---
title: "Root Traits"
author: "Josh Sumner, DDPSC Data Science Core Facility"
subtitle: "pcvr v0.1.0"
output: 
  html_vignette:
    toc: true
    number_sections: false
    code_folding: show
date: "2024-04-22"
vignette: >
  %\VignetteIndexEntry{Root Traits}
  %\VignetteEngine{knitr::rmarkdown}
  %\VignetteEncoding{UTF-8}
---

```{r setup, include=FALSE}
knitr::opts_chunk$set(echo = TRUE)
library(pcvr)
library(ggplot2)
theme_set(pcv_theme())
```

## Root imaging data

Root imaging is an emerging application of `PlantCV`. Due to the nature of available technologies for
root imaging the output tends to be noisy and there are a different set of phenotypes that may be
interesting for researchers. Fundamentally analysis should be very similar for most phenotypes, but in
the interest of providing an example for root-focused researchers we will go over a few options for
root data output from `PlantCV`. For this vignette we will work with simulated data based off of mini rhyzotron data collected from Fischer farms in the Fall of 2023.

## Simulating Minirhyzotron data

The data is simulated as a mixture between a Uniform background distribution and N gaussian
distributions where N follows a uniform distribution and each gaussian is parameterized by mu and
sigma. Mu also follows a uniform distribution and sigma follows a half-normal distribution. Pixels
are assigned to the background or the gaussian mixture component according to theta. Pixels assigned
to the gaussian mixture are randomly assigned to each of the N gaussian distributions. See the
`rRhyzoDist` function below. We also define functions that will generate single value traits
from the MV frequencies.


```{r}
rRhyzoDist <- function(n, theta = 0.3, u1_max = 20, u2_max = 5500, sd = 200, abs_max = 5500) {
  #* split n_pixels based on theta into background and gaussians
  n_unif_pixels <- ceiling(n * theta)
  n_gauss_pixels <- floor(n * (1 - theta))
  #* background is uniform
  background <- runif(n_unif_pixels, 0, u2_max)
  #* simulate a number of gaussians randomly between 1 and u1_max
  n_gaussians <- runif(1, 1, u1_max)
  #* each gaussian has a mean that is uniform between 1 and u2_max
  mu_is <- lapply(seq_len(n_gaussians), function(i) {
    return(runif(1, 1, u2_max))
  })
  #* each gaussian has a sigma that is half-normal based on sd
  sd_is <- lapply(seq_len(n_gaussians), function(i) {
    return(extraDistr::rhnorm(1, sd))
  })
  #* assign pixels randomly to gaussians
  index <- sample(seq_len(n_gaussians), size = n_gauss_pixels, replace = TRUE)
  px_is <- lapply(seq_len(n_gaussians), function(i) {
    return(sum(index == i))
  })
  #* draws n_pixels time from each gaussian
  d <- unlist(lapply(seq_len(n_gaussians), function(i) {
    return(rnorm(px_is[[i]], mu_is[[i]], sd_is[[i]]))
  }))
  #* combine data
  d <- c(d, background)
  #* make sure no gaussians return data out of bounds
  d[d < 0] <- runif(sum(d < 0), 0, abs_max)
  d[d >= abs_max] <- runif(sum(d >= abs_max), 0, abs_max)
  return(d)
}
lastNonZeroBin <- function(d) {
  return(max(d[d$value > 0, "label"]))
}
tubeAngleToDepth <- function(x, theta) {
  return(sin(theta) * x)
}
mv_mean <- function(d) {
  return(weighted.mean(d$label, d$value))
}
mv_median <- function(d) {
  return(median(rep(d$label, d$value)))
}
mv_std <- function(d) {
  return(sd(rep(d$label, d$value)))
}
sv_from_mv <- function(df, theta) { # note this should also return mean/median/std
  metaCols <- colnames(df)[-which(grepl("value|label|trait", colnames(df)))]
  out <- aggregate(
    as.formula(paste0(
      "value ~ ",
      paste(metaCols, collapse = "+")
    )),
    data = df, sum, na.rm = TRUE
  )
  colnames(out)[ncol(out)] <- "area"
  out$max_pixel <- unlist(lapply(split(df, interaction(df[, metaCols])), lastNonZeroBin))
  out$height <- tubeAngleToDepth(out$max_pixel, 0.35)
  out$mean_x_frequencies <- unlist(lapply(split(df, interaction(df[, metaCols])), mv_mean))
  out$median_x_frequencies <- unlist(lapply(split(df, interaction(df[, metaCols])), mv_median))
  out$std_x_frequencies <- unlist(lapply(split(df, interaction(df[, metaCols])), mv_std))
  return(out)
}
```

The simulated data looks realistic based on limited test data available at time of writing.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Simulated mini rhyzotron style data which is more or less only noise.
set.seed(123)
ex <- do.call(rbind, lapply(1:20, function(rep) {
  n_total_pixels <- runif(1, 100, 3000)
  x <- rRhyzoDist(n = n_total_pixels)
  h <- hist(x, plot = FALSE, breaks = seq(0, 5500, 20))
  breaks <- h$breaks[-1]
  counts <- h$counts
  rep_df <- data.frame(
    rep = as.character(rep),
    value = counts, label = breaks,
    trait = "x_frequencies"
  )
  return(rep_df)
}))
pcv.joyplot(ex, "x_frequencies", group = c("rep"))
```


For the rest of this vignette we will use simulated data. The first simulated data `df` assumes that
roots can appear and disappear from the minirhyzotron images over time. The second simulated data
assumes that once a root is seen along the minirhyzotron that it will stay visible.

```{r}
n_times <- 5
parameters <- data.frame(
  time = c(1:n_times),
  n_min = rep(0, n_times),
  n_max = seq(2000, 5500, length.out = n_times),
  theta = rep(0.3, n_times),
  u1_max = seq(10, 20, length.out = n_times),
  u2_max = seq(2000, 5500, length.out = n_times),
  u2_max_noise = seq(400, 200, length.out = n_times),
  sd = seq(150, 250, length.out = n_times)
)
set.seed(123)
df <- do.call(rbind, lapply(seq_len(nrow(parameters)), function(time) {
  pars <- parameters[parameters$time == time, ]
  time_df <- do.call(rbind, lapply(1:10, function(rep) {
    n_total_pixels <- runif(1, pars$n_min, pars$n_max)
    u2_max_iter <- ceiling(rnorm(1, pars$u2_max, pars$u2_max_noise))
    x <- rRhyzoDist(
      n = n_total_pixels, theta = pars$theta,
      u1_max = pars$u1_max,
      u2_max = u2_max_iter, sd = pars$sd
    )
    h <- hist(x, plot = FALSE, breaks = seq(0, 5500, 20))
    breaks <- h$breaks[-1]
    counts <- h$counts
    rep_df <- data.frame(
      rep = as.character(rep),
      time = as.character(time),
      value = counts, label = breaks,
      trait = "x_frequencies"
    )
    return(rep_df)
  }))
  return(time_df)
}))
df$rep <- factor(df$rep, levels = seq_along(unique(df$rep)), ordered = TRUE)
sv <- sv_from_mv(df)
```

```{r}
n_times <- 5
parameters <- data.frame(
  time = c(1:n_times),
  n_min_new_px = rep(50, n_times),
  n_max_new_px = seq(1000, 2500, length.out = n_times),
  theta = rep(0.3, n_times),
  u1_max = seq(10, 20, length.out = n_times),
  mean_added_depth = seq(log(200), log(1200), length.out = n_times),
  added_depth_noise = rep(0.1, n_times),
  sd = seq(150, 250, length.out = n_times)
)
set.seed(567)
df2 <- do.call(rbind, lapply(1:10, function(rep) {
  dList <- list()
  add_area <- 2000
  previous_max_depth <- 2000
  d <- numeric(0)
  for (time in seq_len(nrow(parameters))) {
    pars <- parameters[parameters$time == time, ]
    n_total_pixels <- add_area + runif(1, pars$n_min_new_px, pars$n_max_new_px)
    max_depth <- ceiling(previous_max_depth + rlnorm(1, pars$mean_added_depth, pars$added_depth_noise))
    x <- rRhyzoDist(
      n = n_total_pixels, theta = pars$theta,
      u1_max = pars$u1_max,
      u2_max = max_depth, sd = pars$sd
    )
    d <- append(d, x)
    h <- hist(d, plot = FALSE, breaks = seq(0, 5500, 20))
    breaks <- h$breaks[-1]
    counts <- h$counts
    dList[[time]] <- data.frame(
      rep = as.character(rep),
      time = as.character(time),
      value = counts, label = breaks,
      trait = "x_frequencies"
    )
    add_area <- 0
    previous_max_depth <- max_depth
  }
  return(do.call(rbind, dList))
}))
df2$rep <- factor(df2$rep, levels = seq_along(unique(df2$rep)), ordered = TRUE)
sv2 <- sv_from_mv(df2)
```

## Outlier Removal


## Single Value Traits

If we assume that roots can only enter the minirhyzotron images then we would expect a positive trend
over time for total root area.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Plot of single value root traits from mini rhyzotron style data collection under
#|   the assumption that roots can enter and exit the image.
ggplot(sv, aes(x = time, y = area, group = rep)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  labs(x = "Sampling Time", y = "Area (px)", title = "Assuming roots can leave the image")
```


```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Plot of single value root traits from mini rhyzotron style data collection under
#|   the assumption that roots can only enter the image then never leave it.
ggplot(sv2, aes(x = time, y = area, group = rep)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  labs(x = "Sampling Time", y = "Area (px)", title = "Assuming roots can only enter the image")
```

It would also make sense that the mean of the distribution would move deeper over time as roots have
time to grow. This is likely to be true regardless of whether roots can leave the image.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Mean depth over time assuming roots grow deeper over the experiment and
#|   can enter and exit the image.
ggplot(sv, aes(x = time, y = mean_x_frequencies, group = rep)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  labs(x = "Sampling Time", y = "Mean Depth", title = "Assuming roots can leave the image")
```


```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Mean depth over time assuming roots grow deeper over the experiment and
#|   cannot leave the image once they enter.
ggplot(sv2, aes(x = time, y = mean_x_frequencies, group = rep)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  labs(x = "Sampling Time", y = "Mean Depth", title = "Assuming roots can only enter the image")
```

The same should be true for the median, although being more robust to outliers it may move more slowly.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Median depth over time assuming roots grow deeper over the experiment and
#|   can enter and exit the image.
ggplot(sv, aes(x = time, y = median_x_frequencies, group = rep)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  labs(x = "Sampling Time", y = "Median Depth", title = "Assuming roots can leave the image")
```


```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Median depth over time assuming roots grow deeper over the experiment and
#|   cannot leave the image once they enter.
ggplot(sv2, aes(x = time, y = median_x_frequencies, group = rep)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  labs(x = "Sampling Time", y = "Median Depth", title = "Assuming roots can only enter the image")
```

Finally, depth (height as returned by `PlantCV`) should increase in both datasets over time but should
be strictly monotone if roots can only enter the images.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Max depth over time assuming roots grow deeper over the experiment and
#|   can enter and exit the image.
ggplot(sv, aes(x = time, y = height, group = rep)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  labs(x = "Sampling Time", y = "Max Depth", title = "Assuming roots can leave the image")
```


```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Max depth over time assuming roots grow deeper over the experiment and
#|   cannot leave the image once they enter.
ggplot(sv2, aes(x = time, y = height, group = rep)) +
  geom_point() +
  geom_line() +
  labs(x = "Sampling Time", y = "Max Depth", title = "Assuming roots can only enter the image")
```

### Statistical Analysis

These data are likely to be noisier than above ground phenotypes but the same general methods should
be applicable. Here we will show a simple example of longitudinal modeling using `growthSS` and
a pairwise comparison via `conjugate` but any methods in other vignettes may be broadly reasonable.

#### Longitudinal Modeling

For the purposes of this example we combine the two datasets as though each is from one genotype
where the roots exhibit different behavior in being able to leave the image vs not being able to
leave the image and model the root area over time.

```{r}
sv$geno <- "a"
sv2$geno <- "b"
ex <- rbind(sv, sv2)
ex$time <- as.numeric(ex$time)
```

We fit a (perhaps overly) simple linear model to this data using the `nls` backend. Other options
include quantile modeling (`type = "nlrq"`), frequentist mixed effect modeling (`type = "nlme"`),
General Additive modeling (`type = "mgcv"`), and Bayesian hierarchical modeling (`type = "brms"`).

```{r}
ss <- growthSS("int_linear", area ~ time | rep / geno, df = ex, type = "nls")
m1 <- fitGrowth(ss)
```

Any models fit by `fitGrowth` can be visualized using `growthPlot`.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Linear model of root area.
growthPlot(m1, form = ss$pcvrForm, df = ss$df)
```

And non-`brms` models can be tested using `testGrowth`. Note that `brms::hypothesis` is a more flexible
version of the third example of `testGrowth` below.

We might test that the intercept (amount of roots visible at the first timepoint) is different:

```{r}
testGrowth(ss, m1, test = "I")$anova
```

That the effect of time is different:

```{r}
testGrowth(ss, m1, test = "A")$anova
```

Or more specific hypotheses on any coefficients such as the slope for the first group being 10% higher
than that of the second group (to clarify groups you can always check the data returned by `growthSS`):

```{r}
table(ss$df$geno, ss$df$geno_numericLabel)
testGrowth(ss, m1, test = "A1*1.1 - A2")
```

If you have a more nuanced hypothesis or want to model heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation then
other backends as detailed in the
[intermediate growth modeling](https://github.com/danforthcenter/pcvr/tree/main/tutorials/pcvrTutorial_intermediateGrowthModeling)
and
[advanced growth modeling](https://github.com/danforthcenter/pcvr/tree/main/tutorials/pcvrTutorial_advancedGrowthModeling)
tutorials may be of use.

#### Pairwise Comparisons

For non-longitudinal data/hypotheses any standard tests may be useful. Here we'll only show `conjugate`
since it is a departure from the norm.

The `conjugate` function makes pairwise Bayesian comparisons using distributions for which there are
conjugate prior distributions that can be easily updated with observed data. This allows for more
direct hypothesis testing and Region of Practical Equivalence (ROPE) testing.

Here we might use `conjugate` to compare to compare area on the last day between our two "genotypes".
In this example we'll use the "T" distribution to run a Bayesian analog to a T-test.

```{r}
s1 <- ex[ex$geno == "a" & ex$time == max(ex$time), "area"]
s2 <- ex[ex$geno == "b" & ex$time == max(ex$time), "area"]

conj_ex <- conjugate(
  s1, s2, # specify data, here two samples
  method = "t", # use the "T" distribution
  priors = list(mu = 3000, sd = 50), # prior distribution, here it is the same for both samples
  rope_range = c(-500, 500), # differences of <500 pixels deemed not meaningful
  rope_ci = 0.89, cred.int.level = 0.89, # default credible interval lengths
  hypothesis = "equal" # hypothesis to test
)
```

The `conjugate` output includes a summary, the posterior distributions in the same format as the priors
were supplied, and optionally a plot.

Print the object to view a summary which
contains the HDE (highest density estimate) of each group's posterior distribution,
the HDI (highest density interval) of each group's posterior distribution, the hypothesis that was
tested, the posterior probability of that hypothesis, the HDE/HDI for the mean difference (if rope_range
was specified), and the probability of the mean difference being within the rope_range.

```{r}
conj_ex
```

The posterior is returned as a list with the same elements as the prior. This allows for Bayesian
updating if you wish to do so.

```{r}
do.call(rbind, conj_ex$posterior)
```

The plot includes information from the summary graphically as a patchwork of 2 ggplots if rope_range
was specified or is a single ggplot otherwise.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Example of conjugate plot for single or multi value traits.
plot(conj_ex)
```

Here we would conclude that the distributions are different since the probability that they are the same
is roughly 1% and that the mean difference is biologically meaningful since the HDI of the mean
difference falls entirely outside of our rope_range.

## Multi Value Traits

The multi value traits returned by `analyze_distribution` will often be more difficult to analyze than
standard multi value traits that describe spectral wavelengths or indices. The `conjugate` function
can use MV traits by specifying matrices/data.frames for s1 and s2, but it will be very rare that a
minirhyzotron image's distribution will follow an easily parameterized pdf.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Joyplot of multi value traits which is similar to analyze distribution in plantcv
pcv.joyplot(df, "x_frequencies", group = c("rep", "time"))
```

Theoretically we could consider this as a mixture of uniform and gaussian distributions.
A mixture of conjugate priors yields a mixture of conjugate posteriors, but this is out
of the current scope of `conjugate`. Likewise, the complexity of a non-conjugate mixture model applied
to this data does not seem warranted.

The other general option in `pcvr` to analyze multi-value traits is Earth-Mover's Distance (EMD),
which is a distance metric to classify how much "work" it would take to turn one histogram into another.
This may be useful for minirhyzotron data depending on your hypothesis. 

Here we will show an ad-hoc option to compare the number of "peaks" in the data and an example of
using EMD.

### Numbers of Peaks

To compare the number of peaks we need a way to identify a peak. Here we do this with a quick function
that finds intervals of counts above some cutoff for at least some duration.

```{r}
getPeaks <- function(d = NULL, intensity = 20, duration = 3) {
  binwidth <- as.numeric(unique(diff(d$label)))
  if (length(binwidth) > 1) {
    stop("label column should have constant bin size")
  }
  labels <- sort(d[d$value >= intensity, "label"])
  r <- rle(diff(labels))
  peaks <- sum(r$lengths[r$values == binwidth] >= duration)
  return(peaks)
}
```

```{r}
d <- split(df, interaction(df[, c("rep", "time")]))
peak_df <- data.frame(peaks = unlist(lapply(d, getPeaks)))
rownames(peak_df) <- NULL
peak_df$rep <- unlist(lapply(names(d), function(nm) {
  return(strsplit(nm, "[.]")[[1]][[1]])
}))
peak_df$time <- unlist(lapply(names(d), function(nm) {
  return(strsplit(nm, "[.]")[[1]][[2]])
}))
```

```{r}
s1 <- peak_df[peak_df$time == min(peak_df$time), "peaks"]
s2 <- peak_df[peak_df$time == max(peak_df$time), "peaks"]

conj_ex2 <- conjugate(
  s1, s2, # specify data, here two samples
  method = "poisson", # use the Poisson distribution
  priors = list(a = c(0.5, 0.5), b = c(0.5, 0.5)), # prior distributions for gamma on lambda
  rope_range = c(-1, 1), # differences of <500 pixels deemed not meaningful
  rope_ci = 0.89, cred.int.level = 0.89, # default credible interval lengths
  hypothesis = "equal" # hypothesis to test
)
```

```{r}
conj_ex2
```

```{r}
do.call(rbind, conj_ex2$posterior)
```

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Another example of conjugate output. Choosing what you actually mean to measure
#|   and understanding how it is related (and how strong that relationship is) to
#|   actual plant traits that you care about is crucial here.
plot(conj_ex2)
```

### EMD

Earth Mover's Distance measures how much work it takes to turn one histogram into another. Since multi-
value traits are exported from `PlantCV` as histograms this can be useful for color or distribution
analysis. In the following examples we make pairwise comparisons of all our rows and return a long dataframe of those distances. EMD can be computationally heavy with very large datasets since all the pairwise distances have to be calculated. The `mvAg` function may be useful if you need to summarize
your data to make EMD faster. If you are only interested in a change of the mean then this is probably not the best way to use your data, but it is a reasonable option for comparing whether groups are more
or less self-similar than other groups.

Here is a fast example of EMD. In this simulated data we have five generating distributions.
Normal, Log Normal, Bimodal, Trimodal, and Uniform. We could use some gaussian mixtures to characterize the multi-modal histograms but that will get clunky for comparing to the unimodal or uniform distributions. The `conjugate` function would not work here since these distributions do not share a common parameterization. Instead, we can use EMD.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Simulated Earth Mover's Distance based on several probability distributions.
set.seed(123)

simFreqs <- function(vec, group) {
  s1 <- hist(vec, breaks = seq(1, 181, 1), plot = FALSE)$counts
  s1d <- as.data.frame(cbind(data.frame(group), matrix(s1, nrow = 1)))
  colnames(s1d) <- c("group", paste0("sim_", 1:180))
  return(s1d)
}

sim_df <- rbind(
  do.call(rbind, lapply(1:10, function(i) {
    sf <- simFreqs(rnorm(200, 50, 10), group = "normal")
    return(sf)
  })),
  do.call(rbind, lapply(1:10, function(i) {
    sf <- simFreqs(rlnorm(200, log(30), 0.25), group = "lognormal")
    return(sf)
  })),
  do.call(rbind, lapply(1:10, function(i) {
    sf <- simFreqs(c(rlnorm(125, log(15), 0.25), rnorm(75, 75, 5)), group = "bimodal")
    return(sf)
  })),
  do.call(rbind, lapply(1:10, function(i) {
    sf <- simFreqs(c(rlnorm(100, log(15), 0.25), rnorm(50, 50, 5),
                     rnorm(50, 90, 5)), group = "trimodal")
    return(sf)
  })),
  do.call(rbind, lapply(1:10, function(i) {
    sf <- simFreqs(runif(200, 1, 180), group = "uniform")
    return(sf)
  }))
)

sim_df_long <- as.data.frame(data.table::melt(data.table::as.data.table(sim_df), id.vars = "group"))
sim_df_long$bin <- as.numeric(sub("sim_", "", sim_df_long$variable))

ggplot(sim_df_long, aes(x = bin, y = value, fill = group), alpha = 0.25) +
  geom_col(position = "identity", show.legend = FALSE) +
  pcv_theme() +
  facet_wrap(~group)
```

Our plots show very different distributions, so we get EMD between our images and see that we do have some trends shown in the resulting heatmap.

```{r,  class.source="simulated", class.output="simulated"}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Heatmap of Earth Mover's Distance between several probability distributions.
sim_emd <- pcv.emd(
  df = sim_df, cols = "sim_", reorder = c("group"),
  mat = FALSE, plot = TRUE, parallel = 1, raiseError = TRUE
)
sim_emd$plot
```

Arranging these distances into a network of dissimilarities shows the different distributions clustering
well.

```{r,  class.source="simulated", class.output="simulated"}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Simulated Earth Mover's Distance show as a network
n <- pcv.net(sim_emd$data, filter = "0.5")
net.plot(n, fill = "group")
```

Using our simulated mini-rhyzotron data we can go through the same steps. Here we will show this with
both simulated datasets (roots leaving the image and roots being stuck in the image once observed).

First we check our distributions via joyplot.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Using a joyplot to check our simulated mini rhyzotron data before using Earth
#|   Mover's Distance.
pcv.joyplot(df, "x_frequencies", group = c("rep", "time"))
```

We calculate EMD between our observations. Note here we have long input data as opposed to wide in the
previous example.

```{r}
df1_emd <- pcv.emd(
  df = df, cols = "x_frequencies", reorder = c("rep", "time"),
  id = c("rep", "time"),
  mat = FALSE, plot = TRUE, parallel = 1, raiseError = FALSE
)
```

And we arrange the distances as a network of dissimilarities. Here we are filtering for only those
edges that are above the 75th percentile in strength and we see a pretty clear temporal clustering.

```{r,  class.source="simulated", class.output="simulated"}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Plotting a network of our simulated mini rhyzotron data's Earth Mover's Distances.
#|   We can see some evidence of a change over time.
n <- pcv.net(df1_emd$data, filter = "0.75")
net.plot(n, fill = "time")
```

With our dataset that assumes roots cannot leave the image once observed we get similar results.

```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Using a joyplot to check our simulated mini rhyzotron data before using Earth
#|   Mover's Distance with the assumption that roots cannot leave the image.
pcv.joyplot(df2, "x_frequencies", group = c("rep", "time"))
```


```{r}
#| fig.alt: >
#|   Plotting a network of our simulated mini rhyzotron data's Earth Mover's Distances.
#|   We can see some evidence of a change over time with the assumption
#|   that roots cannot leave the image.
df2_emd <- pcv.emd(
  df = df2, cols = "x_frequencies", reorder = c("rep", "time"),
  id = c("rep", "time"),
  mat = FALSE, plot = TRUE, parallel = 1, raiseError = FALSE
)
n2 <- pcv.net(df2_emd$data, filter = "0.75")
net.plot(n2, fill = "time")
```

## Conclusion

Root imaging raises several potentially interesting problems around having new phenotypes to consider
and noisy data before and after segmentation. It is always important to consider the generating process
for your data but that may be especially true where it comes to minirhyzotron image data. Hopefully this
vignette helps provide some examples for how these data can be used, but if you have ideas or questions
please raise them in the `pcvr` [github issues](https://github.com/danforthcenter/pcvr) or in the
`help-datascience` slack channel for Danforth Center users.

