Loading...

Application of a Visible/Near-infrared Spectrometer in Identifying Flower and Non-flower Buds on ‘Fuji’ Apple Trees

DOI: 10.18805/IJARe.A-655    | Article Id: A-655 | Page : 214-219
Citation :- Application of a Visible/Near-infrared Spectrometer in Identifying Flower and Non-flower Buds on ‘Fuji’ Apple Trees.Indian Journal of Agricultural Research.2022.(56): 214-219
Alisher Botirov, Songhao An, Osamu Arakawa, Shuhuai Zhang oarakawa@hirosaki-u.ac.jp
Address : Faculty of Agriculture and Life Science, Hirosaki University, Hirosaki, Aomori 036-8560, Japan.
Submitted Date : 18-05-2021
Accepted Date : 4-09-2021

Abstract

Background: Forecasting bud physiologic conditions can help ‘Fuji’ apple farmers manage their orchards more efficiently. Being able to determine the nature of a bud before bud burst is one such forecast that could be of use to these ‘Fuji’ growers. The aim of this research project was to determine if a device, a visible/near-infrared spectrometer, could be employed to determine whether a bud is a flower or non-flower bud without destroying the bud. 
Methods: Experiments were conducted on buds taken from a ‘Fuji’ apple tree, beginning on January 29 through to March 31, 2021, three days before bud burst. The data from the visible/near-infrared spectrometer clarified whether a bud was a flower or a non-flower bud. The Spectro data Classification Learner App proved to be an accurate classification method to analyze flower and non-flower bud Spectro data.
Result: Three days before bud burst, the chlorophyll content levels of the non-flower buds were markedly higher (P≤0.05) than those of the flower bud, which explains why the visible border of the near-infrared spectrometer might have been changed by the chlorophyll content of buds. The visible and near-infrared bands of the buds showed that the Spectro data of the non-flower buds were higher than those of the flower buds when measurements were made three days before bud burst. Three days before bud burst Cubic KNN of KNN classifier analyzed flower and non-flower buds smoothly. Spectro data were labeled as accuracy 75.9%, sensitivity 86% and specificity 67%. The results that were obtained suggest that farmers could use a visible/near-infrared spectrometer to identify flower and non-flower buds in their orchards, without damaging the buds, three days before bud burst.

Keywords

Bud burst Chlorophyll content Classifier learner app Non-destructive method

References

  1. Agati, G., Mazzinghi, P., Fusi, F., Ambrosini, I. (1995). The F685/F730 Chlorophyll fluorescence ratio as a tool in plant physiology: Response to physiological and environmental factors. Journal of Plant Physiology. 145(3): 228-238. 
  2. Botirov, A. and Arakawa, O. (2021). Root growth changes in the winter planting of young ‘Miyabi Fuji’ apple trees. International Journal of Horticultural Science and Technology. 8(3): 227-233.
  3. Buban, T., Faust, M. (1982). Flower bud induction in apple trees: Internal control and differentiation. Horticultural Review. 4: 174-203.
  4. Bubán, T., Faust, M. (1995). New aspects of bud dormancy in apple trees. Acta Horticulturae. pp. 105-112. 
  5. Crowley, T.E. (2020). Absorption of ultraviolet, visible and infrared radiation. Purification and Characterization of Secondary Metabolites. 33-48. 
  6. Gitelson, A.A., Gritz, Y., Merzlyak, M.N. (2003). Relationships between leaf chlorophyll content and spectral reflectance and algorithms for non-destructive chlorophyll assessment in higher plant leaves. Journal of Plant Physiology. 160(3): 271-282. 
  7. Gogoi, N.K., Deka, B. and Bora, L.C. (2018) Remote sensing and its use in detection and monitoring plant diseases: A review. Agricultural Reviews. 39: 307-313. 
  8. Manley, M., Baeten, V. (2018). Spectroscopic Technique: Near Infrared (NIR) Spectroscopy. In Modern Techniques for Food Authentication (2nd ed.).
  9. Orlova, Y., Linker, R., Spektor, B. (2020). Forecasting the potential of apple fruitlet drop by in-situ Vis-NIR spectroscopy. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 169: 105225. 
  10. Osborne, B.G. (2000). Near-infrared spectroscopy in food analysis. Encyclopedia of Analytical Chemistry. 1-14. 
  11. Palta, J.P. (1990). Leaf chlorophyll content. Remote Sensing Reviews. 5(1): 207-213. 
  12. Penuelas, J., Pinol J., Ogaya R., Filella I. (1997). Estimation of plant water concentration by the reflectance Water Index WI (R900/R970). International Journal of Remote Sensing. 18(13): 2869-875. 
  13. Pratt, C. (1988). Apple flower and fruit: Morphology and anatomy. Horticultural Reviews: 273-308. 
  14. Rathore, M., Prakash, H.G. and Bala, S. (2021). Evaluation of the nutritional quality and health benefits of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) by using new technology in agriculture (Near Infra-red spectroscopy-2500). Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research. 40(1): 123-126. 
  15. Rojas-Grau, M.A., Sobrino-Lopez, A., Tapia, M.S., Belloso, O.M. (2006). Browning inhibition in fresh-cut ‘Fuji’ apple slices by natural antibrowning agents. J. Food Sci. 71: 59-65. 
  16. Soejima, J., Bessho, H., Tsuchiya, S., Komori, S., Abe, K., Kotoda, N. (1998). Breeding of Fuji apples and performance on JM rootstocks. Compact Fruit Tree. 31(1): 22-24.
  17. Venkatesan, S., Masilamani, P., Janaki, P., Eevera, T., Sundareswaran, S. and Rajkumar, P. (2020). Role of near-infrared spectroscopy in seed quality evaluation: A Review. Agricultural Reviews. 41(2): 106-115.
  18. Vitola J., Pozo F., Tibaduiza D. A., Anaya M. (2017). A sensor data fusion system based on k-nearest neighbor pattern classification for structural health monitoring applications. Sensors (Switzerland): 17(2).

Global Footprints