4.3 Article

Estimation of Heavy-Metal Contamination in Soil Using Remote Sensing Spectroscopy and a Statistical Approach

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12524-016-0648-4

关键词

Heavy-metal contamination; Remote sensing spectroscopy; Statistical approach

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [41001214]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heavy-metal-contaminated soil is a critical environmental issue in suburban regions. This paper focuses on utilizing field spectroscopy to predict the heavy metal contents in soil for two suburban areas in the Jiangning District (JN) and the Baguazhou District (BGZ) in China. The relationship between the surface soil heavy metal contents and spectral features was investigated through statistical modeling. Spectral features of several spectral techniques, including reflectance spectra (RF), the logarithm of reciprocal spectra (LG) and continuum-removal spectra (CR), were employed to establish and calibrate models regarding to Cd, Hg and Pb contents. The optimal bands for each spectral feature were first selected based on the spectra of soil samples with artificially added heavy metals using stepwise multiple linear regressions. With the chosen bands, the average predictive accuracies of the cross-validation, using the coefficient of determination R-2, for estimating the heavy metal contents in the two field regions were 0.816, 0.796 and 0.652 for Cd; 0.787, 0.888 and 0.832 for Pb; and 0.906 and 0.867 for Hg based on partial least squares regression. Results show that better prediction accuracies were obtained for Cd and Hg, while the poorest prediction was obtained for Pb. Moreover, the performances of the LG and CR models were better than that of the RF model for Pb and Hg, indicating that LG and CR can provide alternative features in determining heavy metal contents. Overall, it's concluded that Cd, Hg and Pb contents can be assessed using remote-sensing spectroscopy with reasonable accuracy, especially when combined with library and field-collected spectra.

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

4.3
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