Vegetation Stress Detection through Chlorophyll <i>a</i> + <i>b</i> Estimation and Fluorescence Effects on Hyperspectral Imagery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical principles applied to remote sensing data are key to successfully quantifying vegetation physiological condition from the study of the light interaction with the canopy under observation. We used the fluorescence-reflectance-transmittance (FRT) and PROSPECT leaf models to simulate reflectance as a function of leaf biochemical and fluorescence variables. A series of laboratory measurements of spectral reflectance at leaf and canopy levels and a modeling study were conducted, demonstrating that effects of chlorophyll fluorescence (CF) can be detected by remote sensing. The coupled FRT and PROSPECT model enabled CF and chlorophyll a + b (Ca + b) content to be estimated by inversion. Laboratory measurements of leaf reflectance (r) and transmittance (t) from leaves with constant Ca + b allowed the study of CF effects on specific fluorescence-sensitive indices calculated in the Photosystem I (PS-I) and Photosystem II (PS-II) optical region, such as the curvature index [CUR; (R675.R690)/R2(683)]. Dark-adapted and steady-state fluorescence measurements, such as the ratio of variable to maximal fluorescence (Fv/Fm), steady state maximal fluorescence (F'm), steady state fluorescence (Ft), and the effective quantum yield (delta F/F'm) are accurately estimated by inverting the FRT-PROSPECT model. A double peak in the derivative reflectance (DR) was related to increased CF and Ca + b concentration. These results were consistent with imagery collected with a compact airborne spectrographic imager (CASI) sensor from sites of sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marshall) of high and low stress conditions, showing a double peak on canopy derivative reflectance in the red-edge spectral region. We developed a derivative chlorophyll index (DCI; calculated as D705/D722), a function of the combined effects of CF and Ca + b content, and used it to detect vegetation stress.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".