| Literature DB >> 31600914 |
Hongyang Li1,2, Shengyao Jia3, Zichun Le4.
Abstract
Soil nutrient detection is important for precise fertilization. A total of 150 soil samples were picked from Lishui City. In this work, the total nitrogen (TN) content in soil samples was detected in the spectral range of 900-1700 nm using a hyperspectral imaging (HSI) system. Characteristic wavelengths were extracted using uninformative variable elimination (UVE) and the successive projections algorithm (SPA), separately. Partial least squares (PLS) and extreme learning machine (ELM) were used to establish the calibration models with full spectra and characteristic wavelengths, respectively. The results indicated that the prediction effect of the nonlinear ELM model was superior to the linear PLS model. In addition, the models using the characteristic wavelengths could also achieve good results, and the UVE-ELM model performed better, having a correlation coefficient of prediction (rp), root-mean-square error of prediction (RMSEP), and residual prediction deviation (RPD) of 0.9408, 0.0075, and 2.97, respectively. The UVE-ELM model was then used to estimate the TN content in the soil sample and obtain a distribution map. The research results indicate that HSI can be used for the detection and visualization of the distribution of TN content in soil, providing a basis for future large-scale monitoring of soil nutrient distribution and rational fertilization.Entities:
Keywords: extreme learning machine; hyperspectral imaging; partial least squares; soil total nitrogen; successive projections algorithm; uninformative variable elimination
Year: 2019 PMID: 31600914 PMCID: PMC6832974 DOI: 10.3390/s19204355
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Geographical map of the research area and locations of sampling points.
Reference values of total nitrogen (TN) content in the 150 soil samples.
| Sample Set | Number | Range (%) | Mean (%) | SD 1 (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calibration set | 100 | 0.0678–0.1710 | 0.1216 | 0.0201 |
| Prediction set | 50 | 0.0760–0.1580 | 0.1197 | 0.0223 |
1 SD = Standard deviation.
Figure 2The hyperspectral imaging (HIS) system.
The performances of the partial least squares (PLS) model and the extreme learning machine (ELM) model with full spectra.
| Model | LVs 1/HLNs 2 | Calibration | Prediction | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rc | RMSEC (%) | rp | RMSEP (%) | RPD | ||
| PLS | 6 | 0.9276 | 0.0077 | 0.9218 | 0.0086 | 2.59 |
| ELM | 24 | 0.9383 | 0.0072 | 0.9347 | 0.0079 | 2.82 |
1 LVs is the number of latent variables in the PLS model. 2 HLNs is the number of hidden-layer neurons in the ELM model.
Figure 3The stability distribution of TN using uninformative variable elimination (UVE).
Figure 4Root-mean-square error of leave-one-out cross validation (RMSECV) changes with the different numbers of selected characteristic wavelengths found using the successive projections algorithm (SPA).
Figure 5The characteristic wavelengths (square markers) selected using SPA.
The performance of the PLS and ELM models with the characteristic wavelengths selected using UVE and SPA.
| Model | Calibration | Prediction | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| rc | RMSEC (%) | rp | RMSEP (%) | RPD | |
| UVE–PLS | 0.9293 | 0.0074 | 0.9266 | 0.0083 | 2.69 |
| SPA–PLS | 0.9310 | 0.0076 | 0.9150 | 0.0089 | 2.51 |
| UVE–ELM | 0.9463 | 0.0068 | 0.9408 | 0.0075 | 2.97 |
| SPA–ELM | 0.9346 | 0.0074 | 0.9196 | 0.0087 | 2.56 |
Figure 6The scatter plots of the calibration set (a) and the prediction set (b) in the UVE–ELM model.
Figure 7(a) The hyperspectral image and (b) the corresponding TN content distribution map visualized based on the UVE–ELM model.