Estimation of Corn Canopy Chlorophyll Content Using Derivative Spectra in the O2–A Absorption Band
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chlorophyll (Chl) is one of the most important classes of light-absorbing pigments in photosynthesis and the proportion of Chl in leaves is closely related to vegetation nutrient status. Remote sensing-based estimation of Chl content holds great potential for evaluating crop growth status in agricultural management, precision farming and ecosystem monitoring. Recent studies have shown that steady-state fluorescence contributed up to 2% on the apparent reflectance in the 750-nm spectral region of plant and also provided additional evidence for fluorescence in-filling of the atmospheric oxygen absorption band at central wavelength of 760 nm (O2–A band). In this study, an in situ hyperspectral remote sensing approach was employed to estimate corn Chl content at the canopy level by using chlorophyll fluorescence (ChlF) signals in the O2–A absorption band. Two new spectral indices, REArea760 (sum of first derivative reflectance between 755 and 763 nm) and REA760 (maximum of first derivative reflectance between 755 and 763 nm), derived from the first derivative spectra in the O2–A band, were proposed for estimating the corn canopy Chl content (CCC). They were compared with the performance of published indices measured at ground level, including MERIS Terrestrial Chlorophyll Index (MTCI), Optimized Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index 2 (OSAVI2), Modified Chlorophyll Absorption Ratio Index 2 (MCARI2), SR710, REArea (sum of first derivative reflectance between 680 and 780 nm), REA (maximum value of first derivative reflectance between 680 and 780 nm), and mND705. The results indicated that corn Chl content at the canopy level was better predicted by the new indices (with R2=0.835) than the published indices (with R2 ranging from 0.676 to 0.826). The two new indices ranked in the top four according to their summed ranks by integrating the ranks of RMSE and R2 of CCC linear regression models. ChlF originates only from chlorophyll in the photosynthetic apparatus and therefore is less sensitive to soil, wood, and dead biomass interference. Moreover, due to the fluorescence in-filling of the O2–A band and the amplified effect on spectrum signals by derivative operation, the spectral derivative indices in the O2–A band have great potential of estimating the CCC.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".