Plant and Soil

, Volume 158, Issue 1, pp 145–149

Automated measurement of root length with a three-dimensional high-resolution scanner and image analysis

  • A. L. Smit
  • J. F. C. M. Sprangers
  • P. W. Sablik
  • J. Groenwold
Short Communication

Abstract

For measuring the length of root samples, the use of a three-dimensional (3D) scanner is proposed to address the problem of a too low resolution. The scanner's high resolution (up to 354 pixels per cm) enables in the resulting grey-value image very thin roots (diameter 100 μm) to be segmented from the background by a simple thresholding operation. After skeletonizing, total length of the roots is calculated by multiplying the number of skeleton pixels by a correction factor. A comparison with the modified Newman Line-Intersect Method showed a correlation of r=0.98. Besides its superior resolution, an advantage of this type of scanner is its focusing depth, which allows root samples to be recorded on the scanbed similarly to a camera-oriented system.

Key words

image analysis Line-Intersect Method root length three-dimensional scanner 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berntson G M 1992 Plant and Soil 140, 145–149.Google Scholar
  2. Bland W L and Mesarch M A 1990 Plant and Soil 125, 155–157.Google Scholar
  3. Boot R G A and Mensink M 1990 Plant and Soil 129, 291–299.Google Scholar
  4. Chikushi J et al. 1990 Biotronics 19, 129–135.Google Scholar
  5. Dorst L and Smeulders A W M 1986 Pattern Recognition in Practice II. Eds. E S Gelsema and L N Kanal, pp. 73–78. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  6. Harris G A and Campbell G S 1989 Agron. J. 81, 935–938.Google Scholar
  7. Lebowitz R J 1988 Environ. Exp. Bot. 28, 267–273.Google Scholar
  8. Mackie-Dawson L A and Atkinson D 1991 British Ecological Society, Publ. No. 10. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 478 p.Google Scholar
  9. Newman E I 1966 J. Appl. Ecol. 3, 139–145.Google Scholar
  10. Noordwijk M van et al. 1985 Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 33, 241–262.Google Scholar
  11. Pan W L and Bolton R P 1991 Agron. J. 83, 1047–1052.Google Scholar
  12. Tennant D 1975 J. Ecol. 63, 995–1001.Google Scholar
  13. Verbeek P et al. 1988 Signal Processing 15, 249–258.Google Scholar
  14. Zoon F C and van Tienderen P H 1990 Plant and Soil 126, 301–308.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. L. Smit
    • 1
  • J. F. C. M. Sprangers
    • 2
  • P. W. Sablik
    • 3
  • J. Groenwold
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Agrobiological Research (CABO-DLO)WageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Vegetation Science, Plant Ecology and Weed ScienceAgricultural University WageningenWageningenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Technical and Physical Engineering Research Service (TFDL-DLO)WageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations