Next Article in Journal
Comprehensive Evaluation and Main Identification Indexes of Herbicide Resistance of High-Quality Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica L.)
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Manure-Based Nitrogen Substitution for Chemical Nitrogen Fertilizers on Economic Benefits and Water-Use Efficiency of Maize
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 13
Issue 12
10.3390/agronomy13123032
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Micrometeorological Comparison of Canopy Temperature between Two Wheat Cultivars Grown under Irrigation in a Hot Environment in Sudan

by
Almutaz Abdelkarim Abdelfattah Mohammed
1,2,3,*,
Mitsuru Tsubo
4,
Shaoxiu Ma
5,
Yasunori Kurosaki
4,
Yasuomi Ibaraki
6,
Izzat Sidahmed Ali Tahir
2,4,
Yasir Serag Alnor Gorafi
5,
Amani A. M. Idris
2 and
Hisashi Tsujimoto
4
1
United Graduate School of Agricultural Science, Tottori University, Tottori 680-8553, Japan
2
Agricultural Research Corporation, Wad Medani P.O. Box 126, Sudan
3
Hydraulics Research Center, Wad Medani P.O. Box 318, Sudan
4
Arid Land Research Center, Tottori University, Tottori 680-0001, Japan
5
International Platform for Dryland Research and Education, Tottori University, Tottori 680-0001, Japan
6
Faculty of Agriculture, Yamaguchi University, Yamaguchi 753-8515, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2023, 13(12), 3032; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13123032
Submission received: 13 October 2023 / Revised: 6 November 2023 / Accepted: 7 December 2023 / Published: 11 December 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
A thorough exploration of the micrometeorological aspects influencing canopy temperature in contrasting wheat cultivars can unveil the specific mechanisms of adaptation to heat stress. However, information on wheat microclimates in hot environments for crop improvement is lacking. Here, we used a micrometeorological method to investigate wheat’s response to high temperatures. Field experiments were conducted in the Gezira Scheme, Sudan, to compare two high-yielding heat-tolerant cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, in terms of canopy temperature depression (CTD), air temperature gradient (ATG), and vapor pressure gradient (VPG) from a 2 m height to canopy level. The maximum air temperature at 2 m during the main growing season was 37 °C. Air temperature at canopy level was mostly lower in the Imam field than in the Bohaine field, and it was positively correlated with and higher than radiometric canopy surface temperature. The maximum CTD during the reproductive stage was 4.7–6.5 °C in the Bohaine field and 5.0–7.2 °C in the Imam field. ATG was also larger in the Imam field, attributed to the greater leaf area of the Imam canopy, as presumed from the NDVI difference between fields. ATG was negatively correlated with VPG in both fields, and the relationship was stronger at lower nighttime wind speeds and weaker at higher daytime wind speeds. These results indicate that the micrometeorological approach can be used to compare cultivars in high-temperature environments.

1. Introduction

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is strongly affected by climate change, with yields projected to decrease by 6% for every 1 °C increase in global temperature [1,2]. The most obvious effect of high temperatures on wheat is accelerated phenological development, resulting in shorter growing seasons and reduced yields [3,4]. Among the world’s wheat-producing regions, the effects of climate change are expected to be particularly severe in irrigated areas in arid regions such as India and Sudan [5,6,7]. In these regions, canopy temperature depression (CTD)—the difference between air temperature (Ta) and radiometric canopy surface temperature (Ts) at standard (2 m) height, viz., CTD = Ta − Ts—is used as an indicator to screen wheat genotypes for heat stress tolerance, as wheat cultivars with a cooler canopy grow and yield better in hot environments [8,9,10,11]. However, many meteorological factors, such as humidity and wind and morphological characteristics, such as plant height and peduncle length, affect CTD [12,13].
Accurately measuring crop CTD is essential for identifying heat and drought-resistant wheat varieties. A range of techniques are employed for measuring CTD, including handheld infrared thermometers [8,11,14,15,16], thermal cameras [17,18], and increasingly, thermal imaging [19]. These methods are typically employed in clear weather conditions during the afternoon, and they directly assess the radiative heat emitted by the canopy [20], providing insights into drought stress [15,21,22]. Conversely, air temperature at canopy level (Tc) is derived from standard sensors in the surrounding air, offering an overview of the air temperature around the canopy. This information aids researchers and agronomists in understanding microclimates within the canopy, which influence plant physiology, stress responses, and overall crop performance [23]. Analyzing these temperatures facilitates the identification of heat stress patterns and guides the implementation of beneficial agronomic practices, such as optimizing irrigation [24] and heat stress mitigation techniques. This enhances crop management for improved yield in hot environments.
Since wheat is adapted to cool environments, high temperatures are detrimental. At the individual plant scale, they decrease photosynthesis, thus reducing transpiration, which is positively associated with stomatal conductance, which in turn is highly affected by the vapor pressure deficit (VPD) of the atmosphere [10,25,26,27]. At the field scale, the transpiration–VPD relationship is complicated by air movement. Unless water vapor moves from the evaporating canopy surface into the atmosphere, it accumulates near the canopy surface, and the low VPD suppresses transpiration [27]. When the air is dry just above a well-watered canopy, the high VPD increases stomatal conductance, letting more water vapor be released from the canopy surface into the atmosphere. This behavior of water movement in the soil–plant–atmosphere continuum occurs along with the evaporative cooling of the canopy. In hot environments with high evaporative demand, the surface temperature of a well-developed canopy with adequate soil moisture is almost entirely dependent on transpiration cooling [28]. Decreasing transpiration under elevated VPD has been proposed as a crucial trait for drought tolerance. This approach aims to mitigate excessive water loss, prevent hydraulic failure, and enhance overall water use efficiency [29,30].
At high temperatures, especially during grain filling, wheat yields are higher at higher VPD [31] as a result of the crop’s response to atmospheric water vapor pressure (VP) throughout the growing season. The crop’s sensitivity to VP can be characterized by the above-canopy vapor pressure gradient (VPG)—the difference between VP at standard height (VPa) and that at canopy level (VPc), viz., VPG = VPa − VPc. According to the Monin–Obukhov similarity theory of heat, water vapor, and mass fluxes [32], the relationship between air temperature and VP can be interpreted as the association of the above-canopy air temperature gradient (ATG)—the difference between Ta and Tc, viz., ATG = Ta − Tc—with VPG. This relationship with respect to the canopy surface has been studied in specific wheat cultivars [20,33] but not compared between cultivars. Moreover, these micrometeorological parameters have been reported mainly for daytime and specific growth stages. To fully understand the ATG–VPG relationship for cultivar comparison, diurnal changes in Tc and VPc need to be measured throughout the growing season. In addition, as Tc and Ts differ in theory, their relationship needs to be investigated.
The Gezira Scheme in Sudan is one of the hottest wheat-growing areas in the world, and its irrigated wheat yields are projected to decrease under climate warming [7,34]. Adaptation to climate change requires accelerated crop improvement for heat tolerance in controlled environments [35]. However, there is a lack of information on microclimate-irrigated wheat in hot environments to explain crop responses to high temperatures. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to investigate cultivar differences in the canopy temperature of irrigated wheat using a micrometeorological method. The specific objectives were (i) to compare the CTD and ATG of two cultivars contrasting in growth habit and (ii) to determine the relationship between ATG and VPG. The effect of wind on this relationship is discussed in relation to the temperature–humidity–wind relationship above the canopy. The micrometeorological approach has seldom been used to identify cultivar differences, and this study is the first to use it to compare canopy temperature between cultivars in a very hot wheat-growing area.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Field Experiments

Field experiments were conducted during the dry season of 2020–2021 at the Gezira Research Station of the Agricultural Research Corporation, Sudan (14.38° N, 33.50° E), within the Gezira Scheme in the arid climate zone (Figure 1). The climate is characterized by low annual precipitation (about 300 mm) from July to September and almost nil during the wheat-growing season (November–March) [36]. The temperatures are lowest from November to February, and the monthly average ranges between 23.6 °C in the coldest months and 33.1 °C in the warmest months [36]. The soil is classified as Vertisol, with a clay content of 50–60% [37].
The experiments in two adjacent fields were designed to compare two high-yielding heat-tolerant wheat cultivars, i.e., Bohaine and Imam, which are the most common commercial cultivars grown in dry environments in Sudan. Bohaine is a fast-maturing cultivar with a fully erect growth habit, whereas Imam is a later-maturing cultivar with a semi-prostrate growth habit [38]. Each field measured 180 m long by 70 m wide (1.26 ha), aligned north–south; Bohaine was sown on 26 November and Imam on 6 December 2020 at 120 kg ha−1 in north–south rows 0.2 m apart. The fields were flood-irrigated immediately after sowing and every 8 to 13 days until 1 March 2021—Imam 10 times and Bohaine 9 times. The fields received the same type and amount of fertilizers: 25 kg N ha−1 and 28 kg P ha−1 in the form of diammonium phosphate before sowing and 56 kg N ha−1 of urea split-applied at the second and fourth irrigations. Each field had an automatic micrometeorological station installed in the southern part on 13 January 2021.

2.2. Data Collection and Calculation

Plant height was measured four times (vegetative, heading, post-anthesis, and grain-filling stages) on 21 January, 31 January, 14 February, and 28 February 2021 for Imam and 21 January, 1 February, 15 February, and 28 February 2021 for Bohaine. At each measurement, three quadrats consisting of three 1.11-meter-long rows (ca. 1 m2) were selected on the south side of the micrometeorological station in each field. Ten plants were randomly sampled in each quadrat, and values were averaged for statistical analysis. The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) of each field was calculated as a proxy for the leaf area index (LAI) and aboveground biomass [39,40] from near-infrared and red radiance reflectance data from the European Space Agency Sentinel-2 satellite at a spatial resolution of 10 m × 10 m (https://sentinels.copernicus.eu/web/sentinel/home, accessed on 10 July 2023). Gridded NDVI data within each field were averaged over the area of fields for each satellite image for comparison. The heading date was recorded as when 50% of the plants had the base of the spikes emerging from the flag leaf.
Temperature, humidity, and wind data were collected in the center of the field with more than a 130 m green fetch towards the north direction, at two heights using HMP155 probes (Vaisala Oyj, Vantaa, Finland) protected by a forced-ventilation shelter and 03002-47A anemometers (R. M. Young Co., Traverse, MI, USA). The upper sensors were fixed at 2 m above the ground, and the lower sensors were periodically adjusted to 0.05–0.1 m above the canopy surface. To measure canopy surface temperatures (Ts), an SI-411 infrared radiometer (Apogee Instruments, Inc., Logan, UT, USA) capable of monitoring temperatures over a canopy surface area of 8.4 m2 was fixed 2 m above the ground, tilted 45° down to the vertical mounting pole of the station and perpendicular to the western crop row. Measurement intervals were 1 min for Ta, Tc, Ts, and relative humidity (RH) and 1 s for wind speed and direction (WS and WD). Data averaged every 10 min were recorded on a CR1000X datalogger (Campbell Scientific, Inc., Logan, UT, USA).
Hourly Ta, Tc, Ts, and WS at a 2 m height (WSa) and canopy level (WSc) were calculated by averaging 10 min data for each hour of the 24-h day. We calculated 10 min averaged VPa and VPc from RH and air temperature according to [41] and averaged them for each hour. WD at a 2 m height (WDa) and canopy level (WDc) were used to determine the fetch requirement for the micrometeorological measurements. We calculated the percentages of the WD data with WS > 0.5 m s−1 (the threshold speed at which the vane began to move) between north-northwest and north-northeast to ensure a sufficient distance from the northern end of the field to the station with respect to the wind direction.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Plant height was compared between cultivars using an unpaired t-test to ensure the same conditions necessary for micrometeorological comparisons, i.e., the same height of canopy surface between fields. CTD and ATG were analyzed for each of three growth periods, namely 21 to 30 January (I), 31 January to 14 February (II), and 15 to 28 February (III), which were determined from the dates of plant height measurements. In each hour of the 24-h day in each growth period, CTD and ATG were compared between fields by using a paired t-test. To clarify the relationship between ATG and VPG in each growth period, we used linear regression analysis, dividing the data into daytime (from hours 7 to 18) and nighttime (from hours 19 to 6) on the basis of latitude. Pearson’s correlation analysis was performed to determine the relationship between Ts and Tc during all periods. All statistical analyses were performed using R language version 4.3.1, Vienna, Austria [42].

3. Results

3.1. Crop Data

There were no significant differences in plant height between the Bohaine and Imam fields on any measurement date (p > 0.05) (Figure 2). However, NDVI was significantly higher in Imam on all dates. Periods I, II, and III corresponded, respectively, to the late vegetative stage, heading to early grain filling, and mid- to late grain filling in Imam, and to the late vegetative stage to heading, early to mid-grain filling, and late grain filling in Bohaine.

3.2. Micrometeorological Data

During period I, Ta was lowest around sunrise and highest around early afternoon (Figure 3). During periods I–III, the maximum Ta was 37.2 °C in the Bohaine field and 37.3 °C in the Imam field, and the maximum Tc was 36.1 °C and 34.5 °C, respectively. Tc was positively correlated with Ts and was higher than Ts, and the relationship did not differ between daytime and nighttime (Figure 4). Both VPa and VPc increased from early morning to around noon, and then decreased until late afternoon and remained low until early the next morning (Figure 3). The maximum VPa during periods I–III was 1.9 kPa in both fields, which was lower than the maximum VPc (2.3 kPa in the Bohaine field and 2.6 kPa in the Imam field).
Wind speeds were higher during the daytime than during nighttime (Figure 3), with a period I–III average WSa of 3.2 m s−1 in the daytime and 1.7 m s−1 at nighttime in both fields. The average WSc was 1.3 m s−1 in the daytime and 0.4 m s−1 at nighttime in the Imam field and 1.6 and 0.5 m s−1, respectively, in the Bohaine field. The period I–III nighttime wind direction at 2.0 m (WDa) was northerly 70.8% of the time in the Bohaine field and 65.7% of the time in the Imam field, and that at canopy height (WDc) 71.0% of the time in the Bohaine field and 73.7% in the Imam field. In contrast, the daytime WDa was northerly only 31.7% and 43.6% of the time, and the daytime WDc only 44.3% and 59.4% of the time, respectively.

3.3. Comparison of CTD and ATG between Cultivars

The hourly average CTD in period I was significantly larger in the Imam field than in the Bohaine field during nighttime (from hours 19 to 3) but not during most hours of the daytime (Figure 5). That in period II differed between the fields from hours 14 to 8. That in period III differed during most hours of the day. In the Bohaine field, the maximum CTD was 6.5 °C in hour 17 in period I, 6.5 °C in hour 19 in period II, and 4.7 °C in hour 19 in period III. In the Imam field, it was 6.4 °C, 7.2 °C, and 5.0 °C, respectively, during the same hours.
The hourly average ATG was larger in the Imam field than in the Bohaine field during all hours in period I and during most hours in periods II and III (Figure 5). The maximum ATG was 2.4 °C in hour 21 in period I, 2.6 °C in hour 19 in period II, and 1.9 °C in hour 20 in period III in the Bohaine field, and 3.4 °C in hour 16 in period I, 3.4 °C in hour 20 in period II, and 1.9 °C in hour 20 in period III in the Imam field.

3.4. Relationship between ATG and VPG

Daytime ATG was correlated negatively with VPG in both fields during all periods (R2 = 0.02 to 0.30), except in the Imam field in period III (Figure 6). The relationship was moderate in period I and weak in period II. The nighttime relationship between ATG and VPG was stronger in both fields during all periods (R2 = 0.73 to 0.90; Figure 7).

4. Discussion

Canopy temperature is an important trait for breeding wheat with heat stress tolerance. Genotypes have been evaluated mainly in small experimental plots (a few meters); since Ts can be measured over a small area of the canopy surface, a radiometric approach, i.e., CTD, has been used for cultivar comparison [8,10,11,43]. Our study, which was conducted under very high temperatures of up to 37 °C (Figure 2), showed that the maximum CTD was 6.5 °C in the Bohaine field and 6.4 °C in the Imam field during the late vegetative stage, 6.5 °C and 7.2 °C during the early reproductive stage, and 4.7 °C and 5.0 °C during the late reproductive stage. These values are comparable to those of previous studies in irrigated and similar environments; for example, CTD values for wheat varietal differences reported from south-central Mexico ranged widely from 5.0 to 7.9 °C during pre-heading, from 4.8 to 9.1 °C during heading/anthesis, and from 4.1 to 7.3 °C during grain filling [8]. Thus, CTD under irrigated conditions in arid environments is large because dry air promotes transpiration, resulting in more evaporative cooling of the canopy. This indicates that the ambient temperature of the canopy in such microclimates can be modified to be considerably lower than the critical high temperature for growth and development, e.g., 31.0 °C around anthesis and 35.4 °C during grain-filling [44]. On the other hand, CTD is negative in some cases; that is, Ts > Ta, owing to water stress in the field [10].
Although canopy temperature is rarely measured at night, it can be used to compare cultivars in high-temperature environments. For example, Balota et al. [44] showed differences in CTD among wheat cultivars during predawn hours. Similarly, our study showed that Ts at night was lower than Ta, and thus revealed cultivar differences in CTD (Figure 5). This lowered canopy surface at night could be due to radiative cooling [45] or to cooling by nocturnal transpiration [46] in calm air. This implies that nighttime cooling is favorable for crop growth, since leaf respiration is reduced when temperatures drop [47,48].
There are only a few previous comparisons of Ts and Tc in wheat. Our study showed that Ts < Tc (Figure 4). Similarly, previous studies in various climatic zones showed that Ts < aerodynamic surface temperature at high sensible heat flux in temperate central England [20] and arid Phoenix, Arizona, USA [49]. The difference between the two temperatures is due to the fact that Ts, which reflects leaf moisture status, is based on radiative emission from the canopy [22,50,51,52,53], whereas Tc is due to the energy balance of the canopy, especially sensible heat loss from the canopy to the boundary layer above the canopy surface [20,49]. In addition, the relationship between aerodynamic surface temperature and Ts can be discriminated by wind speed [20], but the effect of WS on the ATG–CTD relationship was not clear in our results.
Clarifying the micrometeorological relationship between canopy temperature and atmospheric water vapor may provide a better understanding of the mechanisms that lead to cultivar differences in crop response to high-temperature environments. Wind speed has a significant effect on the loss of sensible heat from the canopy surface and thus on the aerodynamic estimation of canopy surface temperature from the vertical profiles (gradients) of temperature and humidity [20,54]. ATG was negatively correlated with VPG, but the weaker daytime ATG–VPG relationship, at higher WS (Figure 6), could be due to the turbulent flux of heat and water vapor. The stronger relationship at nighttime (Figure 7), at lower WS, can be interpreted as the retention of cold, moist air below the boundary where warmer, dry air has little flow; that is, the horizontal flux of heat and water vapor over the canopy could be slowly stable.
Our study further showed a cultivar difference in ATG (Figure 5), as the canopy of Imam was cooler than that of Bohaine. This difference could be attributed to the large difference in NDVI (as a proxy for LAI and aboveground biomass) between cultivars (Figure 2), as in the positive relationship of CTD with LAI and aboveground biomass in a similar environment in northwest Mexico reported by Ayeneh et al. [55]. As the two fields received full irrigation, Imam, which has a higher LAI and a denser canopy and is recommended for the dry irrigated environments of Sudan [38], could perform better than Bohaine under non-limiting water conditions in terms of the ability to meet atmospheric evaporative demand during the daytime and rehydrate overnight to recover from diurnal wilt, implying that cultivars with a prostrate dense canopy are better adapted to hot and dry environments than those with an erect canopy. This is supported by the recently reported finding [56] that the cultivar difference in CTD can result from their morphological difference. But when we consider the phenological characteristics of these two cultivars, fast-maturing Bohaine with a lower yield potential than long-maturing Imam is still needed when the optimum sowing period for Imam cannot be met.
Based on this study, it has been discovered through micrometeorological observations that wheat displays distinct reactions to high-temperature stress. This indicates that different cultivars possess varying mechanisms of adaptation to heat stress, with those that are more accustomed to high temperatures, demonstrating a greater ability to modify the microclimate. In addition, significant information provided in this study can fill the gap in understanding microclimate modification, which can be used in enhancing crop yield through various techniques available, such as shading, windbreak, antitranspirant application, optimized sowing parameters, intercropping, irrigation, and nutrient management [57].

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrates the potential of the micrometeorological approach to explain cultivar differences in the response of irrigated wheat to high temperatures. There were large differences in ATG and VPG between cultivars. ATG was negatively correlated with VPG, and the relationship was stronger at nighttime, when wind speeds are lower. The cultivar difference was clear during both daytime and nighttime in all three critical growth periods, as air temperature and vapor pressure always had larger gradients in the Imam field than in the Bohaine field. In practical application, once genotypes are screened for high-temperature stress tolerance at the small-plot scale through the use of CTD, the micrometeorological approach can be used to verify their performance at the field scale. The information generated in this study is useful for improving wheat crop management techniques for an optimal canopy architecture that can enhance their capacity to alter the microclimate in hot environments.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.A.A.M. and M.T.; methodology, A.A.A.M. and M.T.; data analysis, A.A.A.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.A.A.M.; writing—review and editing, A.A.A.M., M.T., S.M., Y.K., Y.I., I.S.A.T., Y.S.A.G., A.A.M.I. and H.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable Development, Japan Science and Technology Agency/Japan International Cooperation Agency (JPM-JSA1805).

Data Availability Statement

Data used in this study will be made available upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Asseng, S.; Ewert, F.; Martre, P.; Rötter, R.P.; Lobell, D.B.; Cammarano, D.; Kimball, B.A.; Ottman, M.J.; Wall, G.W.; White, J.W.; et al. Rising Temperatures Reduce Global Wheat Production. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2015, 5, 143–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zhao, C.; Liu, B.; Piao, S.; Wang, X.; Lobell, D.B.; Huang, Y.; Huang, M.; Yao, Y.; Bassu, S.; Ciais, P.; et al. Temperature Increase Reduces Global Yields of Major Crops in Four Independent Estimates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 9326–9331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Akter, N.; Islam, M.R. Heat Stress Effects and Management in Wheat. A Review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 37, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Shpiler, L.; Blum, A. Differential Reaction of Wheat Cultivars to Hot Environments. Euphytica 1986, 35, 483–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Asseng, S.; Cammarano, D.; Basso, B.; Chung, U.; Alderman, P.D.; Sonder, K.; Reynolds, M.P.; Lobell, D.B. Hot Spots of Wheat Yield Decline with Rising Temperatures. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2017, 23, 2464–2472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zaveri, E.; Lobell, D.B. The Role of Irrigation in Changing Wheat Yields and Heat Sensitivity in India. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 4144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Iizumi, T.; Ali-Babiker, I.-E.A.; Tsubo, M.; Tahir, I.S.A.; Kurosaki, Y.; Kim, W.; Gorafi, Y.S.A.; Idris, A.A.M.; Tsujimoto, H. Rising Temperatures and Increasing Demand Challenge Wheat Supply in Sudan. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Amani, I.; Fischer, R.A.; Reynolds, M.P. Canopy Temperature Depression Association with Yield of Irrigated Spring Wheat Cultivars in a Hot Climate. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 1996, 176, 119–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fischer, R.A.; Rees, D.; Sayre, K.D.; Lu, Z.M.; Condon, A.G.; Larque Saavedra, A. Wheat Yield Progress Associated with Higher Stomatal Conductance and Photosynthetic Rate, and Cooler Canopies. Crop Sci. 1998, 38, 1467–1475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Balota, M.; Payne, W.A.; Evett, S.R.; Lazar, M.D. Canopy Temperature Depression Sampling to Assess Grain Yield and Genotypic Differentiation in Winter Wheat. Crop Sci. 2007, 47, 1518–1529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Thakur, V.; Rane, J.; Nankar, A.N. Comparative Analysis of Canopy Cooling in Wheat under High Temperature and Drought Stress. Agronomy 2022, 12, 978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Rebetzke, G.J.; Jimenez-Berni, J.A.; Fischer, R.A.; Deery, D.M.; Smith, D.C.; Smith, D.J. Review: High-Throughput Phenotyping to Enhance the Use of Crop Genetic Resources. Plant Sci. 2019, 282, 40–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Al-Khatib, K.; Paulsen, G.M. Photosynthesis and Productivity during High-Temperature Stress of Wheat Genotypes from Major World Regions. Crop Sci. 1990, 30, 1127–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Deery, D.M.; Rebetzke, G.J.; Jimenez-Berni, J.A.; Bovill, W.D.; James, R.A.; Condon, A.G.; Furbank, R.T.; Chapman, S.C.; Fischer, R.A. Evaluation of the Phenotypic Repeatability of Canopy Temperature in Wheat Using Continuous-Terrestrial and Airborne Measurements. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lepekhov, S.B. Canopy Temperature Depression for Drought- and Heat Stress Tolerance in Wheat Breeding. Vavilovskii Zhurnal Genet Sel. 2022, 26, 196–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Neukam, D.; Ahrends, H.; Luig, A.; Manderscheid, R.; Kage, H. Integrating Wheat Canopy Temperatures in Crop System Models. Agronomy 2016, 6, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Anderegg, J.; Aasen, H.; Perich, G.; Roth, L.; Walter, A.; Hund, A. Temporal Trends in Canopy Temperature and Greenness Are Potential Indicators of Late-Season Drought Avoidance and Functional Stay-Green in Wheat. Field Crops Res. 2021, 274, 108311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Grant, O.M.; Chaves, M.M.; Jones, H.G. Optimizing Thermal Imaging as a Technique for Detecting Stomatal Closure Induced by Drought Stress under Greenhouse Conditions. Physiol. Plant. 2006, 127, 507–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Das, S.; Christopher, J.; Apan, A.; Roy Choudhury, M.; Chapman, S.; Menzies, N.W.; Dang, Y.P. UAV-Thermal Imaging and Agglomerative Hierarchical Clustering Techniques to Evaluate and Rank Physiological Performance of Wheat Genotypes on Sodic Soil. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2021, 173, 221–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Huband, N.D.S.; Monteith, J.L. Radiative Surface Temperature and Energy Balance of a Wheat Canopy. I. Comparison of Radiative and Aerodynamic Canopy Temperature. Bound.-Layer Meteorol. 1986, 36, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Blum, A.; Mayer, J.; Gozlan, G. Infrared Thermal Sensing of Plant Canopies as a Screening Technique for Dehydration Avoidance in Wheat. Field Crops Res. 1982, 5, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Jackson, R.D.; Idso, S.B.; Reginato, R.J.; Pinter, P.J., Jr. Canopy Temperature as a Crop Water Stress Indicator. Water Resour. Res. 1981, 17, 1133–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zhang, F.; Zhang, D.; Li, L.; Zhang, Z.; Liang, X.; Wen, Q.; Chen, G.; Wu, Q.; Zhai, Y. Effect of Planting Density on Canopy Structure, Microenvironment, and Yields of Uniformly Sown Winter Wheat. Agronomy 2023, 13, 870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. O’Shaughnessy, S.A.; Evett, S.R. Canopy Temperature Based System Effectively Schedules and Controls Center Pivot Irrigation of Cotton. Agric. Water Manag. 2010, 97, 1310–1316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Feng, B.; Liu, P.; Li, G.; Dong, S.T.; Wang, F.H.; Kong, L.A.; Zhang, J.W. Effect of Heat Stress on the Photosynthetic Characteristics in Flag Leaves at the Grain-Filling Stage of Different Heat-Resistant Winter Wheat Varieties. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2014, 200, 143–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sharma, D.K.; Andersen, S.B.; Ottosen, C.-O.; Rosenqvist, E. Wheat Cultivars Selected for High Fv/Fm under Heat Stress Maintain High Photosynthesis, Total Chlorophyll, Stomatal Conductance, Transpiration and Dry Matter. Physiol. Plant 2015, 153, 284–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Steiner, J.L.; Hatfield, J.L. Winds of Change: A Century of Agroclimate Research. Agron. J. 2008, 100, S-132–S-152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Mueller, N.D.; Butler, E.E.; McKinnon, K.A.; Rhines, A.; Tingley, M.; Holbrook, N.M.; Huybers, P. Cooling of US Midwest Summer Temperature Extremes from Cropland Intensification. Nat. Clim Chang. 2016, 6, 317–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Medina, S.; Vicente, R.; Nieto-Taladriz, M.T.; Aparicio, N.; Chairi, F.; Vergara-Diaz, O.; Araus, J.L. The Plant-Transpiration Response to Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) in Durum Wheat Is Associated with Differential Yield Performance and Specific Expression of Genes Involved in Primary Metabolism and Water Transport. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 9, 1994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Eyland, D.; Gambart, C.; Swennen, R.; Carpentier, S. Diverse Responses among Wild Banana Species to Vapour Pressure Deficit, a Solution for Drought Tolerance Breeding? bioRxiv 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gourdji, S.M.; Mathews, K.L.; Reynolds, M.; Crossa, J.; Lobell, D.B. An Assessment of Wheat Yield Sensitivity and Breeding Gains in Hot Environments. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2013, 280, 20122190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Monin, A.S.; Obukhov, A.M. Basic Laws of Turbulent Mixing in the Surface Layer of the Atmosphere. Contrib. Geophys. Inst. Acad. Sci. USSR 1954, 151, e187. [Google Scholar]
  33. Dugas, W.A.; Fritschen, L.J.; Gay, L.W.; Held, A.A.; Matthias, A.D.; Reicosky, D.C.; Steduto, P.; Steiner, J.L. Bowen Ratio, Eddy Correlation, and Portable Chamber Measurements of Sensible and Latent Heat Flux over Irrigated Spring Wheat. Agric. For. Meteorol. 1991, 56, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Musa, A.I.I.; Tsubo, M.; Ali-Babiker, I.E.A.; Iizumi, T.; Kurosaki, Y.; Ibaraki, Y.; El-Hag, F.M.A.; Tahir, I.S.A.; Tsujimoto, H. Relationship of Irrigated Wheat Yield with Temperature in Hot Environments of Sudan. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2021, 145, 1113–1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Atlin, G.N.; Cairns, J.E.; Das, B. Rapid Breeding and Varietal Replacement Are Critical to Adaptation of Cropping Systems in the Developing World to Climate Change. Glob. Food Sec. 2017, 12, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Elagib, N.A.; Mansell, M.G. Recent Trends and Anomalies in Mean Seasonal and Annual Temperatures over Sudan. J. Arid Environ. 2000, 45, 263–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Herve, P. The Gezira Irrigation Scheme in Sudan: Objectives, Design, and Performance. Available online: https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/377141468778504847/The-Gezira-irrigation-scheme-in-Sudan-objectives-design-and-performance (accessed on 27 December 2022).
  38. Tahir, I.S.A.; Mustafa, H.; Elbashier, E. Agronomic Performance, Stability and Rust Resistance of Bread Wheat Genotypes under Optimum and Late Sowing Environments in Sudan: A Proposal for the Release of Four Bread Wheat Varieties. In Proceedings of the National Variety Release Committee, Khartoum, Sudan, 2 April 2018. [Google Scholar]
  39. Cabrera-Bosquet, L.; Molero, G.; Stellacci, A.M.; Bort, J.; Nogués, S.; Araus, J.L. NDVI as a Potential Tool for Predicting Biomass, Plant Nitrogen Content and Growth in Wheat Genotypes Subjected to Different Water and Nitrogen Conditions. Cereal Res. Commun. 2011, 39, 147–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Tan, C.-W.; Zhang, P.-P.; Zhou, X.-X.; Wang, Z.-X.; Xu, Z.-Q.; Mao, W.; Li, W.-X.; Huo, Z.-Y.; Guo, W.-S.; Yun, F. Quantitative Monitoring of Leaf Area Index in Wheat of Different Plant Types by Integrating NDVI and Beer-Lambert Law. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Allen, R.G.; Pereira, L.S.; Raes, D.; Smith, M. Crop Evapotranspiration-Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements-FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56; FAO: Rome, Italy, 1998; Volume 300, p. D05109. [Google Scholar]
  42. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  43. Reynolds, M.P.; Balota, M.; Delgado, M.I.B.; Delgado, M.I.; Amani, I.; Fischer, R.A. Physiological and Morphological Traits Associated with Spring Wheat Yield Under Hot, Irrigated Conditions. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1994, 21, 717–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Balota, M.; Payne, W.A.; Evett, S.R.; Peters, T.R. Morphological and Physiological Traits Associated with Canopy Temperature Depression in Three Closely Related Wheat Lines. Crop Sci. 2008, 48, 1897–1910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Luchiari, A., Jr.; Riha, S.J.; Gomide, R.L. Energy Balance in Irrigated Wheat in the Cerrados Region of Central Brazil. Sci. Agric. 1997, 54, 78–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Rawson, H.M.; Clarke, J.M. Nocturnal Transpiration in Wheat. Funct. Plant Biol. 1988, 15, 397–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Toddl, G.W. Photosynthesis and Respiration of Vegetative and Reproductive Parts of Wheat and Barley Plants in Response to Increasing Temperature. Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci. 1982, 62, 57–62. [Google Scholar]
  48. Posch, B.C.; Zhai, D.; Coast, O.; Scafaro, A.P.; Bramley, H.; Reich, P.B.; Ruan, Y.-L.; Trethowan, R.; Way, D.A.; Atkin, O.K. Wheat Respiratory O2 Consumption Falls with Night Warming alongside Greater Respiratory CO2 Loss and Reduced Biomass. J. Exp. Bot. 2021, 73, 915–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Choudhury, B.J.; Reginato, R.J.; Idso, S.B. An Analysis of Infrared Temperature Observations over Wheat and Calculation of Latent Heat Flux. Agric. For. Meteorol. 1986, 37, 75–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jackson, R.D.; Reginato, R.J.; Idso, S.B. Wheat Canopy Temperature: A Practical Tool for Evaluating Water Requirements. Water Resour. Res. 1977, 13, 651–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ehrler, W.L.; Idso, S.B.; Jackson, R.D.; Reginato, R.J. Diurnal Changes in Plant Water Potential and Canopy Temperature of Wheat as Affected by Drought1. Agron. J. 1978, 70, 999–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ehrler, W.L.; Idso, S.B.; Jackson, R.D.; Reginato, R.J. Wheat Canopy Temperature: Relation to Plant Water Potential 1. Agron. J. 1978, 70, 251–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Pinter, P.J.; Zipoli, G.; Reginato, R.J.; Jackson, R.D.; Idso, S.B.; Hohman, J.P. Canopy Temperature as an Indicator of Differential Water Use and Yield Performance among Wheat Cultivars. Agric. Water Manag. 1990, 18, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Monteith, J.L. Evaporation and Surface Temperature. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 1981, 107, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ayeneh, A.; Van Ginkel, M.; Reynolds, M.P.; Ammar, K. Comparison of Leaf, Spike, Peduncle and Canopy Temperature Depression in Wheat under Heat Stress. Field Crops Res. 2002, 79, 173–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Chai, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Lu, S.; Chen, L.; Hu, Y. Field Evaluation of Wheat Varieties Using Canopy Temperature Depression in Three Different Climatic Growing Seasons. Plants 2022, 11, 3471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Biswas, P.; Mondal, S.; Maji, S.; Mondal, A.; Bandopadhyay, P. Microclimate Modification in Field Crops: A Way Toward Climate-Resilience. In Climate-Resilient Agriculture, Vol 1: Crop Responses and Agroecological Perspectives; Hasanuzzaman, M., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 647–666. ISBN 978-3-031-37424-1. [Google Scholar]
Agronomy 13 03032 g001
Figure 1. Location of experimental fields in the study area, the Gezira Scheme (Sudan). The fields are indicated on a map of Sentinel-2 satellite-based NDVI on 1 February 2021.
Figure 1. Location of experimental fields in the study area, the Gezira Scheme (Sudan). The fields are indicated on a map of Sentinel-2 satellite-based NDVI on 1 February 2021.
Agronomy 13 03032 g001
Agronomy 13 03032 g002
Figure 2. Seasonal changes in plant height (bars, mean ± SD) and NDVI (points) of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine.
Figure 2. Seasonal changes in plant height (bars, mean ± SD) and NDVI (points) of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine.
Agronomy 13 03032 g002
Agronomy 13 03032 g003
Figure 3. Seasonal changes in wind speed (WS), air temperature (T), and atmospheric water vapor pressure (VP) at 2 m height (“a”) and canopy level (“c”) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine.
Figure 3. Seasonal changes in wind speed (WS), air temperature (T), and atmospheric water vapor pressure (VP) at 2 m height (“a”) and canopy level (“c”) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine.
Agronomy 13 03032 g003
Agronomy 13 03032 g004
Figure 4. Relationships between canopy surface temperature (Ts) and air temperature at canopy level (Tc) during daytime (hours 7 to 18 of the 24-h day) and nighttime (hours 19 to 6) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, from the late vegetative to late reproductive stages (21 January to 28 February 2021).
Figure 4. Relationships between canopy surface temperature (Ts) and air temperature at canopy level (Tc) during daytime (hours 7 to 18 of the 24-h day) and nighttime (hours 19 to 6) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, from the late vegetative to late reproductive stages (21 January to 28 February 2021).
Agronomy 13 03032 g004
Agronomy 13 03032 g005
Figure 5. Diurnal changes in canopy temperature depression (CTD) and above-canopy air temperature gradient (ATG) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, during periods I (21–30 January 2021), II (31 January–14 February), and III (15–28 February). Points are means and bars are SD. * Significant difference at p ≤ 0.05.
Figure 5. Diurnal changes in canopy temperature depression (CTD) and above-canopy air temperature gradient (ATG) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, during periods I (21–30 January 2021), II (31 January–14 February), and III (15–28 February). Points are means and bars are SD. * Significant difference at p ≤ 0.05.
Agronomy 13 03032 g005
Agronomy 13 03032 g006
Figure 6. Relationships between above-canopy air temperature gradient (ATG) and above-canopy water vapor pressure gradient (VPG) during daytime (hours 7 to 18 of the 24-h day) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, in periods I (21–30 January 2021), II (31 January–14 February), and III (15–28 February).
Figure 6. Relationships between above-canopy air temperature gradient (ATG) and above-canopy water vapor pressure gradient (VPG) during daytime (hours 7 to 18 of the 24-h day) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, in periods I (21–30 January 2021), II (31 January–14 February), and III (15–28 February).
Agronomy 13 03032 g006
Agronomy 13 03032 g007
Figure 7. Relationships between above-canopy air temperature gradient (ATG) and above-canopy water vapor pressure gradient (VPG) during nighttime (hours 19 to 6 of the 24-h day) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, in periods I (21–30 January 2021), II (31 January–14 February), and III (15–28 February). p < 0.001 for all regression lines.
Figure 7. Relationships between above-canopy air temperature gradient (ATG) and above-canopy water vapor pressure gradient (VPG) during nighttime (hours 19 to 6 of the 24-h day) in irrigated fields of wheat cultivars, Imam and Bohaine, in periods I (21–30 January 2021), II (31 January–14 February), and III (15–28 February). p < 0.001 for all regression lines.
Agronomy 13 03032 g007
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mohammed, A.A.A.; Tsubo, M.; Ma, S.; Kurosaki, Y.; Ibaraki, Y.; Tahir, I.S.A.; Gorafi, Y.S.A.; Idris, A.A.M.; Tsujimoto, H. Micrometeorological Comparison of Canopy Temperature between Two Wheat Cultivars Grown under Irrigation in a Hot Environment in Sudan. Agronomy 2023, 13, 3032. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13123032

AMA Style

Mohammed AAA, Tsubo M, Ma S, Kurosaki Y, Ibaraki Y, Tahir ISA, Gorafi YSA, Idris AAM, Tsujimoto H. Micrometeorological Comparison of Canopy Temperature between Two Wheat Cultivars Grown under Irrigation in a Hot Environment in Sudan. Agronomy. 2023; 13(12):3032. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13123032

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mohammed, Almutaz Abdelkarim Abdelfattah, Mitsuru Tsubo, Shaoxiu Ma, Yasunori Kurosaki, Yasuomi Ibaraki, Izzat Sidahmed Ali Tahir, Yasir Serag Alnor Gorafi, Amani A. M. Idris, and Hisashi Tsujimoto. 2023. "Micrometeorological Comparison of Canopy Temperature between Two Wheat Cultivars Grown under Irrigation in a Hot Environment in Sudan" Agronomy 13, no. 12: 3032. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13123032

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop