells. Each cell was constructed with different features to test the influence of vegetation and soil media on pollutant removal capabilities.

Bioretention cells diagram

Bioretention cells at the newly constructed Bioretention Laboratory at the University of Vermont.

Methods Used

To understand what was happening within eight bioretention cells at the newly constructed Bioretention Laboratory at the University of Vermont, Dr. Cording and her team investigated the mechanisms influencing greenhouse gas emissions and nutrient transformations at various depths in engineered soil media. In addition to using her own monitoring infrastructure, Dr. Cording used soil moisture sensors to measure water content within the soil media. She says, “I was comparing different vegetation treatments while simulating increased precipitation due to climate change in the Northeast.  I put the soil probes in at 5 cm and 61cm, one on top of the other.  Then I looked at the way the EC and the volumetric water content (VWC) changed prior to a storm event, during a storm event, and after a storm event.”

Garden in bloom in the rain

One of the team’s bioretention cells at the University of Vermont.

Cording says the EC and VWC sensors allowed them to get a general sense of what was happening inside the cell over time.  She adds, “I used the data when I needed to know more of the story, such as how the conductivity at the surface compared to other depths so we could see if the nutrients in the soil were migrating, and how much was moving down.  We were also able to use the sensors to compare the VWC around the roots of different vegetation types. It provided a lot of insight into the dynamic world that exists below the soil surface.”

Next Week:  Read about the team’s key findings and what lies ahead for this research.

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Improving Drought Tolerance in Soybean

Limited water availability is a significant issue threatening the agricultural productivity of soybean, reducing yields by as much as 40 percent. Due to climate change, varieties with improved drought tolerance are needed, but phenotyping drought tolerance in the field is challenging, mainly because field drought conditions are unpredictable both spatially and temporally.  This has led to the genetic mechanisms governing drought tolerance traits to be poorly understood. Researcher Clinton Steketee at the University of Georgia is trying to improve soybean drought tolerance by using improved screening techniques for drought tolerance traits, identifying new drought tolerant soybean germplasm, and clarifying which genomic regions are responsible for traits that help soybeans cope with water deficit.

Seedlings sprouting

Researchers are trying to improve soybean drought tolerance by using better screening techniques for drought tolerance traits.

Which Traits Are Important?

Clinton and his colleagues are evaluating a genetically diverse panel of 211 soybean lines in two different states, Kansas and Georgia, for over two years to help him accomplish his research objectives. These 211 lines come from 30 countries and were selected from geographical areas with low annual precipitation and newly developed soybean lines with enhanced drought-related traits, along with drought susceptible checks. The researchers are looking at traits such as canopy wilting.  Some plants will take a few days longer to wilt, allowing these plants to continue their photosynthetic ability to produce biomass for seed production. Other traits that he is interested in evaluating are stomatal conductance, canopy temperature with thermal imaging, relative water content, and carbon isotope discrimination.

Beans growing on a stalk

The scientists want to monitor traits such as canopy wilting.

Use of Microclimate Stations to Monitor Environmental Conditions

Clinton says to make selection of drought-tolerant lines easier and more predictable, knowledge of field environmental conditions is critical. He says, “You can phenotype all you want, but you need the true phenotype of the plant to be observed under real drought conditions so you can discover the genes for drought tolerance and improve resistance down the line in a breeding program.”

In addition to soil moisture sensors, the team used microclimate weather stations to help monitor water inputs at their two field research sites and determine ideal time periods for phenotyping drought-related traits.  Steketee says, “We put microenvironment monitors in the field next to where we were growing our experimental materials.  Both locations use those monitors to keep an eye on weather conditions throughout the growing season, measuring temperature, humidity, and precipitation. Since we could access the data remotely, we used that information to help us determine when it was time to go out to the field and look at the plots. We wanted to see big differences between soybean plants if possible, especially in drought conditions. By monitoring the conditions we could just go back to our weather data to show we didn’t get rain for 3 weeks before we took this measurement, proving that we were actually experiencing drought conditions.”

Soybeans

The team identified some lines that performed well.

Results So Far

Though 2015 wasn’t a great year for drought in Georgia, Clinton says there was a period in late July when he was able to measure canopy wilting, and they identified some lines that performed well.  He says, “We compared our data to the data collected by our collaborator in Kansas, and there are a few lines that did well in both locations.  Hopefully, another year of data will confirm that these plants have advantageous drought tolerance traits, and we’ll be able to probe the advantageous traits out of those lines and integrate them into our breeding program.”

Future Plans

The team will use what’s called a genome-wide association study approach to identify genomic regions responsible for drought tolerance traits of interest. This approach uses phenotypic information collected from the field experiments along with DNA markers throughout the soybean genome to see if that marker is associated with the trait they are interested in.  If the scientists find the spot in the genome that is associated with the desired trait, they will then develop genomic tools to be used for selection, integrate that trait into elite germplasm, and ultimately improve the drought tolerance of soybeans.

See weather sensor performance data for the ATMOS 41 weather station.

Explore which weather station is right for you.

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our

Crowdsource Your Data Collection?

What can you do when you need data from all over the world in a short amount of time?  Many scientists, including ones at JPL/NASA, are crowdsourcing their data collection.

Close up of microbes

Projects range from ground truthing NASA satellite data, to spotting migration patterns, to collecting microbes.

Darlene Cavalier, Professor of Practice at Arizona State University is the founder of SciStarter, a website where scientists make data collection requests to a community of volunteers who are interested in collecting and analyzing data for scientific research.

Who Collects the Data?

SciStarter was an outgrowth of Cavalier’s University of Pennsylvania graduate school project where she sought to connect people who didn’t have formal science degrees with scientists who needed their help.  She says, “We know from various National Science Foundation reports that many people without science degrees are interested in participating in and learning about science. The challenge was that there was no easy way to find those opportunities.”

Image of a purple Orchid

One project invites UK citizens to find and take pictures of orchids.

Cavalier started SciStarter, in part, to create a “one-stop shop” resource where people could easily search and find projects best suited to their locations and interests.  She says, “We have over 1,600 projects and events.  Projects range from ground truthing NASA satellite data, to spotting migration patterns, to collecting microbes.”  One project, sponsored by the National History Museum in London, invites UK citizens to find and take pictures of orchids with their smartphones, so scientists can study the effect of climate change on UK flowering times.

How Are Volunteers Recruited?

Volunteers are recruited through SciStarter’s partnerships with the National Science Teachers Association, Discover Magazine, the United Nations, PBS and more. One of the most visible ways that volunteers are enlisted is through an organization Cavalier started called Science Cheerleader.  The organization consists of 300 current and former NFL and NBA cheerleaders who are scientists and engineers.  These role models visit youth sports groups, go to science festivals, and talk in schools.  During their appearances they engage people of all ages in actual citizen science projects. Darlene says, “This is our way of casting a wide net and making new audiences aware of these opportunities.”

Researcher taking samples

Science cheerleader consists of 300 current and former NFL and NBA cheerleaders who are now scientists and engineers.

What’s the Ultimate Goal?

Cavalier is determined to create pathways between citizen science and citizen science policy. She says, “The hope is after people engage in citizen science projects, they will want to participate in deliberations around related science policy. Or perhaps policy decision makers will want to be part of the discovery process by contributing or analyzing scientific data.”  Darlene has partnered with Arizona State University and other organizers to form a very active network called Expert and Citizen Assessment of Science and Technology (ECAST).  This group seeks to unite citizens, scientific experts, and government decision makers in discussions evaluating science policy. Cavaliers says, “The process allows us to discover ethical and societal issues that may not come up if there were only scientists and policy makers in a room.  It’s a network which allows us to take these conversations out of Washington D.C.  The conversations may originate and ultimately circle back there, but the actual public deliberations are held across the country, so we get a cross-section of input from different Americans.” ECAST has been contracted by NASA, NOAA, the Department of Energy, and others to explore specific policy questions that would benefit from the public’s input.

Image of the capital building

ECAST is a network which allows us to take science policy conversations out of Washington D.C.

Overcoming Obstacles

Cavalier says the SciStarter team constantly works to remove challenges and impediments to public participation. She explains, “We’ve found it can be difficult to articulate the geographic bounds of a project because when a researcher says, “this project can be done in a watershed,” it doesn’t mean anything to most people.  So SciStarter spent time developing a system of “Open Streetmap and USGS databases that show land-type coverage.”

Another obstacle to some types of research is access to instrumentation.  Darlene comments, “The NASA Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) project really opened our eyes to how many obstacles can exist between the spectrum of recruiting, training, equipping, and fully engaging a participant.”  This year, SciStarter is building a database of citizen science tools and instruments and will begin to create the digital infrastructure to map tools to people and projects through a “Build, Borrow, Buy” function on project pages.

Image of the world from a satellite view

“The NASA Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) project really opened our eyes to how many obstacles can exist to full engagement.”

What’s Next?

Darlene says that sometimes scientists who want accurate data without knowing about or identifying a particular sensor for participants to use often create room for data errors.   To address this problem, SciStarter and Arizona State University will be hosting a summit this fall where scientists, citizen scientists, and commercial developers of instrumentation will meet to determine if it’s possible to fill gaps to develop and scale access to inexpensive, modular instruments that could be used in different types of research.  You can learn more about crowdsourcing your data collection with SciStarter here.

Download the “Researcher’s complete guide to soil moisture”—>

Get more information on applied environmental research in our