Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Direct Comparison of Remote Sensing Approaches for High-Throughput Phenotyping in Plant Breeding

Open access
Tattaris, Maria, Reynolds, Matthew P., Chapman, Scott C.·2016·Frontiers in Plant Science

Abstract

Remote sensing (RS) of plant canopies permits non-intrusive, high-throughput monitoring of plant physiological characteristics. This study compared three RS approaches using a low flying UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle), with that of proximal sensing, and satellite-based imagery. Two physiological traits were considered, canopy temperature (CT) and a vegetation index (NDVI), to determine the most viable approaches for large scale crop genetic improvement. The UAV-based platform achieves plot-level resolution while measuring several hundred plots in one mission via high-resolution thermal and multispectral imagery measured at altitudes of 30-100 m. The satellite measures multispectral imagery from an altitude of 770 km. Information was compared with proximal measurements using IR thermometers and an NDVI sensor at a distance of 0.5-1 m above plots. For robust comparisons, CT and NDVI were assessed on panels of elite cultivars under irrigated and drought conditions, in different thermal regimes, and on un-adapted genetic resources under water deficit. Correlations between airborne data and yield/biomass at maturity were generally higher than equivalent proximal correlations. NDVI was derived from high-resolution satellite imagery for only larger sized plots (8.5 × 2.4 m) due to restricted pixel density. Results support use of UAV-based RS techniques for high-throughput phenotyping for both precision and efficiency.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpls.2016.01131

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

  • Field high-throughput phenotyping: the new crop breeding frontier

    Araus, J. L., & Cairns, J. E. (2014) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2013.09.008 · Cited by 1,817 · cited 4×

    “…Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nigeria Anyela Valentina Camargo Rodriguez, Aberystwyth University, UK *Correspondence: Matthew P. Reynolds m.reynolds@cgiar.org Specialty section: This article was submitted to Crop Science and Horticulture, a section of the journal Frontiers in…”
    BackgroundMethodInfluential

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 295

Metadata

Authors
Tattaris, M., Reynolds, M. P., & Chapman, S. C.
Venue
Frontiers in Plant Science
Published
2016-08-03
Volume
7
Pages
1131-1131
ISSN
1664-462X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2495898644
Cited by
295
References
1
FWCI
22.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Direct Comparison of Remote Sensing Approaches for High-Throughput Phenotyping in Plant Breeding. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fpls.2016.01131
The paper
Tattaris, M., Reynolds, M. P., & Chapman, S. C. (2016). A Direct Comparison of Remote Sensing Approaches for High-Throughput Phenotyping in Plant Breeding. Frontiers in Plant Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01131

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.