2022
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2022.1041404
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Root system architecture and environmental flux analysis in mature crops using 3D root mesocosms

Abstract: Current methods of root sampling typically only obtain small or incomplete sections of root systems and do not capture their true complexity. To facilitate the visualization and analysis of full-sized plant root systems in 3-dimensions, we developed customized mesocosm growth containers. While highly scalable, the design presented here uses an internal volume of 45 ft3 (1.27 m3), suitable for large crop and bioenergy grass root systems to grow largely unconstrained. Furthermore, they allow for the excavation a… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 61 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The use of 3D imaging techniques in root phenotyping is promising because of their ability to leverage multiple views of a given scene to resolve occlusion in dense root architectures (Bucksch, 2014; Clark et al., 2011; Dowd et al., 2022; Topp et al., 2013). However, 3D imaging methods, such as X‐ray CT (Shao et al., 2021) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; van Dusschoten et al., 2016), are 100–1000 times more expensive than multicamera systems (Liu et al., 2021), and do not meet the needs of large‐scale field studies due to the high operation cost and difficulties in deploying in the field environment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of 3D imaging techniques in root phenotyping is promising because of their ability to leverage multiple views of a given scene to resolve occlusion in dense root architectures (Bucksch, 2014; Clark et al., 2011; Dowd et al., 2022; Topp et al., 2013). However, 3D imaging methods, such as X‐ray CT (Shao et al., 2021) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; van Dusschoten et al., 2016), are 100–1000 times more expensive than multicamera systems (Liu et al., 2021), and do not meet the needs of large‐scale field studies due to the high operation cost and difficulties in deploying in the field environment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%