高光谱小波能量特征估测土壤有机质含量

doi:10.3964/j.issn.1000-0593(2019)10-3217-06

Abstract
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (2600 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract There is no silver-bullet solution of eliminating noise during the acquisition process of soil hyperspectral. As the noise interference, the observations of soil spectra are in low signal-to-noise ratio, which affects the estimation accuracy of soil organic matter content. This paper attempts to adopt the wavelet energy features method to reduce the noise in soil hyperspectral and improve the estimation accuracy of soil organic matter content. The Yunlianghu Farm of Qianjiang City, Hubei Province, located in the hinterland of Jianghan Plain, was selected as the experimental area, and 80 samples of paddy soil with a depth of 0~20 cm were collectedin September 2016. After pretreatment (air drying, milling, sieving), soil sample spectral reflectance and determine soil organic matter contentwere collected in the laboratory. The concentration gradient method was employed to divide the whole sample set (80 samples) into a calibration set (54 samples) and a validation set (26 samples). Continuous wavelet transformation was performed using mexh as a wavelet basis function, transforming the soil hyperspectral into sensitive wavelet coefficients of 10 decomposition scales. Then the root mean square of the wavelet coefficients was calculated scale by scaleto define wavelet energy features, and the wavelet energy features vector was determined by the wavelet energy features. The correlation coefficients between the wavelet coefficients and the organic matter content were calculated scale by scale and wavelength by wavelength, and the wavelet coefficient which reaches the extremely significant level (p<0.01) was defined as the sensitive wavelet coefficients. Principal component analysis was conducted to calculate the principal component loads of soil hyperspectral and wavelet energy features vector, respectively. The trend of principal component information of modeled independent variables before and after wavelet energy features transformation would be judged from the difference between the first principal component contribution rate and the spatial dispersion of the first three principal component scores degree. Moreover, regression models were established based on wavelet energy features vector and sensitive wavelet coefficients, respectively, to estimate soil organic matter content. The results showed that with the increase of soil organic matter content, the full-band reflectance decreased, but the spectral reflectance curves of different soil samples were similar, and the reflectance in the near-infrared bands (780~2 400 nm) was higher than that in the visible bands (400~780 nm). The sensitive wavelet coefficients corresponded to wavelengths of 494, 508, 672, 752, 1 838, and 2 302 nm. The first principal component contribution rates of soil hyperspectral and wavelet energy features vector were 96.28% and 99.13%, respectively. The first three principal component scatter points of wavelet energy features vector were more spatially aggregated than those of soil hyperspectral, which demonstrated that the wavelet energy features method effectively reduces the influence of noise. Comparing the estimation models of soil organic matter content, the multivariate linear regression model adopting wavelet energy features vector as the independent variable had the highest estimation accuracy, whose determination coefficients (R²), relative estimate deviation (RPD), and the root mean squared error (RMSE) of validation set were 0.77, 1.82, and 0.82, respectively. Therefore, the wavelet energy features method which is proved to raise the signal-to-noise ratio of the data without adding to the complexity, could improve the estimation accuracy of soil organic matter and realize the dimensional reduction of soil hyperspectral data. This method can be applied to studies like on-the-go soil properties measurement and soil quality monitoring.

Key words：Soil hyperspectral; Wavelet coefficients; Wavelet energy features; Soil organic matter; Paddy soil

Received: 2018-08-27 Accepted: 2018-12-21

ZTFLH:

S127

Corresponding Authors: YU Lei E-mail: yulei@mail.ccnu.edu.cn

Cite this article:

URL:

https://www.gpxygpfx.com/EN/10.3964/j.issn.1000-0593(2019)10-3217-06 OR https://www.gpxygpfx.com/EN/Y2019/V39/I10/3217

[1] Dotto A C, Dalmolin R S D, Caten A T, et al. Geoderma, 2018, 314: 262.
[2] ZHOU Qian-qian, DING Jian-li(周倩倩，丁建丽). Acta Pedologica Sinica(土壤学报), 2018, 55(2): 313.
[3] Rossel R A V, Behrens T, Ben-Dor E, et al. Earth-Science Reviews, 2016, 155: 198.
[4] Nouri M, Gomez C, Roger J M, et al. Geoderma, 2017, 298: 54.
[5] ZHANG Rui, LI Zhao-fu, PAN Jian-jun(张锐，李兆富，潘剑君). Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering(农业工程学报), 2017, 33(1): 175.
[6] CHEN Hong-yan, ZHAO Geng-xing, LI Xi-can, et al(陈红艳，赵庚星，李希灿, 等). Scientia Agricultura Sinica(中国农业科学), 2012, 45(7): 1425.
[7] YU Lei, HONG Yong-sheng, ZHOU Yong, et al(于雷，洪永胜，周勇, 等). Spectroscopy and Spectral Analysis(光谱学与光谱分析), 2016, 36(5): 1428.
[8] LIAO Qin-hong, GU Xiao-he, LI Cun-jun, et al(廖钦洪，顾晓鹤，李存军, 等). Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering(农业工程学报), 2012, 28(23): 132.
[9] CAI Liang-hong, DING Jian-li(蔡亮红，丁建丽). Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering(农业工程学报), 2017, 33(16): 144.
[10] Wang H F, Huo Z G, Zhou G S, et al. Plant Physiology & Biochemistry, 2016, 98: 39.
[11] CHEN Hong-yan, ZHAO Geng-xing, LI Xi-can, et al(陈红艳，赵庚星，李希灿, 等). Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology(应用生态学报), 2011, 22(11): 2935.
[12] Lark R M. Geoderma, 2016, 266: 84.
[13] Yun Y H, Wang W T, Tan M L, et al. Analytica Chimica Acta, 2014, 807(1): 36.
[14] Pu R, Gong P. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2004, 91(2): 212.
[15] SONG Kai-shan, ZHANG Bai, WANG Zong-ming, et al(宋开山，张柏，王宗明, 等). Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology(植物生态学报), 2008, 32(1): 152.
[16] ZHU Ya-xing, YU Lei, HONG Yong-sheng, et al(朱亚星，于雷，洪永胜, 等). Scientia Agricultura Sinica(中国农业科学), 2017, 50(22): 4325.
[17] Bruce L M, Li J. Geoscience & Remote Sensing IEEE Transactions on, 2001, 39(7): 1540.
[18] Yu X, Liu Q, Wang Y B, et al. Catena, 2016, 137: 340.
[19] LI Pei-zhe(李培哲). Statistics and Decision(统计与决策), 2012，(24): 89.
[20] Xu S X, Shi X Z, Wang M Y, et al. Geoderma, 2016, 267: 174.