| Literature DB >> 23203052 |
Yidan Bao1, Wenwen Kong, Fei Liu, Zhengjun Qiu, Yong He.
Abstract
Amino acids are quite important indices to indicate the growth status of oilseed rape under herbicide stress. Near infrared (NIR) spectroscopy combined with chemometrics was applied for fast determination of glutamic acid in oilseed rape leaves. The optimal spectral preprocessing method was obtained after comparing Savitzky-Golay smoothing, standard normal variate, multiplicative scatter correction, first and second derivatives, detrending and direct orthogonal signal correction. Linear and nonlinear calibration methods were developed, including partial least squares (PLS) and least squares-support vector machine (LS-SVM). The most effective wavelengths (EWs) were determined by the successive projections algorithm (SPA), and these wavelengths were used as the inputs of PLS and LS-SVM model. The best prediction results were achieved by SPA-LS-SVM (Raw) model with correlation coefficient r = 0.9943 and root mean squares error of prediction (RMSEP) = 0.0569 for prediction set. These results indicated that NIR spectroscopy combined with SPA-LS-SVM was feasible for the fast and effective detection of glutamic acid in oilseed rape leaves. The selected EWs could be used to develop spectral sensors, and the important and basic amino acid data were helpful to study the function mechanism of herbicide.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23203052 PMCID: PMC3509568 DOI: 10.3390/ijms131114106
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Raw reflectance spectra of oilseed rape leaves.
Statistics of glutamic acid content of oilseed rape leaves.
| Set | No. | Range (mg/100 g DW) | Mean (mg/100 g DW) | S.D. (mg/100 g DW) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calibration | 124 | 1.176–4.101 | 2.410 | 0.5252 |
| Validation | 62 | 1.189–3.654 | 2.411 | 0.5219 |
| Prediction | 62 | 1.183–3.877 | 2.411 | 0.5313 |
Prediction results of glutamic acid by partial least squares (PLS) and successive projections algorithm-least squares-support vector machine (SPA-LS-SVM) models.
| Model | Treatment | LV/EW/(γ, σ2) | Calibration | Validation | Prediction | RPD | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||
| RMSEC | RMSEV | RMSEP | |||||||
| PLS | Raw | 8/700/- | 0.9474 | 0.1674 | 0.9603 | 0.1462 | 0.9591 | 0.1530 | 3.6 |
| SG | 8/700/- | 0.9471 | 0.1678 | 0.9602 | 0.1463 | 0.9591 | 0.1528 | 3.6 | |
| SNV | 7/700/- | 0.9414 | 0.1765 | 0.9542 | 0.1552 | 0.9519 | 0.1628 | 3.4 | |
| MSC | 7/700/- | 0.9413 | 0.1765 | 0.9546 | 0.1546 | 0.9524 | 0.1621 | 3.4 | |
| 1-Der | 6/700/- | 0.9629 | 0.1412 | 0.9694 | 0.1282 | 0.9678 | 0.1335 | 4.1 | |
| 2-Der | 4/700/- | 0.9603 | 0.1459 | 0.9585 | 0.1483 | 0.9576 | 0.1527 | 3.5 | |
| Detrending | 7/700/- | 0.9507 | 0.1623 | 0.9598 | 0.1463 | 0.9550 | 0.1571 | 3.6 | |
| DOSC | 4/700/- | 0.9361 | 0.1840 | 0.9460 | 0.1692 | 0.9436 | 0.1752 | 3.1 | |
| SPA-PLS | Raw | 8/19/- | 0.9490 | 0.1649 | 0.9607 | 0.1458 | 0.9557 | 0.1591 | 3.6 |
| 1-Der | 3/10/- | 0.9487 | 0.1654 | 0.9575 | 0.1501 | 0.9528 | 0.1608 | 3.5 | |
| SPA-LS-SVM | Raw | -/19/ (1.5 × 104, 59.9) | 0.9911 | 0.0700 | 0.9966 | 0.0431 | 0.9943 | 0.0569 | 12.2 |
| 1-Der | -/10/ (38.6, 29.5) | 0.9869 | 0.0846 | 0.9952 | 0.0514 | 0.9787 | 0.1100 | 10.2 | |
Selected effective wavelengths (EWs) by SPA.
| Preprocessing | No. | Selected EWs (nm) |
|---|---|---|
| Raw | 19 | 2252, 2228, 1404, 2268, 2178, 1434, 2426, 1844, 1692, 1190, 1344, 1636, 1730, 1892, 1234, 1546, 2409, 2046, 1776 |
| 1-Der | 10 | 1678, 2266, 2486, 2234, 2296, 1272, 1534, 2444, 2208, 1718 |
Figure 2Reference vs. predicted values of glutamic acid by SPA-LS-SVM (Raw).