4.7 Article

Green methodology for soil organic matter analysis using a national near infrared spectral library in tandem with learning machine

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 658, 期 -, 页码 895-900

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.263

关键词

Soil; Near infrared spectroscopy; Spectral library; Learning machine; Random forest

资金

  1. Instituto Nacional de Ciencia e Tecnologia de Bioanalitica (INCTBio)
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq, Brazil) [465389/2014-7, 303994/2017-7]
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES, Brazil) [001]
  4. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP, Brazil) [2014/508673]
  5. Embrapa [MP5 14.05.01.001.01.00.00]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Precision agriculture requires faster and automatic responses for fertility parameters, especially regarding soil organic matter (SOM). In Brazil, the standard methodology for SUM determination is a wet procedure based on the oxidation of the sample by an excess of potassium dichromate based on Walkley-Black method. This methodology has serious drawbacks, since, at a national level, generates approximately 600,000 L/year of toxic add waste containing Cr3+ and possibly Cr6+, besides time consuming and expensive. Herein, we present a faster green methodology that can eliminate the generation of these hazardous wastes and reduces the costs of analysis by approximately 80%, democratizing the soil fertility information and increasing the productivity. The methodology is based on the use of a national near infrared spectral library with approximately 43,000 samples and learning machine data analysis based on a random forest algorithm The methodology was validated by submitting the prediction results of 12 blind soil samples to a proficiency assay used for fertility soil laboratories qualification, receiving the maximum quality excellence index, indicating that it is suitable for use in routine analysis. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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