Accounting for variation in designing greenhouse experiments Chris Brien1, Bettina Berger2, Huwaida Rabie1, Mark Tester2 1Phenomics & Bioinformatics Research Centre, University of South Australia; 2Australian Centre for Plant.

Download Report

Transcript Accounting for variation in designing greenhouse experiments Chris Brien1, Bettina Berger2, Huwaida Rabie1, Mark Tester2 1Phenomics & Bioinformatics Research Centre, University of South Australia; 2Australian Centre for Plant.

Accounting for variation
in designing greenhouse
experiments
Chris Brien1, Bettina Berger2,
Huwaida Rabie1, Mark Tester2
1Phenomics
& Bioinformatics Research
Centre, University of South Australia;
2Australian Centre for Plant Functional
Genomics, Adelaide.
Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The issues.
The PA experiment.
Results of the experiment.
Uniformity trials to compare designs.
Current designs.
Conclusions.
2
1. The issues

The Plant accelerator ®



Latest technology in high throughput plant imaging
Plants are first grown in a Greenhouse then moved to the
imaging room (Smarthouse)
Automatic, non-destructive, repeated measurements of
the physical attributes (phenotype) of plants in
Smarthouse.
3
Issues in designing PA experiments

At least two phases: Greenhouse and Smarthouse
phases.

Should one worry about design at all?
o


Even if design Smarthouse phase, do we need to worry
about design in the Greenhouse phase?
If do use designs, what design to use in a phase?



Perhaps better to rearrange location of plants during the
experiment to average out microclimate effects.
What N-S or E-W trends should be accounted for?
Is there spatial correlation?
Does movement in PA have a thigmomorphogenic
or other effect of movement?

Other possible effects of movement are soil compaction
and or root damage due to soil movement.
4
2.

The PA experiment
Ran a two-phase wheat experiment in PA.





Brien & Bailey (2006) and Brien et al (2011) discuss
such experiments;
They generally involve multiple allocations and/or
randomizations.
In this case, a Greenhouse and a Smarthouse
phase.
All plants are Gladius.
Specifically designed soil substrate to circumvent
soil movement effects.
5
Greenhouse phase
East
North
2 Sides
2 Blocks
3 Rows in S
24Columns in B
South
Air con
288 pots


The 2 Sides by 2
Blocks correspond
to 4 Locations in
the Greenhouse.
No allocations
Western door
6
Smarthouse phase: allocation of pots
to carts
East
North
Zone 3
Air con
Zone 2
North
Zone 4
South
West
Zone 4
Zone 3
Zone 2
Zone 1
Zone 1
South
Greenhouse
2 Sides
2 Blocks
3 Rows in S
24Columns in B
288 pots
Smarthouse
4 Zones
3 Lanes in Z
24Positions
288 carts

Solid lines indicate
randomization while
dashed lines indicate
systematic assignment.
7
Smarthouse tactics

Four tactics, each of 3 rows of 24 carts, were
applied in the Smarthouse:
Bench: Plants placed on benches at the end of the
conveyer system and not moved – no relocation;
2. Same lane: always return to the same position after
watering or imaging – standard practice;
3. Half lane: After watering or imaging, move pots forward
half a lane, which will result in pots changing sides from
East to West and vice-a-versa with each move –
restricted relocation;
4. Next lane: After watering or imaging, move the whole
lane forward to the next lane in the Smarthouse –
restricted relocation.
1.
8
Allocation of Smarthouse tactics


Pots have been allocated to carts .
Four tactics are systematically allocated to zones.
Smarthouse
Greenhouse
2 Sides
2 Blocks
3 Rows in S
24Columns in B
288 pots
4 Zones
3 Lanes in Z
24Positions
4 Tactics
4 treatments
288 carts
9
East
Smarthouse phase
West
North
Imaging
Air con
Zone 3 – Half lane
Next
Half
Same
Bench
West
Air con
South
North
Zone 4 –
Next
lane
10
3. Results: data obtained



Fresh weight at the end of the trial
Total area (pixels) on Mon, Wed & Fri from day 21
to day 51.
Height (cm) on day 51, from which derived a
Density index ( = Total area / height).
11
Profile plots of the longitudinal data

Next lane


has slower
growth
is more
variable.
12
Predicted growth curves using splines


Next lane has
slowest growth
Half-lane has
fastest growth
13
Total area measurements for Days 21
and 51

Focus on these:



Day 21 represents the effect of the Greenhouse;
Day 51 represents the combined effect of the
Greenhouse and Smarthouse.
Mixed models:

Tactics + Tactics∧Lanes + td(Positions) +
td(Positions)∧Tactics
| idh(Tactics)∧Lanes∧ar1(Positions)
o
o
o
td means investigate trend over this factor;
idh mean investigate unequal variances between levels;
ar1 mean investigate autocorrelation between levels.
14
Results of mixed model analyses


Similar models for Day 21 and Day 51.
Differences in means and variances between the
Tactics.




However, no differences between bench and same lane
for any responses (including density index).
No evidence of spatial correlation.
No differences between the three Lanes within
each Tactic.
Trends over Columns in the greenhouse and
Positions in the Smarthouse that differ between
Tactics.
15
Column/Position trends in Total area
Day 21


Day 51
Area increases eastwards in the Greenhouse, mainly in south (light?).
Increasing slope for all on Day 51, except for half-lane.
16
Position trends for Day 51 adjusted for
Day 51
Day 21



For same lane (and probably bench) there is a trend in the
Smarthouse that increases from West to East (air in W).
The Position trend in next lane parallels Column trend in
Day 21 total areas — greenhouse or Smarthouse?
For half lane, no Smarthouse Position trend — little Column
17
trend in north-east and no Smarthouse contribution.
Lane trend

Jo Tillbrooks’ 2011 experiments
– fill Smarthouse
Three split plots



Exp. 1 – 22 lines and 3 conditions in 8 blocks; conditions
in 3 vertical subplots.
Exp. 2 – 153 lines and 2 conditions in 3 blocks; lines
partially replicated; conditions in 2 horizontal subplots.
Exp. 3 – 214 lines and 2 conditions in 8 blocks; lines
partially replicated; conditions in 2 vertical subplots.
18
Estimated lane trend
Ribbons are CIs

Plants in Lanes towards north grow less



no. lanes with lower area depends on time of the year.
Seems about 4 lanes are homogeneous.
It would appear that the lower total area for nextlane tactic is due to shading in the northern zone.
19
Relative efficiencies from taking lane
& position into account
No trend
Lane trend
Position trend
Lane + Position trend
1
100.0
139.9
102.8
148.8
Experiment
2
100.0
236.07
95.9
230.1
3
100.0
146.8
98.0
147.7
The efficiencies are relative to the no-tend analysis.



Gains vary.
Gains in efficiency of 40% or more can be
expected from allowing for lane trends.
A 10% gain in efficiency can be expected from
allowing for position trends in Experiment 1 only,
and provided that lane trends allowed for.
20
Relocation during the PA experiment

In half-lane tactic:




Plants spend half time in eastern half and western half;
Plants not equal in exposure to trend: when carts 13–24
moved to positions 1–12, relative east west positions
maintained;
Result is unable to detect trend, but greater individual
plant variability (30% less precision).
In next-lane tactic:

Plants spend equal amount of time in shaded lanes;
 5 or less days difference in entry of 1st and exit of 3rd
lanes;
 No difference between lanes of next-lane tactic supports
uniform exposure of plants to lane trend.
21
4. Uniformity trials to compare
designs


Each tactic, 3 Lanes  24 Positions, is essentially a
uniformity trial (all Gladius, all treated equally).
Perfect for comparing different designs to deal with
position trends:




Superimpose treatments (lines) on a zone using different
designs;
Analyse the total area according to the design;
Compute the relative efficiencies (%) of designs:
Repeat for a random sample of possible randomizations
of the designs.
22
Relative efficiency (relative to a CRD)

For a Proposed Design or Analysis (PDA):
APCRD
REPDA 
100
APPDA
where each



AP  F1,d ,1  .
2
diff
It is a modified A-optimality criterion, the F taking
into account any differences in denominator df.
It compares the average sizes of the confidence
intervals for pairwise differences between
predictions for treatments.
PDA with REPDA > 100 is more efficient than a CRD:

it has smaller s.e.d.s and so better able to detect
treatment (line) differences.
23
Equally-replicated lines

Consider the following designs & analyses with 36
(24) lines:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
A CRD, without and with adjustment for Position trend;
An RCBD with two 3  12 (three 3 8 & 1  24) blocks,
without and with adjustment for Position trend;
(Nearly) Trend-free designs for CRD & RCBD (DiGGer);
Resolved IBDs with blocks 3  1, 1  4 & 3  6
(3  1, 1  4 & 3 4) (CycDesigN);
Resolved row-col designs with two 3  12 (three 3 8)
rectangles.
3
2
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
24
Equallyreplicated
lines

Look for designs which
give > 10% increase
for all tactics.

For 36 lines: small blocks,
CRD + Adj, or TFD;
but, TFCBD312EqLin
best for same & next.
 For 24 lines: small blocks,
CRD + Adj, RCBD 38 (
RRCD 38); TF or NTF
no advantage.
25
Partially-replicated lines, with 2
conditions (an initial investigation)

A split-plot design for 72 carts with:
1)
2)
3)
3
2
33
1
22
6 (or 8) duplicated lines, 20 (or 16) unreplicated lines
and 2 control lines replicated twice;
Lines applied to 36 main plots, of 2 consecutive carts in
the same lane, using an augmented block design;
2 conditions randomized to the 2 subplots (carts) of a
main plot.
Again, looked at designs with varying block sizes.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
11
11 22 33 44 55 66 77 88 99 10
10 11
11 12
12 13
13 14
14 15
15 16
16 17
17 18
18 19
19 20
20 21
21 22
22 23
23 24
24
26
Partiallyreplicated
lines, with
two
conditions

t6
t8
t6
t8
Look for designs which
give > 10% increase for
all tactics.

Line comparisons: best is
main plots (2 carts) of
33 (= 3 Lanes 6
Positions) for t6 & t8, and
32 (= 3 Lanes 4
Positions) for t6.
 Conditions comparisons:
little affected (as assigned
to carts), but same
designs best.
27
5.

Current designs
Smarthouse experiments run with 24 lanes x 22 positions
 528 carts.


Smarthouse divided into:
(6 zones of 4 lanes) x (2 halves of 10 & 12 positions).


Lines are balanced across positions so that they are unaffected by a
linear trend across positions in the Smarthouse.
Often partially replicated designs:


Block designs for 12 blocks.
Nearly trend-free designs:


Maximum of 23 carts per row because of weight limitations of
conveyor system.
Parents/controls several replicates, 20% replicated twice, rest
unreplicated.
Generated using DiGGer software, an add-in to the
statistical programming language R. (free)
28
Fleet x Commander mapping popn

Germination and initial growth of 528 single-plant pots on
10 tables in southern space in Smarthouse.
Smarthouse
Position
Table 1
1
2
3
Table 3
4
5
1
2
3
Table 5
4
5
1
2
3
Table 7
4
5
1
2
3
Table 9
4
5
1
2
3
4
2
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
3
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
4
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
5
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
6
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
7
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
8
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
9
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
10
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
11
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
12
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
13
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
Table 6
Table 8
Table 2
Table 4
Table
10
14
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
15
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
16
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
17
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
18
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
19
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
20
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
21
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
22
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24
23
Lane1
Lane2 Lane3
Lane4
Lane5
Lane6
Lane7
Lane8
Lane9
Lane10
Lane11 Lane12 Lane13 Lane14 Lane15
Lane16 Lane17 Lane18 Lane19 Lane20
Lane21 Lane22 Lane23 Lane24


Colours represent 6 Zones of 4 Lanes on the conveyor
system.
Within a lane, 22 pots arranged in same order as will be
placed on conveyor system.
29
Fleet x Commander mapping popn


6 Zones each of 2 blocks
of 4 lanes x
10 & 12 Positions.
2 parents replicated
6 times (blue),
36 lines replicated
twice (grey),
180 lines unreplicated
(green).



16.7% replicated.
2 consecutive carts
have 2 conditions
(no & added salt)
randomized to them.
Asymmetrical in 26–1
to distance from air con.
A partially-replicated, nearly-trendfree, block design with split plots.
30
Barley GWAS experiment




168 lines from a barley diversity panel from James
Hutton Institute, each replicated thrice.
3 Australian varieties as controls, each replicated 8
times.
2 watering conditions to study drought tolerance.
A total of 1024 pots requiring 2 Smarthouses.



In one Smarthouse, controls have 4 replicates, 84 lines
replicated twice and 84 occur only once.
A partially-replicated, nearly-trend-free, block design with
split plots used in each Smarthouse.
Initial growth on tables with lanes kept in blocks.
31
Barley GWAS experiment
NW Smarthouse
NE Smarthouse
Controls (blue), replicated twice (grey), unreplicated (green).
32
6. Specific conclusions



Not much Greenhouse column trend, except in south-east.
There are substantial lane and, to a lesser extent, position
trends in the Smarthouse.
Designs in the Smarthouse should be block or trend-free
designs, not row-and-column designs, nor spatial designs.


The blocks in such design should be no larger than 4 Lanes by 12
Positions and smaller would be better.
These conclusions need to be re-evaluated in other
situations.
33
General conclusions




No evidence of a thigmomorphogenic or other movement
effect in the Smarthouse. (Bench & Same Lane tactics do
not differ.)
Rearranging carts only minimizes plant variability where
exposure of the plants to microclimates is equalized.
Designed experiments and statistical analysis can more
easily and reliably achieve same as rearranging carts.
Have aligned Greenhouse and Smarthouse features,
e.g. blocks and trends, so both dealt with simultaneously.
34
Acknowledgements

The work was supported by:
35