Cargando…
A practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize
BACKGROUND: The fraction of intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (fPARi) is typically described with a non-linear function of leaf area index (LAI) and k, the light extinction coefficient. The parameter k is used to make statistical inference, as an input into crop models, and for phenoty...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8196512/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34118957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-021-00753-2 |
_version_ | 1783706704345563136 |
---|---|
author | Lacasa, Josefina Hefley, Trevor J. Otegui, María E. Ciampitti, Ignacio A. |
author_facet | Lacasa, Josefina Hefley, Trevor J. Otegui, María E. Ciampitti, Ignacio A. |
author_sort | Lacasa, Josefina |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The fraction of intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (fPARi) is typically described with a non-linear function of leaf area index (LAI) and k, the light extinction coefficient. The parameter k is used to make statistical inference, as an input into crop models, and for phenotyping. It may be estimated using a variety of statistical techniques that differ in assumptions, which ultimately influences the numerical value k and associated uncertainty estimates. A systematic search of peer-reviewed publications for maize (Zea Mays L.) revealed: (i) incompleteness in reported estimation techniques; and (ii) that most studies relied on dated techniques with unrealistic assumptions, such as log-transformed linear models (LogTLM) or normally distributed data. These findings suggest that knowledge of the variety and trade-offs among statistical estimation techniques is lacking, which hinders the use of modern approaches such as Bayesian estimation (BE) and techniques with appropriate assumptions, e.g. assuming beta-distributed data. RESULTS: The parameter k was estimated for seven maize genotypes with five different methods: least squares estimation (LSE), LogTLM, maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) assuming normal distribution, MLE assuming beta distribution, and BE assuming beta distribution. Methods were compared according to the appropriateness for statistical inference, point estimates’ properties, and predictive performance. LogTLM produced the worst predictions for fPARi, whereas both LSE and MLE with normal distribution yielded unrealistic predictions (i.e. fPARi < 0 or > 1) and the greatest coefficients for k. Models with beta-distributed fPARi (either MLE or Bayesian) were recommended to obtain point estimates. CONCLUSION: Each estimation technique has underlying assumptions which may yield different estimates of k and change inference, like the magnitude and rankings among genotypes. Thus, for reproducibility, researchers must fully report the statistical model, assumptions, and estimation technique. LogTLMs are most frequently implemented, but should be avoided to estimate k. Modeling fPARi with a beta distribution was an absent practice in the literature but is recommended, applying either MLE or BE. This workflow and technique comparison can be applied to other plant canopy models, such as the vertical distribution of nitrogen, carbohydrates, photosynthesis, etc. Users should select the method balancing benefits and tradeoffs matching the purpose of the study. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13007-021-00753-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8196512 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81965122021-06-15 A practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize Lacasa, Josefina Hefley, Trevor J. Otegui, María E. Ciampitti, Ignacio A. Plant Methods Methodology BACKGROUND: The fraction of intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (fPARi) is typically described with a non-linear function of leaf area index (LAI) and k, the light extinction coefficient. The parameter k is used to make statistical inference, as an input into crop models, and for phenotyping. It may be estimated using a variety of statistical techniques that differ in assumptions, which ultimately influences the numerical value k and associated uncertainty estimates. A systematic search of peer-reviewed publications for maize (Zea Mays L.) revealed: (i) incompleteness in reported estimation techniques; and (ii) that most studies relied on dated techniques with unrealistic assumptions, such as log-transformed linear models (LogTLM) or normally distributed data. These findings suggest that knowledge of the variety and trade-offs among statistical estimation techniques is lacking, which hinders the use of modern approaches such as Bayesian estimation (BE) and techniques with appropriate assumptions, e.g. assuming beta-distributed data. RESULTS: The parameter k was estimated for seven maize genotypes with five different methods: least squares estimation (LSE), LogTLM, maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) assuming normal distribution, MLE assuming beta distribution, and BE assuming beta distribution. Methods were compared according to the appropriateness for statistical inference, point estimates’ properties, and predictive performance. LogTLM produced the worst predictions for fPARi, whereas both LSE and MLE with normal distribution yielded unrealistic predictions (i.e. fPARi < 0 or > 1) and the greatest coefficients for k. Models with beta-distributed fPARi (either MLE or Bayesian) were recommended to obtain point estimates. CONCLUSION: Each estimation technique has underlying assumptions which may yield different estimates of k and change inference, like the magnitude and rankings among genotypes. Thus, for reproducibility, researchers must fully report the statistical model, assumptions, and estimation technique. LogTLMs are most frequently implemented, but should be avoided to estimate k. Modeling fPARi with a beta distribution was an absent practice in the literature but is recommended, applying either MLE or BE. This workflow and technique comparison can be applied to other plant canopy models, such as the vertical distribution of nitrogen, carbohydrates, photosynthesis, etc. Users should select the method balancing benefits and tradeoffs matching the purpose of the study. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13007-021-00753-2. BioMed Central 2021-06-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8196512/ /pubmed/34118957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-021-00753-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Methodology Lacasa, Josefina Hefley, Trevor J. Otegui, María E. Ciampitti, Ignacio A. A practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize |
title | A practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize |
title_full | A practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize |
title_fullStr | A practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize |
title_full_unstemmed | A practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize |
title_short | A practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize |
title_sort | practical guide to estimating the light extinction coefficient with nonlinear models—a case study on maize |
topic | Methodology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8196512/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34118957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13007-021-00753-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lacasajosefina apracticalguidetoestimatingthelightextinctioncoefficientwithnonlinearmodelsacasestudyonmaize AT hefleytrevorj apracticalguidetoestimatingthelightextinctioncoefficientwithnonlinearmodelsacasestudyonmaize AT oteguimariae apracticalguidetoestimatingthelightextinctioncoefficientwithnonlinearmodelsacasestudyonmaize AT ciampittiignacioa apracticalguidetoestimatingthelightextinctioncoefficientwithnonlinearmodelsacasestudyonmaize AT lacasajosefina practicalguidetoestimatingthelightextinctioncoefficientwithnonlinearmodelsacasestudyonmaize AT hefleytrevorj practicalguidetoestimatingthelightextinctioncoefficientwithnonlinearmodelsacasestudyonmaize AT oteguimariae practicalguidetoestimatingthelightextinctioncoefficientwithnonlinearmodelsacasestudyonmaize AT ciampittiignacioa practicalguidetoestimatingthelightextinctioncoefficientwithnonlinearmodelsacasestudyonmaize |