Screening in plant factories: a review of non-invasive plant monitoring techniques for closed regulated agroecosystems

Under the conditions of growing crops in plant factories, timely information about the physiological state of plants makes it possible to maintain crop yields at a high level. In crop production, non-invasive methods of plant diagnostics are most widely used, which helps identify plant stress conditions at an early stage. In the theoretical study applied to plant factories, the authors compared electrophysical monitoring methods (the measurement of biopotential and bioimpedance), thermography methods (the method of registration of xylem sap flow and infrared thermography), optical methods (the measurement of reflective characteristics of leaves, hyper- and multispectral imaging), and the method for measuring chlorophyll fluorescence. The studied methods were classified and analyzed according to several criteria: measurable indicators, the assessment of plant parameters, the portability of the measuring instrument, the ability to scan at the canopy level. It was concluded that non-invasive methods for diagnosing the physiological state of plants are capable of signaling negative changes at an early stage, provide for indirect assessing plant stress, transpiration, photosynthesis, pigment and elemental composition, and the electrical resistance of tissues. Among the technologies for non-invasive diagnostics of the physiological state of plants for closed regulated agroecosystems, the method of spectral analysis of plant leaves, in particular, spectral visualization, and the fluorescence method are particularly effective. In further studies to evaluate photosynthesis and compose “light recipes”, the authors are planning to compare the fluorescence method and the spectral imaging method in practical conditions.

1. Kozai T. Resource use efficiency of closed plant production system with artificial light: Concept, estimation and application to plant factory. Proceedings of the Japan Academy, Ser. B, Physical and Biological Sciences. 2013; 89(10). https://doi.org/10.2183/pjab.89.447

2. Graamans L., Baeza. E., van den Dobbelsteen A., Tsafaras I., Stanghellini C. Plant factories versus greenhouses: Comparison of resource use efficiency. Agricultural Systems. 2018; 160: 31-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.11.003

3. Ahmad P., Ahanger M.A., Alyemeni M.N., Alam P. Effect of Light Intensity on Photosynthesis. Photosynthesis, Productivity and Environmental Stress. 2019: 65-73. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119501800.ch4

4. Demmig-Adams B.; Adams III W.W. Photoinhibition. Encyclopedia of Applied Plant Sciences. 2017; 1: 78-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394807-6.00093-9

5. Jócsák I., Végvári G., Vozáry E. Electrical impedance measurement on plants: a review with some insights to other fields. Theoretical and Experimental Plant Physiology. 2019; 31: 359-375.

6. Jamaludin D., Abd Aziz S., Ahmad D., Z.E. Jaafar, H. Impedance analysis of Labisia pumila plant water status. Information Processing in Agriculture. 2015; 2(3-4): 161-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inpa.2015.07.004

7. Muñoz-Huerta R.F., Ortiz-Melendez A. De J., Guevara-Gonzalez R.G. et al. An analysis of electrical impedance measurements applied for plant n status estimation in lettuce (Lactuca sativa). Sensors. 2014; 14(7): 11492-11503. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140711492

8. Ben Hamed K., Zorrig W., Hamzaoui A.H. Electrical impedance spectroscopy: A tool to investigate the responses of one halophyte to different growth and stress conditions. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 2016; 123: 376-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2016.03.006

9. Ozier-Lafontaine H., Bajazet T. Analysis of root growth by impedance spectroscopy (EIS). Plant and Soil. 2005; 277: 299-313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-005-7531-3

10. Repo T., Korhonen A., Laukkanen M., Lehto T., Silvennoinen R. Detecting mycorrhizal colonisation in Scots pine roots using electrical impedance spectra. Biosystems Engineering. 2014; 121: 139-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2014.02.014

11. Hasegawa Y., Puglisi D., Spetz A.L. Development of agriculture support system using plant bioelectric potential responses and gas sensor. International Journal of Food and Biosystems Engineering. 2017; 5(1): 44-51.

12. Kuleshova T.E., Bushlyakova A.V., Gall’, N.R. Non-invasive measurement of plants’ bioelectric potentials. Pis’ma v ZHTF. 2019; 45(5): 6-8. https://doi.org/10.21883/PJTF.2019.05.47387.17541 (In Rus.)

13. Taniguchi H., Akiyama K., Fujie T. Biopotential Measurement of plant leaves with ultra-light and flexible conductive polymer nanosheets. CSJ Journals. 2020; 93(8): 1007-1013. https://doi.org/10.1246/bcsj.20200064

14. EDN: ZMWFMD Odintsova V.A. Phytomonitoring in the study of water exchange and temperature regime of sweet cherry. Nauchnye trudy SKFNTsSVV. 2017; 13: 55-58. (In Rus.)

15. Thompson M.V., Zwieniecki M.A. 11 – The role of potassium in long distance transport in plants. Physiological Ecology. 2005: 221-240. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012088457-5/50013-7

16. Amelin A.V., Chekalin E.I., Zaikin V.V., Sal’nikova N.B. Intensity of photosynthesis and transpiration of leaves in plants Glycine Max (L.) MERR. Vestnik agrarnoy nauki. 2017; 6(69): 3-8. https://doi.org/10.15217/issn2587-666X.2017.6.3 (In Rus.)

17. Guidi L., Degl’Innocenti E. Imaging of chlorophyll a fluorescence: A tool to study abiotic stress in plants. Abiotic Stress in Plants – Mechanisms and Adaptations. 2010. https://doi.org/10.5772/22281

18. Perez-Bueno M.L., Pineda M., Baron M. Phenotyping plant responses to biotic stress by chlorophyll fluorescence imaging. Front. Plant Sci. 2019; 10: 1135. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01135

19. Kalaji H.M., Jajoo A., Oukarroum A. et al. Chlorophyll a fluorescence as a tool to monitor physiological status of plants under abiotic stress conditions. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum. 2016; 38: 102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-016-2113-y

20. Lichtenthaler H. Multi-colour fluorescence imaging of photosynthetic activity and plant stress. Photosynthetica. 2021; 59 (SI): 364-380. https://doi.org/10.32615/ps.2021.020

21. Kim C., van Iersel M.W. Morphological and physiological screening to predict lettuce biomass production in controlled environment agriculture. Remote Sens. 2022; 14 (2): 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14020316

22. Seaton G.R., Walker D.A. Chlorophyll fluorescence as a measure of photosynthetic carbon assimilation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 1990; 242: 29-35. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1990.0099

23. Zaiyou J., Xiuren Z., Jing T. Photosynthetic and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics of Isodon rubescens (Hemsley) H. Hara. Scientific Reports. 2020; 10: 10043. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67192-2

24. EDN: PLYYEN Burynin D.A., Smirnov A.A. Review of technical means for non-invasive monitoring of the state of plants using hyperspectral imaging methods. Elektrotekhnologii i elektrooborudovanie v APK. 2021; 68(2): 54-61. (In Rus.)

25. Mishra P., Lohumi S., Ahmad Khan H., Nordon A. Close-range hyperspectral imaging of whole plants for digital phenotyping: Recent applications and illumination correction approaches. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 2020; 178: 105780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105780

26. Lichtenthaler H.K., Gitelson A., Lang M. Non-destructive determination of chlorophyll content of leaves of a green and an aurea mutant of tobacco by reflectance measurements. Journal of Plant Physiology. 1996; 148 (3-4): 483-493. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0176-1617(96)80283-5

27. Hernández-Clemente R., Navarro-Cerrillo R.M., Zarco-Tejada P.J. Carotenoid content estimation in a heterogeneous conifer forest using narrow-band indices and PROSPECT + DART simulations. Remote Sensing of Environment. 2012; 127: 298-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.09.014

28. Gitelson A.A., Merzlyak M.N., Chivkunova O.B. Optical properties and nondestructive estimation of anthocyanin content in plant leaves. Photochemistry and Photobiology. 2001; 74 (1): 38-45. https://doi.org/ 10.1562/0031-8655(2001)074<0038: opaneo>2.0.co;2.

29. Pattanayak G., Biswal A., Reddy V.S., Tripathy B.C. Light-dependent regulation of chlorophyll b biosynthesis in chlorophyllide a oxygenase overexpressing tobacco plants. Biochemical and biophysical research communications. 2005; 326(2): 466-471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.11.049

30. Gamon J.А., Peñuelas J., Field C.В. А narrow-waveband spectral index that tracks diurnal changes in photosynthetic efficiency. Remote Sensing of Environment. 1992; 41: 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4257(92)90059-S

31. Proshkin Y.A., Smirnov A.A., Semenova N.A., Dorokhov A.S., Burynin D.A., Ivanitskikh A.S., Panchenko V.A. Assessment of ultraviolet impact on main pigment content in purple basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) by the spectrometric method and hyperspectral images analysis. Applied Sciences. 2021; 11 (19): 8804. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11198804

32. Pineda M., Barón M., Pérez-Bueno M.-L. Thermal imaging for plant stress detection and phenotyping. Remote Sensing. 2021; 13 (1): 68. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13010068

33. Jones H.G. Application of thermal imaging and infrared sensing in plant physiology and ecophysiology. Advances in Botanical Research. 2004; 41: 107-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2296(04)41003-9

34. Oerke E.-C., Steiner U. Potential of digital thermography for disease control. Precision Crop Protection – the Challenge and Use of Heterogeneity. 2010. Р. 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9277-9_11