| Literature DB >> 31319530 |
Maurizio Teobaldelli1, Youssef Rouphael1, Giancarlo Fascella2, Valerio Cristofori3, Carlos Mario Rivera3, Boris Basile4.
Abstract
In this research, seven different models to predict leaf area (LA) of loquat (Eriobotrya japonica Lindl) were tested and evaluated. This species was chosen due to the relevant importance of its fruit as an appreciated early summer product and of its leaves and flower as a source of additional income within the nutraceutical and functional food markets. The analysis (calibration and validation) was made using a large dataset (2190) of leaf width (W), leaf length (L), and single LA collected in ten common loquat cultivars. During the analysis, the results obtained using one- and two-regressor models were also evaluated to assess the need for fast measurements against different levels of accuracy achieved during the final estimate. The analysis permitted to finally select two different models: 1) a model based on a single measurement and quadratic relationship between the single LA and W (R2 = 0.894; root mean squared error [RMSE] = 12.98) and another model 2) based, instead, on two measurements (L and W), and on the linear relationship between single LA and the product of L × W (R2 = 0.980; RMSE = 5.61). Both models were finally validated with an independent dataset (cultivar 'Tanaka') confirming the quality of fitting and accuracy already observed during the calibration phase. The analysis permitted to select two different models to be used according to the aims and accuracy required by the analysis. One, based on a single-regressor quadratic model and W (rather than L) as a proxy variable, is capable of obtaining a good quality of fitting of the single LA of loquat cultivars (R2 = 0.894; RMSE = 12.98), whereas, the other, a linear two-regressor (i.e., W and L) model, permitted to achieve the highest prediction (R2 = 0.980; RMSE = 5.61) of the observed variable, but double the time required for leaf measurement.Entities:
Keywords: Indirect measurement; bootstrap; leaf shape; model calibration; plant phenotyping; validation
Year: 2019 PMID: 31319530 PMCID: PMC6681347 DOI: 10.3390/plants8070230
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Characteristics of predictors (L, W) and dependent variable (LA) used in this study.
| Group | No. of Cultivars | No. of Leaves Sampled | L (cm) | W (cm) | L × W (cm²) | L:W | LA (cm²) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean | Min | Max | Mean | ||||
| Training set | 9 | 1890 | 10 | 33.3 | 20.17 | 2.5 | 12.1 | 6.341 | 38 | 387.2 | 133.28 | 3.25 (0.47) | 25.35 | 274 | 88.4 |
| Validation set | 1 | 300 | 12.6 | 31.8 | 20.27 | 3.4 | 11 | 6.268 | 42.84 | 337.7 | 131.66 | 3.29 (0.54) | 27.3 | 229.7 | 84.61 |
L: leaf length; W: leaf width; LA: leaf area; L:W: length to width ratio (leaf shape ratio); SE: standard error.
Characteristics of the leaf shape ratio (L:W) from different cultivars used in this study.
| Cultivar | Leaf Shape Ratio (L:W) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Max | Mean | Standard Deviation | Min | |
| Algerino | 4.349 | 2.947 | 0.357 | 1.910 |
| Champagne | 4.677 | 3.276 | 0.411 | 2.067 |
| Early Gold | 4.943 | 3.092 | 0.451 | 2.250 |
| Grosso lungo | 6.120 | 3.726 | 0.643 | 2.540 |
| Grosso tondo | 5.167 | 3.472 | 0.435 | 2.291 |
| Nespola di Ferdinando | 4.400 | 2.981 | 0.361 | 1.984 |
| Nespolone di Palermo | 4.016 | 3.014 | 0.309 | 2.250 |
| Nespolone di Trabia | 3.864 | 2.941 | 0.281 | 2.238 |
| Precoce di Palermo | 5.270 | 3.804 | 0.524 | 2.339 |
| Tanaka | 5.231 | 3.293 | 0.467 | 2.176 |
| Total | 6.120 | 3.256 | 0.528 | 1.910 |
Comparison of mean values of leaf shape ratio of Loquat with other values reported for other fruit crops in the literature.
| Species | L:W | References |
|---|---|---|
| Apple | 1.76 | [ |
| Apricot | 1.14 | [ |
| Chinese litchi | 3.19 | [ |
| Citrus | 1.85 | [ |
| Durian | 2.42 | [ |
| Hazelnut | 1.23 | [ |
| Loquat | 3.25 | This study |
| Medlar | 2.38 | [ |
| Mulberry | 2.71 | [ |
| Persimmon | 1.45 | [ |
Fitted constant (a) and coefficient (b) of the models used to estimate the loquat leaf area (LA in cm2) of single leaves from leaf length (L) and leaf width (W) measurements. The standard errors and p-value in parenthesis; L and W were in cm. All data were derived from the calibration Experiment 2015 (n = 1890 leaves).
| Model No. | Form of the Model Tested | Fitted Coefficient and Constant |
| RMSE | BIC | PRESS | SSE | Bias | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LA = | −83.292 (1.801/***) | 8.510 (0.087/***) | 0.836 | 16.14 | 15,664 | 486,356 | 484,990 | 1366 |
| 2 | LA = | 14.610 (0.291/***) | 0.086 (0.001/***) | 0.851 | 15.74 | 15,571 | 462,944 | 461,346 | 1598 |
| 3 | LA = | 2.227 (0.901/*) | 0.203 (0.002/***) | 0.853 | 15.27 | 15,458 | 435,447 | 434,241 | 1206 |
| 4 | LA = | −61.081 (1.321/***) | 23.575 (0.202/***) | 0.880 | 13.83 | 15,089 | 357,115 | 356,091 | 1024 |
| 5 | LA = | 19.217 (0.284/***) | 0.230 (0.002/***) | 0.878 | 13.82 | 15,087 | 357,303 | 355,669 | 1634 |
| 6 | LA = | 14.025 (0.666/***) | 1.741 (0.014/***) | 0.894 | 12.98 | 14,854 | 314,867 | 313,948 | 919 |
| 7 | LA = | −0.516 (0.321/ns) | 0.667 (0.002/***) | 0.980 | 5.614 | 11,732 | 58,879 | 58,694 | 185 |
Note: *** p < 0.001; * p < 0.05; ns = not significant; R = coefficient of determination; RMSE (cm2) = root mean squared error; BIC = Bayesian information criterion, PRESS = predicted residual error sum of squares; SSE = sum of squared error; Bias = differences between the PRESS and SSE values.
Figure 1Plots of predicted leaf area (PLA) using model 7 [LA = −0.516 + 0.667 × (L × W)], obtained with pooled data of nine different loquat cultivars, versus observed values of single leaf areas (OLA) of each cultivar used in the calibration experiment (data collected during 2015). Dotted lines represent the 1:1 relationship between the predicted and observed values. The solid line represents the linear regression line of each model.
Main outputs for non-parametric bootstrap analysis (replications: 1000) of models 6 and 7 fitted with data from the loquat single leaf area (LA in cm2) from leaf length (L) and width (W) measurements. Standard errors and p-value in parenthesis; L and W were in cm.
| Model N. | Dependent Variable | Number of Predictor Variables | Parameter | Original | Boot | Percent Confidence Interval | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | ( | Value | Bias | SE | Med | Skew | Kurtosis | 2.5% | 97.5% | ||||
| 6 | LA | 1 |
| 0.894 | - | 0.894 | 0.000 | 0.005 | - | - | - | - | - |
| RMSE | 12.980 | - | 12.992 | −0.012 | 2.704 | - | - | - | - | - | |||
| (intercept) | 14.025 | (***) | 14.003 | −0.022 | 0.706 | 14.021 | −0.013 | −0.335 | 12.656 | 15.395 | |||
| W2 | 1.741 | (***) | 1.742 | 0.001 | 0.018 | 1.742 | −0.038 | −0.405 | 1.707 | 1.778 | |||
| 7 | LA | 2 |
| 0.980 | - | 0.980 | 3.24 × 10−5 | 0.001 | - | - | - | - | - |
| RMSE | 5.614 | - | 5.6022 | −0.012 | 1.334 | - | - | - | - | - | |||
| (intercept) | −0.516 | (ns) | −0.526 | −0.011 | 0.350 | −0.525 | 0.013 | 0.301 | −1.211 | 0.176 | |||
| L × W | 0.667 | (***) | 0.667 | 0.000 | 0.003 | 0.667 | 0.048 | 0.202 | 0.661 | 0.673 | |||
Note: *** p < 0.001; ns = not significant; R = coefficient of determination; RMSE (cm2) = root mean squared error.
Figure 2Plot of predicted leaf area (PLA) estimated using (A) one-regressor bootstrapped model 6 [LA = 14.003 + 1.742 × W2] and (B) two-regressors bootstrapped model 7 [LA = −0.526 + 0.667 × (L × W)] versus observed values of single leaf areas (OLA) of cv. ‘Tanaka’ collected during 2016 (validation experiment). The solid line and the grey area represent, respectively, linear regression lines of the bootstrapped models 6 and 7 and generalised linear smoothing. R and root mean squared error (RMSE) are also reported. Dotted lines represent the 1:1 relationship between the predicted and observed values. The analysis of the dispersion pattern of residuals for models 6 and 7 are shown in the insets. Residuals = the difference between predicted leaf areas (PLA) estimated by model 6 or 7 (with coefficients obtained from pooled data from nine loquat cultivars, see Table 4 for more details) versus the observed leaf area of ‘Tanaka’ cultivar sampled in 2016 (validation experiment). The solid line is the mean of the differences. The broken lines are the limits of agreement, calculated as d ± 3 SD (standard deviation); where d is the mean of the differences, and SD is the standard deviation of the differences. If the differences are normally distributed, 97% of the differences in a population will lie between the limits of agreement.