植物生态学报 ›› 2006, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (1): 78-82.DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2006.0011
收稿日期:
2005-02-02
接受日期:
2005-05-24
出版日期:
2006-02-02
发布日期:
2006-01-30
作者简介:
E-mail:zhangjinheng@qust.edu.cn
基金资助:
Received:
2005-02-02
Accepted:
2005-05-24
Online:
2006-02-02
Published:
2006-01-30
摘要:
该文将矿质分析及岩石光谱特征分析中普遍使用的连续统去除法引入水稻(Oryza sativa)叶片反射光谱特征的分析中。分析连续统去除光谱反射率和连续统去除一阶微分光谱,发现随着氮素水平的增加连续统去除光谱反射率下降。分析连续统去除光谱吸收特征参数与叶片全氮量相关性,这些参数包括:吸收峰左半端的面积(A1)、吸收峰整体面积(A)、对称度(S)和连续统去除最小反射率(Dhc),结果表明连续统去除光谱吸收特征参数与叶片全氮量之间负相关性显著(均通过0.01水平的显著相关检验)。考虑到氮素营养在植物体内转移的营养原理,在分蘖期、孕穗期和抽穗期这3个关键生育期内分别针对水稻第一完全展开叶和第三完全展开叶建立连续统去除光谱吸收特征参数评价水稻氮素营养的回归模型。结果表明在估算第三完全展开叶氮素营养时,3个生育期内建模使用的回归量均为吸收峰整体面积A,而且在3个生育期内模型的决定系数较高且比较稳定。但是,第一完全展开叶建模使用的回归量(续统去除光谱吸收特征参数)不完全一致,这可能是由于氮素营养在植物体内转移导致。尽管连续统去除法诊断水稻氮素营养的一些机理还有待于进一步深入研究,但是该研究证明了运用水稻鲜叶片连续统去除反射光谱进行定性和定量评价水稻氮素营养在方法上是可行的。
张金恒. 基于连续统去除法的水稻氮素营养光谱诊断. 植物生态学报, 2006, 30(1): 78-82. DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2006.0011
ZHANG Jin-Heng. RICE NITROGEN NUTRITION DIAGNOSIS USING CONTINUUM-REMOVED REFLECTANCE. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2006, 30(1): 78-82. DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2006.0011
N0 L1 | N1 L1 | N2 L1 | N0 L3 | N1 L3 | N2 L3 | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖期Tiller stage | ||||||||||||||||||||||
吸收峰整体面积A | 98.689 2 | 93.392 0 | 90.131 0 | 99.663 4 | 89.757 4 | 87.542 8 | ||||||||||||||||
吸收峰左半端的面积A1 | 51.397 6 | 47.638 4 | 46.044 9 | 52.415 8 | 46.164 5 | 45.059 5 | ||||||||||||||||
对称度S | 0.520 8 | 0.510 1 | 0.510 9 | 0.525 9 | 0.514 3 | 0.514 7 | ||||||||||||||||
连续统去除最小反射率Dhc | 0.126 5 | 0.116 9 | 0.115 7 | 0.125 7 | 0.116 9 | 0.115 6 | ||||||||||||||||
叶片氮素含量Leaf Ndw | 2.85 | 3.58 | 4.11 | 2.73 | 3.6 | 4.04 | ||||||||||||||||
孕穗期Booting stage | ||||||||||||||||||||||
吸收峰整体面积A | 102.434 6 | 97.111 1 | 90.425 0 | 94.466 8 | 90.234 9 | 87.872 6 | ||||||||||||||||
吸收峰左半端的面积A1 | 53.211 5 | 49.451 7 | 45.554 9 | 48.538 2 | 45.510 4 | 44.188 7 | ||||||||||||||||
对称度S | 0.519 5 | 0.509 2 | 0.503 8 | 0.513 8 | 0.504 4 | 0.502 9 | ||||||||||||||||
连续统去除最小反射率Dhc | 0.127 5 | 0.113 3 | 0.109 2 | 0.110 0 | 0.106 6 | 0.107 1 | ||||||||||||||||
叶片氮素含量Leaf Ndw | 2.26 | 2.85 | 3 | 2.27 | 2.62 | 3.03 | ||||||||||||||||
抽穗期Heading stage | ||||||||||||||||||||||
吸收峰整体面积A | 97.862 5 | 90.807 6 | 91.089 2 | 99.339 5 | 91.067 2 | 89.124 5 | ||||||||||||||||
吸收峰左半端的面积A1 | 50.774 2 | 46.068 3 | 46.042 8 | 51.488 3 | 46.448 7 | 45.084 1 | ||||||||||||||||
对称度S | 0.518 8 | 0.507 3 | 0.505 5 | 0.518 3 | 0.510 0 | 0.505 9 | ||||||||||||||||
连续统去除最小反射率Dhc | 0.131 0 | 0.108 8 | 0.109 5 | 0.134 2 | 0.125 7 | 0.115 7 | ||||||||||||||||
叶片氮素含量Leaf Ndw | 2.49 | 3 | 3.13 | 1.9 | 2.54 | 2.78 |
表1 连续统去除光谱吸收特征参数平均值和叶片氮素含量平均值
Table 1 Average values of absorption character parameters of continuum-removed spectrum and leaf nitrogen concentration
N0 L1 | N1 L1 | N2 L1 | N0 L3 | N1 L3 | N2 L3 | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖期Tiller stage | ||||||||||||||||||||||
吸收峰整体面积A | 98.689 2 | 93.392 0 | 90.131 0 | 99.663 4 | 89.757 4 | 87.542 8 | ||||||||||||||||
吸收峰左半端的面积A1 | 51.397 6 | 47.638 4 | 46.044 9 | 52.415 8 | 46.164 5 | 45.059 5 | ||||||||||||||||
对称度S | 0.520 8 | 0.510 1 | 0.510 9 | 0.525 9 | 0.514 3 | 0.514 7 | ||||||||||||||||
连续统去除最小反射率Dhc | 0.126 5 | 0.116 9 | 0.115 7 | 0.125 7 | 0.116 9 | 0.115 6 | ||||||||||||||||
叶片氮素含量Leaf Ndw | 2.85 | 3.58 | 4.11 | 2.73 | 3.6 | 4.04 | ||||||||||||||||
孕穗期Booting stage | ||||||||||||||||||||||
吸收峰整体面积A | 102.434 6 | 97.111 1 | 90.425 0 | 94.466 8 | 90.234 9 | 87.872 6 | ||||||||||||||||
吸收峰左半端的面积A1 | 53.211 5 | 49.451 7 | 45.554 9 | 48.538 2 | 45.510 4 | 44.188 7 | ||||||||||||||||
对称度S | 0.519 5 | 0.509 2 | 0.503 8 | 0.513 8 | 0.504 4 | 0.502 9 | ||||||||||||||||
连续统去除最小反射率Dhc | 0.127 5 | 0.113 3 | 0.109 2 | 0.110 0 | 0.106 6 | 0.107 1 | ||||||||||||||||
叶片氮素含量Leaf Ndw | 2.26 | 2.85 | 3 | 2.27 | 2.62 | 3.03 | ||||||||||||||||
抽穗期Heading stage | ||||||||||||||||||||||
吸收峰整体面积A | 97.862 5 | 90.807 6 | 91.089 2 | 99.339 5 | 91.067 2 | 89.124 5 | ||||||||||||||||
吸收峰左半端的面积A1 | 50.774 2 | 46.068 3 | 46.042 8 | 51.488 3 | 46.448 7 | 45.084 1 | ||||||||||||||||
对称度S | 0.518 8 | 0.507 3 | 0.505 5 | 0.518 3 | 0.510 0 | 0.505 9 | ||||||||||||||||
连续统去除最小反射率Dhc | 0.131 0 | 0.108 8 | 0.109 5 | 0.134 2 | 0.125 7 | 0.115 7 | ||||||||||||||||
叶片氮素含量Leaf Ndw | 2.49 | 3 | 3.13 | 1.9 | 2.54 | 2.78 |
分蘖期 Tiller stage | 孕穗期 Booting stage | 抽穗期 Heading stage | |
---|---|---|---|
连续统去除一阶导数反射光谱(R'der) | -0.820 13** | -0.728 32** | -0.479 08** |
连续统去除最小反射率Dhc | -0.456 58** | -0.503 58** | -0.495 89** |
吸收峰整体面积A | -0.837 67** | -0.708 92** | -0.610 78** |
吸收峰左半端的面积A1 | -0.836 35** | -0.728 01** | -0.583 89** |
对称度S | -0.672 25** | -0.765 76** | -0.464** |
表2 连续统去除吸收特征参数和叶片氮素含量的相关性分析
Table 2 Correlatetion between absorption character parameters of continuum-removed spectrum and leaf nitrogen concentration
分蘖期 Tiller stage | 孕穗期 Booting stage | 抽穗期 Heading stage | |
---|---|---|---|
连续统去除一阶导数反射光谱(R'der) | -0.820 13** | -0.728 32** | -0.479 08** |
连续统去除最小反射率Dhc | -0.456 58** | -0.503 58** | -0.495 89** |
吸收峰整体面积A | -0.837 67** | -0.708 92** | -0.610 78** |
吸收峰左半端的面积A1 | -0.836 35** | -0.728 01** | -0.583 89** |
对称度S | -0.672 25** | -0.765 76** | -0.464** |
判定系数 R2 | 调整判定系数 Adjusted R2 | 标准误 SE | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖期Tiller stage | A | 0.702 9 | 0.693 3 | 0.335 48 | ||
孕穗期Booting stage | A1 | 0.715 5 | 0.706 6 | 0.205 57 | ||
抽穗期Heading stage | R'der & Dhc | 0.601 9 | 0.576 2 | 0.222 8 | ||
方差分析 ANOVA | 离差平方和 Sum of squares | 均方Mean square | F | p | ||
分蘖期 Tiller stage | A | 回归分析Regression | 8.254 17 | 8.254 2 | 73.339 7 | 8.31E-12 |
孕穗期 Booting stage | A1 | 回归分析Regression | 3.400 5 | 3.400 5 | 80.465 7 | 5.06E-13 |
抽穗期Heading stage | 残差Residual | 1.352 3 | 0.042 26 | |||
分蘖期Tiller stage | R'der & Dhc | 回归分析Regression | 2.326 971 | 1.163 49 | 23.435 2 | 6.31E-07 |
残差Residual | 1.539 053 | 31 | 0.049 647 | |||
总Total | 3.866 024 | 33 |
表3 第一完全展开叶连续统去除吸收光谱特征参数和叶片氮素含量逐步线性回归分析(n=34)
Table 3 Stepwise linear regression nitrogen concentration vs. absorption character parameters of continuum-removed spectrum (the most upper expended leaf) (n=34)
判定系数 R2 | 调整判定系数 Adjusted R2 | 标准误 SE | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖期Tiller stage | A | 0.702 9 | 0.693 3 | 0.335 48 | ||
孕穗期Booting stage | A1 | 0.715 5 | 0.706 6 | 0.205 57 | ||
抽穗期Heading stage | R'der & Dhc | 0.601 9 | 0.576 2 | 0.222 8 | ||
方差分析 ANOVA | 离差平方和 Sum of squares | 均方Mean square | F | p | ||
分蘖期 Tiller stage | A | 回归分析Regression | 8.254 17 | 8.254 2 | 73.339 7 | 8.31E-12 |
孕穗期 Booting stage | A1 | 回归分析Regression | 3.400 5 | 3.400 5 | 80.465 7 | 5.06E-13 |
抽穗期Heading stage | 残差Residual | 1.352 3 | 0.042 26 | |||
分蘖期Tiller stage | R'der & Dhc | 回归分析Regression | 2.326 971 | 1.163 49 | 23.435 2 | 6.31E-07 |
残差Residual | 1.539 053 | 31 | 0.049 647 | |||
总Total | 3.866 024 | 33 |
判定系数 R2 | 调整判定系数 Adjusted R2 | 估计值的标准误 SE of the estimate | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖期Tiller stage | A | 0.876 | 0.872 | 0.222 58 | ||
孕穗期Booting stage | A | 0.800 9 | 0.794 4 | 0.193 78 | ||
抽穗期Heading stage | A | 0.702 4 | 0.693 1 | 0.245 8 | ||
A1 | 0.758 3 | 0.742 7 | 0.225 09 | |||
方差分析 ANOVA | 离差平方和 Sum of Squares | 均方Mean Square | F | p | ||
分蘖期Tiller stage | A | 回归分析Regression | 10.844 7 | 10.844 7 | 218.897 2 | 2.90E-16 |
残差Residual | 1.535 8 | 0.049 54 | ||||
总Total | 12.380 5 | |||||
孕穗期Booting stage | A | 回归分析Regression | 4.681 37 | 4.681 37 | 124.668 9 | 2.90E-16 |
残差Residual | 1.164 067 | 0.037 557 | ||||
总Total | 5.845 4 | |||||
抽穗期Heading stage | A | 回归分析Regression | 4.564 9 | 4.564 9 | 75.525 8 | 3.20E-12 |
残差Residual | 1.934 1 | 0.060 44 | ||||
总Total | 6.499 09 | |||||
A1 | 回归分析Regression | 4.928 4 | 2.464 2 | 48.636 4 | 2.75E-10 | |
残差Residual | 1.570 6 | 0.050 666 | ||||
总Total | 6.499 094 |
表4 第三完全展开叶连续统去除吸收光谱特征参数和叶片氮素含量逐步线性回归分析(n=34)
Table 4 Stepwise linear regression Stepwise linear regression nitrogen concentration vs. absorption character parameters of continuum-removed spectrum (the third expended leaf) (n=34)
判定系数 R2 | 调整判定系数 Adjusted R2 | 估计值的标准误 SE of the estimate | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
分蘖期Tiller stage | A | 0.876 | 0.872 | 0.222 58 | ||
孕穗期Booting stage | A | 0.800 9 | 0.794 4 | 0.193 78 | ||
抽穗期Heading stage | A | 0.702 4 | 0.693 1 | 0.245 8 | ||
A1 | 0.758 3 | 0.742 7 | 0.225 09 | |||
方差分析 ANOVA | 离差平方和 Sum of Squares | 均方Mean Square | F | p | ||
分蘖期Tiller stage | A | 回归分析Regression | 10.844 7 | 10.844 7 | 218.897 2 | 2.90E-16 |
残差Residual | 1.535 8 | 0.049 54 | ||||
总Total | 12.380 5 | |||||
孕穗期Booting stage | A | 回归分析Regression | 4.681 37 | 4.681 37 | 124.668 9 | 2.90E-16 |
残差Residual | 1.164 067 | 0.037 557 | ||||
总Total | 5.845 4 | |||||
抽穗期Heading stage | A | 回归分析Regression | 4.564 9 | 4.564 9 | 75.525 8 | 3.20E-12 |
残差Residual | 1.934 1 | 0.060 44 | ||||
总Total | 6.499 09 | |||||
A1 | 回归分析Regression | 4.928 4 | 2.464 2 | 48.636 4 | 2.75E-10 | |
残差Residual | 1.570 6 | 0.050 666 | ||||
总Total | 6.499 094 |
图1 孕穗期第一完全展开叶水稻鲜叶片连续统去除反射光谱(550~750 nm) N0, N1, N2: 同表1
Fig.1 Continuum-removed reflectance of rice of the most upper fully leaf at booting stage (550-750 nm) See Table 1
[1] | Blackburn GA (1998). Quantifying chlorophylls and caroteniods at leaf and canopy scales: an evaluation of some hyperspectral approaches. Remote Sensing of Environment, 66,273-285. |
[2] | Clark RN (1981). Water frost and ice: the near-infrared spectral reflectance 0.65-2.5 μm. Journal of Geophysical Research, 86,3087-3096. |
[3] | Clark RN, Roush TL (1984). Rreflectance spectroscopy: quantitative analysis techniques for remote sensing applications. Journal of Geophysical Research, 89,6329-6340. |
[4] | Clark RN, King TVV, Ager C, Swayze GA (1995). Initial vegetation species and senescence/stress mapping in the San Luis Calley, Colorado using imaging spectrometer data. In: Posey HH, Pendelton JA, van Zyl D eds. Proceedings of the Summitville Forum '95. Colorado Geological Survey Special Publication, Colorado, 38,64-69. |
[5] | Kokaly RF (2001). Investigating a physical basis for spectroscopic estimates of leaf nitrogen concentration. Remote Sensing of Environment, 75,153-161. |
[6] | McCord TB, Clark RN, Hawke BR, McFadden LA, Owensby PD, Pieters CM, Adams JB (1981). Moon-near-infrared spectral reflectance: a first good look. Journal of Geophysical Research, 86,833-892. |
[7] | Montero S, Irene C, Brimhall GH (2002). Semi-automated mineral identification algorithm for ultraviolet, visible and near infrared reflectance spectroscopy. http://eps.berkeley.edu/groups/erc/Documents. Cited 12 Jul 2002. |
[8] | Mutanga O, Skidmore AK, van Wieren SE (2003). Discriminating tropical grass ( Cenchrus ciliaris) canopies grown under different nitrogen treatments using spectroradiometry. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry & Remote Sensing, 57,263-272. |
[9] | Pu RL (浦瑞良), Gong P (宫鹏) (2002). Hyperspectral Remote Sensing and its Applications (高光谱遥感及其应用). Higher Education Press, Beijing,51-52,82-83. (in Chinese) |
[10] | Singer RB (1981). Near-infrared spectral reflectance of mineral mixtures: systematic combinations of pyroxenes, olivine, and iron oxides. Journal of Geophysical Research, 86,7967-7982. |
[11] | Wang RC, Wang K, Shen ZQ (1998). Feasibility of field evaluation of rice nitrogen status from reflectance spectra of canopy. Pedosphere, 8,121-126. |
[12] | Zhang JH (张金恒), Wang K (王珂), Wang RC (王人潮) (2003). Study on hyperspectral remote sensing in estimate vegetation leaf chlorophyll content. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Agricultural Science) (上海交通大学学报(农业科学)), 21,74-80. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[1] | 汪星, 宫兆宁, 井然, 张磊, 金点点. 基于连续统去除法的水生植物提取及其时空变化分析——以官厅水库库区为例[J]. 植物生态学报, 2018, 42(6): 640-652. |
[2] | 刘畅, 孙鹏森, 刘世荣. 水分敏感的反射光谱指数比较研究——以锐齿槲栎为例[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(8): 850-861. |
[3] | 刘畅, 孙鹏森, 刘世荣. 植物反射光谱对水分生理变化响应的研究进展[J]. 植物生态学报, 2016, 40(1): 80-91. |
[4] | 张翠萍,孟平,张劲松,万贤崇. 固氮植物绿豆对核桃幼苗生长、叶片气孔气体交换及水力特征的作用[J]. 植物生态学报, 2014, 38(5): 499-506. |
[5] | 沙依然·外力,李秉柏,张佳华,杨沈斌. 水稻模拟模型在高温敏感性研究中的应用[J]. 植物生态学报, 2014, 38(5): 515-528. |
[6] | 邹媛媛, 刘琳, 刘洋, 赵亮, 邓启云, 吴俊, 庄文, 宋未. 不同水稻品种种子固有细菌群落的多样性[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(8): 880-890. |
[7] | 隗溟,廖学群,李冬霞,段海龙. 水稻分蘖节位生产力比较[J]. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(4): 324-332. |
[8] | 顾东祥, 汤亮, 徐其军, 雷晓俊, 曹卫星, 朱艳. 水氮处理下不同品种水稻根系生长分布特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(5): 558-566. |
[9] | 陈洁, 汤亮, 刘小军, 曹卫星, 朱艳. 基于植株碳流的水稻籽粒淀粉积累模拟模型[J]. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(4): 431-440. |
[10] | 王维, 蔡一霞, 杨建昌, 朱庆森. 结实期土壤水分亏缺影响水稻籽粒灌浆的生理原因[J]. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(2): 195-202. |
[11] | 杨杰, 田永超, 姚霞, 曹卫星, 朱艳. 利用高光谱参数反演水稻叶片类胡萝卜素含量[J]. 植物生态学报, 2010, 34(7): 845-854. |
[12] | 张玉森, 姚霞, 田永超, 曹卫星, 朱艳. 应用近红外光谱预测水稻叶片氮含量[J]. 植物生态学报, 2010, 34(6): 704-712. |
[13] | 田永超, 杨杰, 姚霞, 朱艳, 曹卫星. 利用红边面积形状参数估测水稻叶层氮浓度[J]. 植物生态学报, 2009, 33(4): 791-801. |
[14] | 张巍巍, 郑飞翔, 王效科, 冯兆忠, 欧阳志云. 臭氧对水稻根系活力、可溶性蛋白含量与抗氧化系统的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2009, 33(3): 425-432. |
[15] | 蔡昆争, 吴学祝, 骆世明. 不同生育期水分胁迫对水稻根叶渗透调节物质变化的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2008, 32(2): 491-500. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||
Copyright © 2022 版权所有 《植物生态学报》编辑部
地址: 北京香山南辛村20号, 邮编: 100093
Tel.: 010-62836134, 62836138; Fax: 010-82599431; E-mail: apes@ibcas.ac.cn, cjpe@ibcas.ac.cn
备案号: 京ICP备16067583号-19