Using Conditional Probability and a Nonlinear Kriging Technique to Predict Potato Early Die Caused by Verticllium Dahliae

  • Luke SteereEmail author
  • Noah Rosenzweig
  • William Kirk
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 582)


Verticillium dahliae is a plant pathogenic fungus that can be devastating to commercial potato production. Potato growers in the state of Michigan have experienced yield declines and decreased marketability as a direct result of the persistence of V. dahliae in soil. A team of researchers at Michigan State University conducted a soil evaluation using geostatistics and geographic information systems (GIS). The use of a nonlinear Kriging method allowed the team to predict where infection may occur. Nonlinear Kriging is a useful tool for creating conditional probability maps based on a threshold, which can be built into the equation. Verticillium dahliae has an inoculum threshold needed to cause infection in a potato plant. Using this threshold, maps can be created based on a probability of any point in space being greater than the threshold. The methods used in this paper show how geostatistics can be a valuable tool for commercial growers.


Geostatistics Indicator Kriging Potato early die Soilborne disease 



This research was supported by funding provided by the Michigan Potato Industry Commission through a USDA NIFA Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (Grant #791N1300). Additional funding and resources were provided by the Michigan Potato Industry Commission and the Michigan State University Project GREEEN (Generating Research and Extension to Meet Economic and Environmental Needs). The authors wish to thank Rob Schafer and the potato growers of Michigan.


  1. 1.
    Miller, J., Hopkins, B., Johnson, D.: Checklist for a holistic potato health management plan. In: Potato Health Management, Second Edition, pp. 7–10 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wilson, C.M.: Roots: Miracles Below. Doubleday, New York (1968)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    González-Rodríguez, R.M., et al.: Determination of 23 pesticide residues in leafy vegetables using gas chromatography–ion trap mass spectrometry and analyte protectants. J. Chromatogr. A 1196, 100–109 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stevenson, W.R., et al.: Compendium of Potato Diseases. American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martin, M., Riedel, R., Rowe, R.: Verticillium dahliae and Pratylenchus penetrans: interactions in the early dying complex of potato in Ohio. Phytopathology 72(6), 640–644 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nicot, P., Rouse, D.: Relationship between soil inoculum density of Verticillium dahliae and systemic colonization of potato stems in commercial fields over time (1987).
  7. 7.
    Powelson, M.L., Rowe, R.C.: Biology and management of early dying of potatoes. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 31(1), 111–126 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heermann, D., et al.: Interdisciplinary irrigated precision farming research. Precision Agric. 3(1), 47–61 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Adrian, A.M., Dillard, C., Mask, P.: GIS in agriculture. Geograph. Inf. Syst. Bus., 324–342 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kerry, R., et al.: Disaggregation of legacy soil data using area to point kriging for mapping soil organic carbon at the regional scale. Geoderma 170, 347–358 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kravchenko, A., Bullock, D.G.: A comparative study of interpolation methods for mapping soil properties. Agron. J. 91(3), 393–400 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mueller, T., et al.: Map quality for ordinary kriging and inverse distance weighted interpolation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 68(6), 2042–2047 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yost, R., Uehara, G., Fox, R.: Geostatistical analysis of soil chemical properties of large land areas. II. Kriging. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46(5), 1033–1037 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eldeiry, A.A., Garcia, L.A.: Using nonlinear geostatistical models in estimating the impact of salinity on crop yield variability. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 77(5), 1795–1805 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goovaerts, P.: Comparative performance of indicator algorithms for modeling conditional probability distribution functions. Math. Geol. 26(3), 389–411 (1994)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smith, J.L., Halvorson, J.J., Papendick, R.I.: Using multiple-variable indicator kriging for evaluating soil quality. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57(3), 743–749 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nicot, P., Rouse, D.: Precision and bias of three quantitative soil assays for Verticillium dahliae. Phytopathology 77(6), 875–881 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kabir, Z., Bhat, R., Subbarao, K.: Comparison of media for recovery of Verticillium dahliae from soil. Plant Dis. 88(1), 49–55 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rogerson, P.A.: Statistical Methods for Geography: a Student’s Guide. Sage Publications, London (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tobler, W.R., A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region. Economic geography, 1970: p. 234–240Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Goovaerts, P.: Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1997)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Journel, A.G.: Nonparametric estimation of spatial distributions. J. Int. Assoc. Math. Geol. 15(3), 445–468 (1983)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Solow, A.R.: Mapping by simple indicator kriging. Math. Geol. 18(3), 335–352 (1986)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ramos, P., Monego, M., Carvalho, S.: Spatial distribution of a sewage outfall plume observed with an AUV. In: Oceans 2008: Proceedings of the MTS-IEEE Conference, Quebec City, QC, Canada (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Robinson, T., Metternicht, G.: Testing the performance of spatial interpolation techniques for mapping soil properties. Comput. Electron. Agric. 50(2), 97–108 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wilhelm, S., Paulus, A.O.: How soil fumigation benefits the California strawberry industry. Plant Dis. 64(3), 264–270 (1980)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wilhelm, S., Storkan, R., Sagen, J.: Verticillium wilt of strawberry controlled by fumi-gation of soil with chloropicrin and chloropicrin-methyl bromide mixtures. Phytopathology 51(11), 744 (1961)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ebben, M.H., Gandy, D.G., Spencer, D.: Toxicity of methyl bromide to soil-borne fungi. Plant. Pathol. 32(4), 429–433 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thomas, W.: Methyl bromide: effective pest management tool and environmental threat. J. Nematology 28(4S), 586 (1996)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hayat, R., et al.: Soil beneficial bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion: a review. Ann. Microbiol. 60(4), 579–598 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Michigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations