Cargando…

Direct comparison of MRI and X-ray CT technologies for 3D imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification

BACKGROUND: Roots are vital to plants for soil exploration and uptake of water and nutrients. Root performance is critical for growth and yield of plants, in particular when resources are limited. Since roots develop in strong interaction with the soil matrix, tools are required that can visualize a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Metzner, Ralf, Eggert, Anja, van Dusschoten, Dagmar, Pflugfelder, Daniel, Gerth, Stefan, Schurr, Ulrich, Uhlmann, Norman, Jahnke, Siegfried
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4359488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25774207
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-015-0060-z
_version_ 1782361415891288064
author Metzner, Ralf
Eggert, Anja
van Dusschoten, Dagmar
Pflugfelder, Daniel
Gerth, Stefan
Schurr, Ulrich
Uhlmann, Norman
Jahnke, Siegfried
author_facet Metzner, Ralf
Eggert, Anja
van Dusschoten, Dagmar
Pflugfelder, Daniel
Gerth, Stefan
Schurr, Ulrich
Uhlmann, Norman
Jahnke, Siegfried
author_sort Metzner, Ralf
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Roots are vital to plants for soil exploration and uptake of water and nutrients. Root performance is critical for growth and yield of plants, in particular when resources are limited. Since roots develop in strong interaction with the soil matrix, tools are required that can visualize and quantify root growth in opaque soil at best in 3D. Two modalities that are suited for such investigations are X-ray Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Due to the different physical principles they are based on, these modalities have their specific potentials and challenges for root phenotyping. We compared the two methods by imaging the same root systems grown in 3 different pot sizes with inner diameters of 34 mm, 56 mm or 81 mm. RESULTS: Both methods successfully visualized roots of two weeks old bean plants in all three pot sizes. Similar root images and almost the same root length were obtained for roots grown in the small pot, while more root details showed up in the CT images compared to MRI. For the medium sized pot, MRI showed more roots and higher root lengths whereas at some spots thin roots were only found by CT and the high water content apparently affected CT more than MRI. For the large pot, MRI detected much more roots including some laterals than CT. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques performed equally well for pots with small diameters which are best suited to monitor root development of seedlings. To investigate specific root details or finely graduated root diameters of thin roots, CT was advantageous as it provided the higher spatial resolution. For larger pot diameters, MRI delivered higher fractions of the root systems than CT, most likely because of the strong root-to-soil contrast achievable by MRI. Since complementary information can be gathered with CT and MRI, a combination of the two modalities could open a whole range of additional possibilities like analysis of root system traits in different soil structures or under varying soil moisture. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13007-015-0060-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4359488
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43594882015-03-15 Direct comparison of MRI and X-ray CT technologies for 3D imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification Metzner, Ralf Eggert, Anja van Dusschoten, Dagmar Pflugfelder, Daniel Gerth, Stefan Schurr, Ulrich Uhlmann, Norman Jahnke, Siegfried Plant Methods Methodology BACKGROUND: Roots are vital to plants for soil exploration and uptake of water and nutrients. Root performance is critical for growth and yield of plants, in particular when resources are limited. Since roots develop in strong interaction with the soil matrix, tools are required that can visualize and quantify root growth in opaque soil at best in 3D. Two modalities that are suited for such investigations are X-ray Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Due to the different physical principles they are based on, these modalities have their specific potentials and challenges for root phenotyping. We compared the two methods by imaging the same root systems grown in 3 different pot sizes with inner diameters of 34 mm, 56 mm or 81 mm. RESULTS: Both methods successfully visualized roots of two weeks old bean plants in all three pot sizes. Similar root images and almost the same root length were obtained for roots grown in the small pot, while more root details showed up in the CT images compared to MRI. For the medium sized pot, MRI showed more roots and higher root lengths whereas at some spots thin roots were only found by CT and the high water content apparently affected CT more than MRI. For the large pot, MRI detected much more roots including some laterals than CT. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques performed equally well for pots with small diameters which are best suited to monitor root development of seedlings. To investigate specific root details or finely graduated root diameters of thin roots, CT was advantageous as it provided the higher spatial resolution. For larger pot diameters, MRI delivered higher fractions of the root systems than CT, most likely because of the strong root-to-soil contrast achievable by MRI. Since complementary information can be gathered with CT and MRI, a combination of the two modalities could open a whole range of additional possibilities like analysis of root system traits in different soil structures or under varying soil moisture. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13007-015-0060-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-03-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4359488/ /pubmed/25774207 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-015-0060-z Text en © Metzner et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology
Metzner, Ralf
Eggert, Anja
van Dusschoten, Dagmar
Pflugfelder, Daniel
Gerth, Stefan
Schurr, Ulrich
Uhlmann, Norman
Jahnke, Siegfried
Direct comparison of MRI and X-ray CT technologies for 3D imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification
title Direct comparison of MRI and X-ray CT technologies for 3D imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification
title_full Direct comparison of MRI and X-ray CT technologies for 3D imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification
title_fullStr Direct comparison of MRI and X-ray CT technologies for 3D imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification
title_full_unstemmed Direct comparison of MRI and X-ray CT technologies for 3D imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification
title_short Direct comparison of MRI and X-ray CT technologies for 3D imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification
title_sort direct comparison of mri and x-ray ct technologies for 3d imaging of root systems in soil: potential and challenges for root trait quantification
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4359488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25774207
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-015-0060-z
work_keys_str_mv AT metznerralf directcomparisonofmriandxraycttechnologiesfor3dimagingofrootsystemsinsoilpotentialandchallengesforroottraitquantification
AT eggertanja directcomparisonofmriandxraycttechnologiesfor3dimagingofrootsystemsinsoilpotentialandchallengesforroottraitquantification
AT vandusschotendagmar directcomparisonofmriandxraycttechnologiesfor3dimagingofrootsystemsinsoilpotentialandchallengesforroottraitquantification
AT pflugfelderdaniel directcomparisonofmriandxraycttechnologiesfor3dimagingofrootsystemsinsoilpotentialandchallengesforroottraitquantification
AT gerthstefan directcomparisonofmriandxraycttechnologiesfor3dimagingofrootsystemsinsoilpotentialandchallengesforroottraitquantification
AT schurrulrich directcomparisonofmriandxraycttechnologiesfor3dimagingofrootsystemsinsoilpotentialandchallengesforroottraitquantification
AT uhlmannnorman directcomparisonofmriandxraycttechnologiesfor3dimagingofrootsystemsinsoilpotentialandchallengesforroottraitquantification
AT jahnkesiegfried directcomparisonofmriandxraycttechnologiesfor3dimagingofrootsystemsinsoilpotentialandchallengesforroottraitquantification