Precision Agriculture

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 723–745 | Cite as

Prediction of plant water status in almond and walnut trees using a continuous leaf monitoring system

  • R. DhillonEmail author
  • F. Rojo
  • S. K. Upadhyaya
  • J. Roach
  • R. Coates
  • M. Delwiche


Persistent drought conditions in the Central valley of California demands efficient irrigation scheduling tools such as precision or variable rate irrigation (VRI). To assist VRI scheduling, an experiment was conducted in almond and walnut orchards using a sensor system called ‘leaf monitor’, which was developed at UC Davis to detect plant water status. A Modified Crop Water Stress Index (MCWSI) was calculated to quantify plant water status using leaf temperature and environmental data collected by the leaf monitor. This technique also took into account spatio-temporal variability of plant water status. Stem water potential (SWP), which is considered a standard method for determining plant water stress (PWS), was also measured simultaneously. Relationships between measured deficit stem water potential (DSWP), which is the difference between SWP and the saturated baseline, and MCWSI were developed for both crops based on data collected during the 2013 and 2014 growing seasons. A linear relationship was found in the case of walnut crop with a coefficient of determination (r2) value of 0.67. A quadratic relationship was found in the case of almonds with a coefficient of multiple determination (R2) value of 0.75. Moreover, these results highlighted that at lower PWS of below 0.5 MPa of DSWP, almonds crops did not show any decrease in transpiration rate. However, when the stress level exceeded 0.5 MPa of DSWP, transpiration rate tended to decrease. On the other hand, walnut crop showed decrease in transpiration rate even at low PWS of below 0.5 MPa of DSWP. Temporal variability was noticed in PWS as it was found that coefficients of saturation baseline used for MCWSI method changed significantly throughout the season. MCWSI values estimated before an irrigation event was used to calculate the irrigation amount for low frequency variable rate irrigation (VRI) based on the relationship found between MCWSI and DSWP, and VRI led to an average 39% reduction in water usage as compared to the fixed 100% ET replacement irrigation method for all trees. Based on the results, leaf monitor showed potential for use as an irrigation scheduling tool.


Leaf monitor Modified CWSI Irrigation scheduling Variable rate irrigation (VRI) Stem water potential (SWP) Nut crops 



The authors acknowledge National Institute of Food and Agriculture grant programs (SCRI-USDA-NIFA No. 2010-01213) for the financial support to conduct these research activities.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Mention of trade names of products do not constitute endorsement of the products by the authors or the University of California Davis.


  1. Alchanatis, V., Cohen, Y., Cohen, S., Moller, M., Sprinstin, M., Meron, M., et al. (2009). Evaluation of different approaches for estimating and mapping crop water status in cotton with thermal imaging. Precision Agriculture, 11(1), 27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alderfasi, A. A., & Nielsen, D. C. (2001). Use of crop water stress index for monitoring water status and scheduling irrigation in wheat. Agricultural Water Management, 47(1), 69–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bellvert, J., Zarco-Tejada, P. J., Girona, J., & Fereres, E. (2013). Mapping crop water stress index in a ‘Pinot-noir’ vineyard: Comparing ground measurements with thermal remote sensing imagery from an unmanned aerial vehicle. Precision Agriculture, 15(4), 361–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ben-Gal, A., Dilia, K., Nurit, A., van Halsema, G. E., Yermiyahu, U., Yafe, A., et al. (2010). Whole-tree water balance and indicators for short-term drought stress in non-bearing ‘Barnea’ olives. Agricultural Water Management, 98(1), 124–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bréda, N., & Granier, A. (1996). Intra-and interannual variations of transpiration, leaf area index and radial growth of a sessile oak stand (Quercus petraea). In Annales des sciences forestières (Vol. 53, No. 2–3, pp. 521–536). Les Ulis: EDP Sciences.Google Scholar
  6. Chaves, M. M., Pereira, J. S., Maroco, J., Rodrigues, M. L., Icardo, C. P. P., Osorio, M. L., et al. (2002). How plants cope with water stress in the field? Photosynthesis and growth. Annals of Botany, 89(7), 907–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, Y., Alchanatis, V., Meron, M., Saranga, Y., & Tsipris, J. (2005). Estimation of leaf water potential by thermal imagery and spatial analysis. Journal of Experimental Botany, 56(417), 1843–1852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dhillon, R. (2015). Development and evaluation of a continuous leaf monitoring system for measurement of plant water status. PhD dissertation, Department of Biological Systems Engineering, University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
  9. Dhillon, R., Udompetaikul, V., Rojo, F., Roach, J., Upadhyaya, S., Slaughter, D., et al. (2014). Detection of plant water stress using leaf temperature and microclimatic measurements in almond, walnut and grape crops. Transactions of the ASABE, 57(1), 297–304.Google Scholar
  10. Dhillon, R., Upadhyaya, S., Rojo, F., Roach, J., Coates, R., & Delwiche, M. (2017). Development of a continuous leaf monitoring system to predict plant water status. Transactions of the ASABE, 60(5), 1445–1455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fereres, E., & Soriano, M. A. (2006). Deficit irrigation for reducing agricultural water use. Journal of Experimental Botany, 58(2), 147–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fulton, A., Buchner, R., Olson, B., Schwankl, L., Giles, C., Bertagna, N., et al. (2002). Rapid equilibration of leaf and stem water potential under field conditions in almonds, walnuts, and prunes. HortTechnology, 11(4), 609–615.Google Scholar
  13. Girona, J., Mata, M., & Marsal, J. (2005). Regulated deficit irrigation during the kernel-filling period and optimal irrigation rates in almond. Agricultural Water Management, 75(2), 152–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldhamer, D., & Beede, R. (2004). Regulated deficit irrigation effects on yield, nut quality and water-use efficiency of mature pistachio trees. The Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 79(4), 538–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldhamer, D. A. (2005). Tree water requirements and regulated deficit irrigation. In L. Ferguson (Ed.), Pistachio production manual (4th ed., pp. 103–116). Davis: Fruit and Nut Research and Information Center, University of California.Google Scholar
  16. Goldhamer, D. A., & Fereres, E. (2004). Irrigation scheduling of almond trees with trunk diameter sensors. Irrigation Science, 23(1), 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gonzalez-Dugo, V., Ruz, C., Testi, L., Orgaz, F., & Fereres, E. (2018). The impact of deficit irrigation on transpiration and yield of mandarin and late oranges. Irrigation Science, 1–13.Google Scholar
  18. Idso, S., Jackson, R., Pinter, P., Reginato, R., & Hatfield, J. (1981). Normalizing the stress-degree-day parameter for environmental variability. Agricultural Meteorology, 24, 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Idso, S. B. (1982). Non-water-stressed baselines: A key to measuring and interpreting plant water stress. Agricultural Meteorology, 27(1–2), 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jimenez-Berni, M. J. (2013). Variable rate irrigation: Design of control software and field evaluation in California orchards. Master’s thesis, Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
  21. Jones, H. G. (2004). Irrigation scheduling: Advantages and pitfalls of plant-based methods. Journal of Experimental Botany, 55(407), 2427–2436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jones, H. G. (2013). Plants and microclimate: A quantitative approach to environmental plant physiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Köksal, E. S., Candoğan, B. N., Yildirim, Y. E., & Yazgan, S. (2010). Determination of water use and water stress of cherry trees based on canopy temperature, leaf water potential and resistance. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture, 97(4), 57–64.Google Scholar
  24. Kutner, M., Nachtsheim, C., Neter, J., & Li, W. (2005). Chapter 19: Applied linear statistical models (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill/Irwin Series. ISBN 0-07-238688-6.Google Scholar
  25. McCutchan, H., & Shackel, K. A. (1992). Stem-water potential as a sensitive indicator of water stress in prune trees (Prunus domestica L. cv. French). Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 117(4), 607–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Meron, M., Tsipris, J., Orlov, V., Alchanatis, V., & Cohen, Y. (2010). Crop water stress mapping for site-specific irrigation by thermal imagery and artificial reference surfaces. Precision Agriculture, 11(2), 148–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miranda, F. R., Yoder, R. E., Wilkerson, J. B., & Odhiamboc, L. O. (2005). An autonomous controller for site-specific management of fixed irrigation systems. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 48, 183–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Möller, M., Alchanatis, V., Cohen, Y., Meron, M., Tsipris, J., Naor, A., et al. (2007). Use of thermal and visible imagery for estimating crop water status of irrigated grapevine. Journal of Experimental Botany, 58(4), 827–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Orta, A. H., Erdem, Y., & Erdem, T. (2003). Crop water stress index for watermelon. Scientia Horticulturae, 98(2), 121–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. O’Shaughnessy, S. A., Evett, S. R., Colaizzi, P. D., & Howell, T. A. (2012). A crop water stress index and time threshold for automatic irrigation scheduling of grain sorghum. Agricultural Water Management, 107, 122–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rojo, F., Dhillon, R. Upadhyaya, S., Jenkins, B., Lampinen, B., Roach, J., & Metcalf, S. (2014). Modeling canopy light interception for estimating potential yield in almond and walnut trees. ASABE paper number 141896144, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (July 13–16, 2014).Google Scholar
  32. Sammis, T. W., Riley, W. R., & Lugg, D. G. (1988). Crop water stress index of pecans. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 4(1), 39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Starr, G. C. (2005). Assessing temporal stability and spatial variability of soil water patterns with implications for precision water management. Agricultural Water Management, 72(3), 223–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Stewart, W., Fulton, A., Krueger, W., Lampinen, B., & Shackel, K. (2011). Regulated deficit irrigation reduces water use of almonds without affecting yield. California Agriculture, 65(2), 90–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Swain, D. L., Tsiang, M., Haugen, M., Singh, D., Charland, A., Rajaratnam, B., et al. (2014). The extraordinary California drought of 2013/2014: Character, context, and the role of climate change. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 95(9), S3.Google Scholar
  36. Testi, L., Goldhamer, D. A., Iniesta, F., & Salinas, M. (2008). Crop water stress index is a sensitive water stress indicator in pistachio trees. Irrigation Science, 26(5), 395–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Torre-Neto, A., Schueller, J. K., & Haman, D. Z. (2000). Networked sensing and valve actuation for spatially-variable microsprinkler irrigation. Networked sensing and valve actuation for spatially-variable microsprinkler irrigation. 1–17.Google Scholar
  38. Turner, N. C. (1981). Techniques and experimental approaches for the measurement of plant water status. Plant and Soil, 58(1–3), 339–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Turner, N. C. (1988). Measurement of plant water status by the pressure chamber technique. Irrigation Science, 9(4), 289–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Udompetaikul, V. (2012). Development of a sensor suite for plant water status determination for irrigation management in specialty crops. PhD dissertation, Department of Biological Systems Engineering, University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
  41. Wang, D., & Gartung, J. (2010). Infrared canopy temperature of early-ripening peach trees under postharvest deficit irrigation. Agricultural Water Management, 97(11), 1787–1794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Dhillon
    • 1
    Email author
  • F. Rojo
    • 2
  • S. K. Upadhyaya
    • 3
  • J. Roach
    • 3
  • R. Coates
    • 3
  • M. Delwiche
    • 3
  1. 1.Topcon AgricultureLivermoreUSA
  2. 2.Escuela de AgronomíaPontificia Universidad Católica de ValparaísoQuillotaChile
  3. 3.Department of Biological and Agricultural EngineeringUniversity of California, DavisDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations