| Literature DB >> 33829196 |
Will L Groover1, Kathy S Lawrence1.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the ability of an unmanned aerial system (UAS) equipped with a multispectral sensor to track plant health in the presence of plant-parasitic nematodes in conjunction with nematicide applications. Four nematicides were evaluated for their ability to suppress Belonolaimus longicaudatus and Meloidogyne incognita in microplots, and three nematicides were evaluated on a golf course for their ability to suppress multiple plant-parasitic nematode genera. Visual ratings, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), and Normalized Difference RedEdge Index (NDRE) were reported throughout the trial to assess plant health. B. longicaudatus and M. incognita population density was significantly lowered by nematicide treatments in microplots and correlated with visual ratings, NDVI, and NDRE plant health ratings. On the golf course, all nematicides reduced total plant-parasitic nematode population density at 28, 56, and 84 days after treatment (DAT). Visual turf quality ratings, NDVI, and NDRE were positively correlated with lower nematode population density in the majority of evaluation dates. In the microplot and golf course settings, the parameters evaluated for plant health were correlated with plant-parasitic nematode population density: visual ratings, NDVI, and NDRE improved as nematode population density declined. These results show that remote sensing has the potential to be a beneficial tool for assessing plant-parasitic nematode infected bermudagrass.Entities:
Keywords: Abamectin; Fluensulfone; Fluopyram; Furfural; NDRE; NDVI
Year: 2020 PMID: 33829196 PMCID: PMC8015358 DOI: 10.21307/jofnem-2020-109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nematol ISSN: 0022-300X Impact factor: 1.402
Pearson correlation coefficients† resulting from linear correlation of data parameters from 2018 and 2019 Meloidogyne incognita infested bermudagrass microplots in Auburn, AL.
| 2018 | 2019 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| July | August | September | July | August | September | |
| NDVIb | 0.59** | NS | NS | NS | NS | 0.63*** |
| NDREc | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | 0.66*** |
| NDVI | NS | 0.72*** | 0.93*** | 0.60*** | 0.72*** | 0.95*** |
| Turf visual quality | NS | −0.39* | NS | −0.64* | −0.39* | −0.59** |
| NDVI | NS | −0.48* | −0.76*** | NS | −0.37* | −0.82*** |
| NDRE | NS | NS | −0.61** | NS | NS | −0.76*** |
Notes: †NS, *,**,***Tests of linear correlation between variables were not significant (NS) or were significant at P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.01, or P ≤ 0.001, respectively. aTurf visual quality ratings were assigned on a 1 to 9 scale, where 1 = poorest turf quality, 6 = minimally acceptable turf quality, and 9 = exceptional turf quality; bNDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) collected using a MicaSense Rededge-M (MicaSense, Inc.; Seattle, WA) sensor; cNDRE (Normalized Difference RedEdge Index) collected using a MicaSense Rededge-M (MicaSense, Inc.; Seattle, WA) sensor.
Figure 1:Auburn University Meloidogyne incognita nematicide microplot trials for 2018 and 2019 showing M. incognita population density for 2018 (A) and 2019 (B), visual turf quality ratings for 2018 (C) and 2019 (D), NDVI ratings for 2018 (E) and 2019 (F), and NDRE values for 2018 (G) and 2019 (H). *Different from the untreated control according to the pairwise comparison of each treatment to the untreated (Tukey’s, P ≤ 0.05).
Figure 2:Auburn University Belonolaimus longicaudatus nematicide microplot trials for 2018 and 2019 showing B. longicaudatus population density for 2018 (A) and 2019 (B), visual turf quality ratings for 2018 (C) and 2019 (D), NDVI ratings for 2018 (E) and 2019 (F), and NDRE values for 2018 (G) and 2019 (H). *Different from the untreated control according to the pairwise comparison of each treatment to the untreated (Tukey’s, P ≤ 0.05).
Pearson correlation coefficients† resulting from linear correlation of data parameters from 2018 and 2019 Belanolaimus lonigcaudatus infested bermudagrass microplots in Auburn, AL.
| 2018 | 2019 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| July | August | September | July | August | September | |
| NDVIb | NS | NS | 0.63*** | NS | 0.43* | 0.41* |
| NDREc | NS | NS | 0.66*** | NS | 0.45* | 0.56** |
| NDVI | 0.60** | 0.72*** | 0.96*** | 0.91*** | 0.96*** | 0.84*** |
| Turf visual quality | −0.64*** | NS | −0.56** | NS | −0.56** | −0.54** |
| NDVI | NS | NS | −0.57** | −0.51** | −0.57*** | −0.56** |
| NDRE | NS | NS | −0.61** | −0.53** | −0.61*** | −0.63** |
Notes: †NS, *,**,***Tests of linear correlation between variables were not significant (NS) or were significant at P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.01, or P ≤ 0.001, respectively. aTurf visual quality ratings were assigned on a 1 to 9 scale, where 1 = poorest turf quality, 6 = minimally acceptable turf quality, and 9 = exceptional turf quality; bNDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) collected using a MicaSense Rededge-M (MicaSense, Inc.; Seattle, WA) sensor; cNDRE (Normalized Difference RedEdge Index) collected using a MicaSense Rededge-M (MicaSense, Inc.; Seattle, WA) sensor.
Figure 3:Plant-parasitic nematode genera identified at Montevallo Golf Course, Montevallo, AL in 2019. Genera include Hoplolaimus spp. (A), Helicotylenchulus spp. (B), Meloidogyne spp. (C), Belonolaimus longicaudatus (D), and Criconemoides spp. (E). *Different from the untreated control according to the pairwise comparison of each treatment to the untreated (Tukey’s, P ≤ 0.05).
Figure 4:Nematicide effects on total plant-parasitic nematode population density (A), visual turf quality (B), NDVI (C), and NDRE (D) at Montevallo Golf Course, Montevallo AL, 2019. *Different from the untreated control according to the pairwise comparison of each treatment to the untreated (Tukey’s, P ≤ 0.05).
Pearson correlation coefficients† resulting from linear correlation of vigor ratings and plant-parasitic nematode density from four bermudagrass putting greens treated with three different nematicides in 2019 in Montevallo, AL.
| July 22 | August 5 | August 19 | September 3 | September 16 | September 30 | October 14 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NDVIb | NS | NS | 0.63** | 0.70** | 0.62** | 0.78*** | 0.80*** |
| NDREc | NS | NS | NS | 0.59* | 0.51* | 0.67** | 0.60** |
| NDRE | NS | NS | 0.49* | 0.76*** | 0.93*** | 0.79*** | 0.68** |
| Turf visual quality | −0.64** | −0.81*** | −0.85*** | −0.84*** | |||
| NDVI | −0.47* | −0.84*** | −0.80*** | −0.82*** | |||
| NDRE | NS | −0.59* | −0.70** | −0.70** | |||
Notes: †NS, *,**,***Tests of linear correlation between variables were not significant (NS) or were significant at P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.01, or P ≤ 0.001, respectively. aTurf visual quality ratings were assigned on a 1 to 9 scale, where 1 = poorest turf quality, 6 = minimally acceptable turf quality, and 9 = exceptional turf quality; bNDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) collected using a MicaSense Rededge-M (MicaSense, Inc.; Seattle, WA) sensor; cNDRE (Normalized Difference RedEdge Index) collected using a MicaSense Rededge-M (MicaSense, Inc.; Seattle, WA) sensor.