4.7 Article

Canopy-Level Photochemical Reflectance Index from Hyperspectral Remote Sensing and Leaf-Level Non-Photochemical Quenching as Early Indicators of Water Stress in Maize

Journal

REMOTE SENSING
Volume 9, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs9080794

Keywords

non-photochemical quenching; photochemical quenching; photochemical reflectance index; water stress; soil moisture

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2016YFA0600202]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41671343, 41503070]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of photochemical reflectance index (PRI) and non-photochemical quenching (NPQ) for assessing water stress in maize for the purpose of developing remote sensing techniques for monitoring water deficits in crops. Leaf-level chlorophyll fluorescence and canopy-level PRI were measured concurrently over a maize field with five different irrigation treatments, ranging from 20% to 90% of the field capacity (FC). Significant correlations were found between leaf-level NPQ (NPQ(leaf)) and the ratio of chlorophyll to carotenoid content (Chl/Car) (R-2 = 0.71, p < 0.01) and between NPQ(leaf) and the actual photochemical efficiency of photosystem II (Delta F/F-m') (R-2 = 0.81, p < 0.005). At the early growing stage, both canopy-level PRI and NPQ(leaf) are good indicators of water stress (R-2 = 0.65 and p < 0.05; R-2 = 0.63 and p < 0.05, respectively). For assessment of extreme water stress on plant growth, a relationship is also established between the quantum yield of photochemistry in PSII (Phi P) and the quantum yield of fluorescence (Phi F) as determined from photochemical quenching (PQ) and non-photochemical quenching (NPQ(leaf)) of excitation energy at different water stress levels. These results would be helpful in monitoring soil water stress on crops at large scales using remote sensing techniques.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available