4.0 Article

Evaluating Maize Grain Quality by Continuous Wavelet Analysis Under Normal and Lodging Circumstances

期刊

SENSOR LETTERS
卷 10, 期 1-2, 页码 580-585

出版社

AMER SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1166/sl.2012.1871

关键词

Hyperspectral Measurement; Grain Quality; Continuous Wavelet Analysis; Partial Least Squares Regression

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41001199]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Root lodging is the most common stress that occurred in maize growing period. It has a great impact on both yield and grain quality. This study aims at developing some leaf level non-contact detecting models of grain quality for both maize plants under lodging and normal circumstances. In Anthesis and Spinning stages of maize growth, an artificial lodging was manipulated to simulate the naturally occurred physical force like windstorm. The hyperspectral measurements of three-ear-leaves were taken for both normal and lodged plants by the ASD FieldSpec Pro spectrometer. The contents of oil, protein and starch in the grain were measured by an automated near-infrared grain analyzer. A two-tailed t-test was used to identify the grain quality properties with significant difference between normal and lodging treatments. A continuous wavelet analysis (CWT) was employed to extract the spectral features of grain quality contents. Based on these spectral features, a partial least squares (PLS) regression was applied in developing the predicting models of grain quality parameters for both normal and lodging samples. As shown in the results, the wavelet transformed spectral features were successfully generated for both protein and starch samples, yet with varied wavelength positions and decomposition scales between normal and lodging treatments. The accuracy of the multiple regression models was relatively high, with an R-2 over 0.75 for all predicting models. The potential of CWT analysis in predicting maize grain quality parameters under both normal and lodging circumstances was thus illustrated.

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

4.0
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