4.7 Article

Estimating photosynthetic traits from reflectance spectra: A synthesis of spectral indices, numerical inversion, and partial least square regression

期刊

PLANT CELL AND ENVIRONMENT
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 1241-1258

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pce.13718

关键词

earth system models; global carbon cycles; high-throughput mapping; hyperspectral imaging; machine learning; photosynthesis; plant breeding

资金

  1. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1172157]
  2. Department for International Development
  3. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1172157] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The lack of efficient means to accurately infer photosynthetic traits constrains understanding global land carbon fluxes and improving photosynthetic pathways to increase crop yield. Here, we investigated whether a hyperspectral imaging camera mounted on a mobile platform could provide the capability to help resolve these challenges, focusing on three main approaches, that is, reflectance spectra-, spectral indices-, and numerical model inversions-based partial least square regression (PLSR) to estimate photosynthetic traits from canopy hyperspectral reflectance for 11 tobacco cultivars. Results showed that PLSR with inputs of reflectance spectra or spectral indices yielded an R-2 of 0.8 for predicting V (cmax) and J (max), higher than an R-2 of 0.6 provided by PLSR of numerical inversions. Compared with PLSR of reflectance spectra, PLSR with spectral indices exhibited a better performance for predicting V (cmax) (R-2 = 0.84 +/- 0.02, RMSE = 33.8 +/- 2.2 mu mol m(-2) s(-1)) while a similar performance for J (max) (R-2 = 0.80 +/- 0.03, RMSE = 22.6 +/- 1.6 mu mol m(-2) s(-1)). Further analysis on spectral resampling revealed that V (cmax) and J (max) could be predicted with 10 spectral bands at a spectral resolution of less than 14.7 nm. These results have important implications for improving photosynthetic pathways and mapping of photosynthesis across scales.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据