Plant and Soil

, Volume 260, Issue 1–2, pp 111–120 | Cite as

Estimating length, average diameter and surface area of roots using two different Image analyses systems

  • M.L. Himmelbauer
  • ¡AFF1¿W. Loiskandl
  • ¡AFF1¿F. Kastanek

Abstract

Image analyses systems provide a quick determination of various root morphological parameters. Generally, a specific testing procedure should be conducted at the beginning of every measurement process. In this study, the performance of two image analyses programs using different measuring algorithms was compared: a commercial package WinRHIZO and a freeware ROOTEDGE. Roots of field grown cereal crops, wheat (Triticum durumDesf.) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), were used. Several types of tests were executed: 1. Comparison of image analyses and manually conducted measurements of root length; 2. Comparison between root length, average diameter and surface area measurements performed with ROOTEDGE and WinRHIZO; 3. Tests of root arrangement to assess the importance of random orientation of the scanned roots for accurate measurements; 4. Evaluation of the maximum acceptable scanning density (cm scanned root length per cm2 scanning area). The results suggest that ROOTEDGE and WinRHIZO provide fairly correct measurements of root morphological parameters. There were small differences between manually and image analyses measurements of root length, in particular using a transparent light unit for scanning. Ratios of image analyses to manual estimations ranged from 0.95 to 1.03 for different root samples of winter barley. Comparisons of the programs generated almost equal root estimates. Discrepancies between diameter and surface area were slightly higher than between length measurements. The average root diameter was a little overestimated by ROOTEDGE compared to WinRHIZO. The most significant source for these discrepancies presumably was the difference between the fixed threshold for ROOTEDGE and the flexible threshold, automatically optimized for every single image by WinRHIZO. ROOTEDGE and WinRHIZO image analyses showed small sensitivity to root sample orientation. Estimations of root length, average diameter and surface area were well reproducible. For the scanning density to 3 cm cm−2 CV values for the replicated measurements varied between 0.3% and 3.4% by both programs. High scanning density of roots resulted in increasing underestimation of root length and overestimation of root average diameter. For the common scanning density range in root research between 1 and 3 cm cm−2 discrepancies did not exceed 5%. Higher scanning densities than 3 cm cm−2 are not recommended.

image analyses comparison root scanning root length root diameter ROOTEDGE WinRHIZO 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arsenault J L, Pouleur S, Messier C and Guay R 1995 WinRhizo, a root measuring system with a unique overlap correction method. Hort. Science 30, 906.Google Scholar
  2. Bauhus J and Messier C 1999 Evaluation of fine rot length and diameter measurements obtained using RHIZO image analysis. Agron. J. 91, 142–147.Google Scholar
  3. Bengough A G, Castrignano A, Pages L and van Noordwijk M 2000 Sampling strategies, scaling, and statistics. In Root Meth-ods. A Handbook. Eds. A Smit, A Bengough, C Engels, M van Noordwijk, S Pellerin and S van de Geijn. pp. 147–174. Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Böhm W1979 Methods of studying Root Systems. Springer, Berlin. p 188.Google Scholar
  5. Bouma T, Nielsen K and Koutstaal B 2000 Sample preparation and scanning protocol for computerized analysis of root length and diameter. Plant Soil 218, 185–196.Google Scholar
  6. Box J E 1996 Modern methods for root investigations. In Plant Roots: The Hidden Half. Eds. Y Waisel, A Eshel and K Kafkafi. pp 193–237. Marcel Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Coelho E F and Or D, 1999 Root distribution and water uptake patterns of corn under surface drip irrigation. Plant Soil 206, 123–136.Google Scholar
  8. Costa C, Dwyer L M, Hamilton R I, Hamel C, Nantais L and Smith D 2000 A sampling method for measurement of large root systems with scanner-based image analysis. Agron. J. 92, 621–627.Google Scholar
  9. Costa C, Dwyer L M, Hamel C, Muamba D F, Wang X L, Nantais L and Smith D 2001. Root contrast enhancement for measurement with optical scanner-based image analyses. Can. J. Bot. 79(1), 23–29.Google Scholar
  10. Dowdy R H, Nater E A and Dolan M S 1995 Quantification of the length and diameter of root segments with public domain software. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 26, 459–468.Google Scholar
  11. Ewing R P and Kaspar T C 1995 Accurate perimeter and length measurement using an edge chord algorithm. J. Comput. As-sisted. Microsc. 7, 91–100.Google Scholar
  12. Guay R 1996 Internal technical note no 6: Accuracy of measure-ments with Mac/ WinRHIZO TM V3 3., Regent Instruments Inc.Google Scholar
  13. Harris G and Campbell G 1989 Automated quantification of roots using sample image analyzer. Agron. J. 81, 935–938.Google Scholar
  14. Himmelbauer M, Kastanek F, Loiskandl W and Cepuder P 2000 Analysis of root development of cereals during a growing cycle. Root development of winter barley, and soil characteristics In Proc. of the 3rd Int. PhD Symp. Civ. Eng. Ed. K Bergmeister. pp 547–555. Vienna Oct. 5–7, 2000, v. 1.Google Scholar
  15. Kaspar T C and Ewing R P 1997 ROOTEDGE: Software for meas-uring root length from desktop scanner images. Agron. J. 89, 932–940.Google Scholar
  16. Kimura K, Kikuchi S and Yamasaki S 1999 Accurate root length measurement by image analysis. Plant Soil 216, 117–127.Google Scholar
  17. Kirchhof G 1992 Measurement of root length and thickness using a hand held computer scanner. Field Crops Res. 29, 79–88.Google Scholar
  18. Kirchhof G and P Pendar 1993 Delta-T SCAN User Manual. 1990: Delta-T Devices Ltd., Cambridge.Google Scholar
  19. Kücke M, Schmid H and Spiess A 1995 A comparison of four meth-ods for measuring roots of field crops in three contrasting soils. Plant Soil 172, 63–71.Google Scholar
  20. Mackie-Dawson L and Atkinson D 1991 Methodology for the study of roots in field experiments and interpretation of results. In Plant Root Growth an Ecological Perspective. Spec. Publ. No 10. Ed. D Atkinson. pp. 25–48. Blackwell Sci. Publ., Oxford.Google Scholar
  21. Murphy S and Smucker A 1995 Evaluation of video image analyses and line intercept methods for measuring root systems of alfalfa and ryegrass. Agron. J. 87, 865–868.Google Scholar
  22. Pan W L and Bolton R P 1991 Root quantification by edge discrimination using a desktop scanner. Agron. J. 83, 1043–1052.Google Scholar
  23. Pietola L and Smucker A 1998 Fibrous carrot responses to irrigation and compaction of sandy and organic soils. Plant Soil 200, 95–105.Google Scholar
  24. Pouleur S 1995 Internal technical note no 3: Accuracy of measure-ments with Mac/ WinRHIZO TM, Regent Instruments Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Regent Instruments 2000 User Guide, Mac/ WinRHIZO V4 1, Reference, Regent Instruments Inc.Google Scholar
  26. Richner W, Liedgens M, Bürgi H, Soldati A and Stamp P 2000 Root image analysis and interpretation. In Root Methods. A Hand-book. Eds. A Smit, A Bengough, C Engels, M van Noordwijk, S Pellerin and S van de Geijn. pp. 305–342. Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Smit A L, Sprangers J F, Sablik P W and Groenwold J 1994 Automated measurement of root length with a three-dimensional high-resolution scanner and image analysis. Plant Soil 158, 145–149.Google Scholar
  28. Smucker A J, Mc Burney S and Srivastava A 1982 Quantitat-ive separation of roots from compacted soil profiles by the hydropneumatic elutriation system. Agron. J. 74, 500–503.Google Scholar
  29. Tennant D 1975 A test of a modified line intersect method of estimating root length. J. Ecol. 63, 995–1001.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • M.L. Himmelbauer
    • 1
  • ¡AFF1¿W. Loiskandl
    • 1
  • ¡AFF1¿F. Kastanek
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Hydraulics and Rural Water ManagementUniversity of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna – BOKUViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations