4.5 Article

Canopy-Based Normalized Difference Vegetation Index Sensors for Monitoring Cotton Nitrogen Status

期刊

AGRONOMY JOURNAL
卷 105, 期 5, 页码 1345-1354

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.2134/agronj2013.0080

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Cotton Incorporated

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Crop reflectance using ground-based sensors has the potential to provide information on crop N status in real-time. However, the unique physiological and structural characteristics of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum, L.) complicate normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI)-based inferences on cotton N status. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to (i) determine the sensitivity of selected sensors and resulting NDVI measurements to different levels of fertilizer N; (ii) determine relationships between sensors and biophysical measurements; and (iii) compare absolute NDVI readings reported by each sensor. Field trials were conducted during crop years conducted from 2008 through 2010 at Mississippi State, MS. Fertilizer N rates of 0, 45, 90, and 135 kg N ha(-1) were applied and replicated four times to establish N-induced growth differences. Sensors used included the Yara N Sensor (Yara International ASA, Oslo, Norway), GreenSeeker (GS) Model 505 Optical Sensor Unit (NTech Industries, Inc., Ukiah, CA) and Crop Circle (CC) Model ACS-210 (Holland Scientific, Inc., Lincoln, NE). Sensor readings failed to consistently predict cotton leaf N status before early flowering; however, plant height relationships with NDVIs were strong. Comparison of sensor response curves to fertilizer N resulted in no significant differences in slope values, although consistent, significant differences in gamma intercepts were noted beginning at early flowering and continuing through peak flowering. Greater accuracy in the detection of cotton leaf N status may require the utilization of an index which is less responsive to changes in plant height or canopy architecture. Furthermore, the magnitude of canopy reflectance-based NDVI values differed across sensors.

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

4.5
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