<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# A Leaf Layer Spectral Model for Estimating Protein Content of Wheat Grains

Chun-Hua Xiao, Shao-Kun Li, Ke-Ru Wang, Yan-Li Lu, Jun-Hua Bai, Rui-Zhi Xie, Shi-Ju Gao, Qiong Wang, Fang-Yong Wang

► To cite this version:

Chun-Hua Xiao, Shao-Kun Li, Ke-Ru Wang, Yan-Li Lu, Jun-Hua Bai, et al., A Leaf Layer Spectral Model for Estimating Protein Content of Wheat Grains. 4th Conference on Computer and Computing Technologies in Agriculture (CCTA), Oct 2010, Nanchang, China. pp.16-29, 10.1007/978-3-642-18369-0_3. hal-01564865

HAL Id: hal-01564865

https://inria.hal.science/hal-01564865

Submitted on 19 Jul 2017

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# A Leaf Layer Spectral Model for Estimating Protein Content in Wheat Grains

XIAO Chun-Hua¹,², LI Shao-Kun¹,²,* , WANG Ke-Ru¹,², LU Yan-Li², BAI Jun-Hua²,
XIE Rui-Zhi², GAO Shi-Ju², WANG Qiong², and WANG Fang-Yong¹

¹Key Laboratory of Oasis Ecology Agriculture of Xinjiang Construction Crop/
Center of Crop High-Yield Research, Shihezi 832003, Xinjiang, China;

²Institute of Crop Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences / National Key Facility for Crop Gene Resources and Genetic Improvement, NFCRI, Beijing 100081, China;

*Corresponding author, Address: Department of Crop Culture, Institute of Crop Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, P. R. China,
Tel: +86-010-68918891, Email: lishk@mail.caas.net.cn

## Abstract

The spectral signatures of crop canopies in the field provide much information relating morphological or quality characteristics of crops to their optical properties. This experiment was conducted using two winter-wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars, Jingdong8 (with erect leaves) and Zhongyou9507 (with horizontal leaves). We analysed the relation between the direction spectral characteristics and the leaves nitrogen content (LNC). The result showed that the spectral information observed at the 0° angle mainly provided information on the upper canopy and the lower layer had little impact on their spectra. However, the spectral information observed at 30° and 60° angles reflected the whole canopy information and the status of the lower layer of the canopy had great effects on their spectra. Variance analysis indicated that the ear layer of canopy and the topmost leaf blade made greater contributions to CDS. The predicted grain protein content (GPC) model by leaf layers spectra using 0° view angle was the best with root mean squares (RMSE) of 0.7500 for Jingdong8 and 0.6461 for Zhongyou9507. The coefficients of determination, R2 between measured and estimated grain protein contents were 0.7467 and 0.7599. Thus, grain protein

may be reliably predicted from the leaf layer spectral model.

**Key words:** wheat canopy; leaf distribution; direction spectra; view angle; model

## 1 Introduction

The spectral characteristics of a crop canopy are determined not only by biophysical and biochemical features and also plant structural attributes. Leaf optical properties are a main factor for canopy spectral.

Crop canopy spectral characteristics represent important information needed to guide crop management. Crop composition and structure are difficult to assess by traditional spectral measurement with vertical canopy direction. The direction spectrum includes a great deal of crop canopy information. Multiangle data significantly improved the accuracy of recovering forest parameters when inverting 3-D optical models (Kimes et al., 2002) but forest vertical structure can not be captured accurately using only the 4 spectral bands in the nadir view or all view angles with a single spectral band (Kimes et al., 2006). Directional radiances in or near the principal plane of the sun provides information that leads to more accurate prediction of canopy structure parameters than from other azimuth planes (Gobron et al., 2000).
Canopy emissivity increased with increasing view
angle due to the greater proportion of vegetation
observed at off-nadir view angles; when the proportion
of leaves was lower than that of soil, canopy emissivity
grew with increasing view angle (Sobrino et al., 2005).

It should be noted that these models assume a
Lambertian behaviour for soil and vegetation surfaces.
Although vegetation surfaces show a near Lambertian
behaviour, bare soil surfaces do not and the angular
variation on emissivity can not be neglected. Lidars,
multiangle radiometers, radars and imaging
spectrometers have been identified as systems that can
capture information in the vertical dimension. This
requires a capability to remotely measure the vertical
and spatial distribution of forest structural parameters
that are needed for more accurate models of energy,
carbon, and water flux over regional, continental, and
global scales. Thus, we examined the utility of
hyperspectral data for the quantitative characterization
of vertical wheat structure.

Most remote sensing systems provided an image of
the horizontal scope, but could not provide the vertical
information on biochemical distribution in a crop
canopy, thereby reducing the accuracy of measurement.
Multi-angle data can increase the precision of forest
parameters (Kimes, et al., 2006).

The distribution of tissues in a crop canopy has
certain characteristics - biochemical distribution is
different because of transfer of matter during the
growth stage. Leaves in a wheat canopy are composed
of under, middle, upper layer and ear layers (Wang et
al., 2004). The spectral characteristic differed among
canopy leaves because of the different reflection and
scatter, so their effect on canopy spectra was different
(Wang et al., 2004).

Various biochemical (foliar lignin and nitrogen) and
biophysical factors influencing canopy reflectance
signatures have been studied in previous works.
Information on biochemical parameters is important
and the multi-angle spectra which provide information

on different directions can facilitate a more exact
prediction of biochemical parameters. To date, there
are no studies on the relative importance of vertical
distribution of wheat leaves that determines canopy
reflectance across the shortwave (350-2500nm)
spectrum. The contribution of each leaf layer relative to
all other factors has also not been adequately
determined. Yet, it is the interaction of these factors,
including their potential covariance or unique behavior,
that must be understood if advances in remote sensing
are to be achieved.

In this study, the leaf slice method was used to
characterize a wheat canopy, evaluate the spectral
response of leaf vertical distribution in the canopy,
determine the characteristics of spectral curve for
different leaf layers and develop a methodology for
predicting the biochemistry of the canopy.

**2 Materials and methods**

**2.1 Preliminary experiment**

A field experiment was conducted in the
Experimental Station of the Institute of Crop Science of
the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing
(39°57′55″ N, 116°19′46″ E) in the 2005-2006
growing season. The soil was a silt clay loam
containing 1.16% organic matter, 42.6 mg
kg-1 alkali-hydrolysable N, 26.5 mg kg-1 available
phosphorus and 139.4 mg kg-1 available potassium.

Two winter wheat cultivars were used: Jingdong8,
an erect leaf plant-type and Zhongyou9507, a lax leaf
plant-type. Four N fertilizer (urea, 46%N, ) treatments
were set up with four randomized replications of each
cultivar: N0, no N fertilization, N1, 150 kg hm-2 pure
N fertilization, N2, 300 kg hm-2 (rationally fertilized),
N3, 450 kg hm-2 (excessively fertilized). The N rates
were applied in three splits at pre-sowing (50% of the
total amount), reviving stage (25% of the total amount)
and jointing stage (25% of the total amount). All the
treatments were fertilized with the same amounts of P
(P2O5, 144 kg hm-2) and K (K2O, 75 kg hm-2) at pre-sowing.

The leaf slice method of wheat canopy: whole (plant) wheat samples 0.5m long and 0.8m wide were chosen; based on the vertical distribution of wheat canopy, the samples were measured off the whole wheat canopy (WWC), ear layer of canopy (ELC), inverse first leaves layer of canopy (ILLC-1), inverse second leaves layer of canopy (ILLC-2), inverse third leaves layers of canopy (ILLC-3) and inverse fourth leaves layer of canopy (ILLC-4). Canopy layers were severed with a scissors from the ear layer to lower layer (Fig. 3).

## 2.2 Measured traits and methods

All canopy spectral measurements were taken from a height of 1.3 m above ground (the height of the wheat was 90 cm at maturity), under clear sky conditions between 10:00 and 14:00 (Beijing local time), using an ASD FieldSpec Pro spectrometer (Analytical Spectral Devices, Boulder, CO, USA) fitted with a 258 field of view fiber optics, operating in the 350-2500 nm spectral region with a sampling interval of 1.4 nm between 350 and 1050 nm and 2 nm between 1050 and

2500 nm and with spectral resolutions of 3 nm at 700 nm and 10 nm at 1400 nm. A 40 cm ×40 cm BaSO4 calibration panel was used for calculation of reflectance. The spectra were measured with view angles of 0, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and 180° to the line vertical to the wheat row using the Simple multi-angle spectral measurement equipment (Fig.1) after every layer was removed (N2 treatment). The model spectra were measured with a view angle of 0° using other treatments at ear layer (EL), upper leaves layer (ULL) and lower leaves layer (LLL)(Fig.2).

Leaf samples from EL, ULL, LLL were taken almost synchronously with the spectral measurements. Measurements were conducted at jointing, heading, anthesis, milking and waxing stages. These samples were oven-dried at 70°C and nitrogen content was determined by the Kjeldahl technique (Bremneretal.,1981) using a B-339 DistillationUnit (BUCHIAnalyticalLtd, Flawil, Switzerland). Wheat grain protein content estimated from the formula : $Pro\% = 6.25 \times Nitr (\%)$.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1 Simple multi-angle spectral measurement equipment</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 2 Sketch of measured method by layer</figcaption></figure>

## 2.3 Data analysis

The hyperspectral data were analyzed using the Matlab6.5 software and quantitative data were analyzed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedure.
# 3 Results

## 3.1 The spectral curves following removal of different leaf layers

The lower leaves of the canopy changed the spectral reflectivity (Fig.3) with different view angles at 350-700nm, 800-1300nm and 1400-1800nm. This is important for pigment content within the visible wave

band (350-700nm). The reflectivity of near infrared (800-1300nm) is influenced by canopy characteristics. The wavebands (1400-1800nm) provide information on the water content. In this paper, we analyzed the characteristics of visible (350-700nm) and near infrared (800-1300nm) wavebands.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig.3 Spectra of removing the fourth leaf layer at different angles for Jingdong8 and Zhongyou9507 wheat</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Fig.4 Spectra of removing different leaf layers at 60° angles for Jingdong8 and Zhongyou9507</figcaption></figure>

Comparing the direction spectral characteristic of the two wheat canopies, the spectral response of Jingdong8 with different view angles was more significant than that of Zhongyou9507 at visible and near infrared wavebands; the max reflectivity of Jingdong8 was 31% higher than that of Zhongyou9507 at 350-700nm and 22.4% higher at 800-1300nm.

The spectral curve of doing away with different leaves at the 60° view angle showed that the leaf influenced the curve of visible and near infrared wavebands (Fig.4). The change for Jingdong8 was

more significant than for Zhongyou9507; the spectral reflectivity of Jingdong8 was 11.2% higher than that of Zhongyou9507 at 350-700nm and 26.8% higher at 800-1300nm.

To further analyze the relation between canopy spectra and leaves, we selected six spectral reflectivities at 450, 550, 670, 980, 1090, 1200nm.

## 3.2 Analysis of spectral reflectivity of leaf layers at different view angles

As shown in Fig.5, for Jingdong8, the spectral reflectivity of the whole canopy was similar with the
leaf layer removal treatment, ILLC-4; doing away with ELC and ILLC-1 reduced the reflectivity. The changes in reflectivity at 550nm were more obvious than at 450 and 670nm. In visible wave bands, changes were evident for 980, 1090, 1200nm in near infrared wave bands. At different view angles, the reflectivity of the 90° view angle was the lowest and with increasing distance from the vertical measurement, the reflectivity increased, especially in visible wave bands than in near infrared. The reflectivity changes due to ILLC-1 and ELC were more obvious than those of other leaf layers.

The reflectivity changes due to LLC-3 at 1090nm were 8.8% at 0° view angle and 48.6% for ILLC-1. At 90° view angle, the changes were 5.6 and 40.7%; at 30°, they were 12.9 and 27.7% and at 60° they were 12.2 and 34%, respectively. The change was less pronounced at the 180, 150 and 120° view angles.

Compared to the 90° view angle, the reflectivity at 30 and 60° had more information on the lower leaves, which were important for reflectivity of the canopy. The reflectivity at 0° contained very important information on upper leaves.

The canopy spectral reflectivity of Zhongyou9507 was lower than that of Jingdong8 (Fig.6) at 1090nm; the reflectivity due to ILLC-3 at 0° view angle changed 4.4%, while that due to ILLC-1 changed 14.7%; at 90° view angle, the changes were 5.9 and 46.8%; at 30°, they were 16.9 and 44.4% and at 60° they were 16.8 and 41.2%. Compared with the traditional 90° view angle, the lower leaves were important for canopy spectra at 30 and 60° view angles; the upper leaves were important at 0° view angle although the upper leaves of Zhongyou9507 had less influence on canopy spectra than those of Jingdong8.

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>Fig.5 Spectral characteristics following removal of different leaf layers in Jingdong8</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_18.png" /><figcaption>Fig.6 Spectral characteristics following removal of different leaf layers in Zhongyou9507</figcaption></figure>
## 3.3 Analysis of variance (ANOVA) of spectral reflectivity for different leaf layers

The ANOVA of mean reflectivities across six wavelengths showed that the reflectivity of Jingdong8 was lower than that of Zhongyou9507 (Table 1). For Jingdong8, the response of canopy spectra due to ILLC-1 and ELC were significant at the 0° view angle; at 30° as for 60°, the effects of ELC, ILLC-1, ILLC-2 and ILLC-3 were significant; at 90°, the ELC and ILLC-1 were important and at 120, 150 and 180° view angles, the ELC and ILLC-1 were significant. The ELC and ILLC-1 were important for canopy spectra and the influence of lower leaves were less. For the view angles of 0°, 90°, 120°, 150°, 180°), the under leaves

were less influential; at 30 and 60°, the response of lower leaves were significant. The canopy spectral responses of different leaves for Zhongyou9507 differed from that of Jingdong8; at 0 and 90° view angles, the ELC and ILLC-1 effects were significant at 30 and 60°, the ELC, ILLC-1, ILLC-2 effects were significant.

At the same view angle, the ELC and ILLC-1 were more important than the lower leaves.

The spectral response of lower leaves was related to the view angle. With vertical and horizontal measurements, the influence of lower leaves were less than that of other view angles.

<table><caption>Table 1 Canopy spectral characteristic of different leaf layers of Jingdong8 and Zhongyou9507</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Angles°</th><th rowspan="2">Treatments</th><th colspan="6">Average value</th></tr><tr><th colspan="3">Jingdong8</th><th colspan="3">Zhongyou9507</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="6">0</td><td>WWC</td><td>0.2254</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1657</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-3</td><td>0.2110</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1643</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-4</td><td>0.2046</td><td>a</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1662</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-2</td><td>0.1974</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1573</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-1</td><td>0.1690</td><td>bc</td><td>BC</td><td>0.1354</td><td>b</td><td>B</td></tr><tr><td>ELC</td><td>0.1508</td><td>c</td><td>C</td><td>0.1308</td><td>b</td><td>B</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">30</td><td>WWC</td><td>0.2265</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1713</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-4</td><td>0.2196</td><td>ab</td><td>A</td><td>0.1646</td><td>a</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-3</td><td>0.1951</td><td>bc</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1619</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-2</td><td>0.1886</td><td>c</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1398</td><td>bc</td><td>BC</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-1</td><td>0.1591</td><td>d</td><td>BC</td><td>0.1276</td><td>cd</td><td>C</td></tr><tr><td>ELC</td><td>0.1487</td><td>d</td><td>C</td><td>0.1143</td><td>d</td><td>C</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">60</td><td>WWC</td><td>0.2064</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1784</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-4</td><td>0.2021</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1553</td><td>ab</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-3</td><td>0.1816</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1503</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-2</td><td>0.1645</td><td>bc</td><td>ABC</td><td>0.1323</td><td>bc</td><td>ABC</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-1</td><td>0.1412</td><td>bc</td><td>BC</td><td>0.1052</td><td>c</td><td>BC</td></tr><tr><td>ELC</td><td>0.1225</td><td>c</td><td>C</td><td>0.0974</td><td>c</td><td>C</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">90</td><td>WWC</td><td>0.1588</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1766</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-4</td><td>0.1726</td><td>a</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1657</td><td>a</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-3</td><td>0.1451</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1532</td><td>abc</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-2</td><td>0.1292</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1276</td><td>abcd</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ELC</td><td>0.1081</td><td>b</td><td>B</td><td>0.1137</td><td>bcd</td><td>B</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-1</td><td>0.1040</td><td>b</td><td>B</td><td>0.1084</td><td>d</td><td>B</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">120</td><td>WWC</td><td>0.1645</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1765</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-4</td><td>0.1642</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1692</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">150</td><td>ILLC-3</td><td>0.1511</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1616</td><td>abc</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-2</td><td>0.1341</td><td>abc</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1432</td><td>bcd</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-1</td><td>0.1139</td><td>bc</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1255</td><td>d</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ELC</td><td>0.1051</td><td>c</td><td>B</td><td>0.1325</td><td>cd</td><td>B</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-4</td><td>0.1734</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1679</td><td>ab</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="7">180</td><td>ILLC-3</td><td>0.1637</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1692</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-2</td><td>0.1547</td><td>abc</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1568</td><td>bc</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>WWC</td><td>0.1454</td><td>abc</td><td>ABC</td><td>0.1672</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-1</td><td>0.1325</td><td>cd</td><td>BC</td><td>0.1515</td><td>c</td><td>AB</td></tr><tr><td>ELC</td><td>0.1166</td><td>d</td><td>C</td><td>0.1555</td><td>c</td><td>B</td></tr><tr><td>WWC</td><td>0.2254</td><td>a</td><td>A</td><td>0.1678</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-4</td><td>0.1879</td><td>ab</td><td>AB</td><td>0.1599</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">120</td><td>ILLC-3</td><td>0.1883</td><td>ab</td><td>ABC</td><td>0.1555</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-2</td><td>0.1725</td><td>bc</td><td>BC</td><td>0.1464</td><td>a</td><td>A</td></tr><tr><td>ILLC-1</td><td>0.1388</td><td>c</td><td>BC</td><td>0.1461</td><td>b</td><td>B</td></tr><tr><td>ELC</td><td>0.1360</td><td>c</td><td>C</td><td>0.1537</td><td>b</td><td>B</td></tr></tbody></table>

Note: Means followed by different lower case letters differ significantly at P< 0.05; those followed by different upper case letters differ significantly at P<0.01.

## 3.4 Correlation of spectral parameters of leaf layers with leaf nitrogen content (LNC)

The correlation between canopy spectral parameters, spectral grads and corresponding nitrogen content in

different leaf layers (Table 2 was significant between △RVI[670, 890] and leaf layer grads at the flowering stage for Jingdong8 and milky stage for Zhongyou9507.

<table><caption>Table 2 Correlation coefficients between nitrogen contents at different layers and spectral characteristics (SC)</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Growth stage</th><th rowspan="2">Cultivar</th><th rowspan="2">nitrogen content</th><th colspan="6">LSCP</th></tr><tr><th>680nm</th><th>NDVI [857,1210]</th><th>PRI (570,531)</th><th>PPR (550,540)</th><th>OSAVI</th><th>RVI [670,890]</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="4">Anthesis</td><td>Jingdong8</td><td>ULNC</td><td>-0.2058</td><td>0.6835*</td><td>0.1929</td><td>-0.4270</td><td>-0.6850*</td><td>0.6900*</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>LLNC</td><td>-0.2016</td><td>0.6437*</td><td>0.2082</td><td>-0.3300</td><td>-0.5669</td><td>0.5361</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>△LNC</td><td>-0.2779</td><td>0.6431*</td><td>0.5443</td><td>-0.5240</td><td>-0.3256</td><td>0.7710**</td></tr><tr><td>Zhongyou 9507</td><td>ULNC</td><td>0.0627</td><td>-0.2781</td><td>0.0508</td><td>-0.6561*</td><td>-0.0322</td><td>0.6171*</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Milky ripe</td><td>Jingdong8</td><td>ULNC</td><td>0.3290</td><td>0.5788</td><td>0.6957*</td><td>-0.5719</td><td>0.4431</td><td>0.5831</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>LLNC</td><td>0.3656</td><td>0.5690</td><td>0.4514</td><td>-0.5913</td><td>0.4368</td><td>0.6097*</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>△LNC</td><td>0.5610</td><td>0.3882</td><td>-0.4454</td><td>-0.3284</td><td>-0.5557</td><td>0.6627*</td></tr><tr><td>Zhongyou 9507</td><td>ULNC</td><td>0.2041</td><td>0.1279</td><td>0.1432</td><td>-0.5355</td><td>0.2822</td><td>0.4570</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"></td><td></td><td>LLNC</td><td>0.4674</td><td>-0.4111</td><td>-0.5394</td><td>0.6751*</td><td>-0.2721</td><td>0.5118</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>△LNC</td><td>-0.1453</td><td>-0.5269</td><td>-0.6252*</td><td>-0.4591</td><td>-0.1190</td><td>-0.7888**</td></tr></tbody></table>
* and **: significant correlations at 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels, respectively. ULNC: upper layer nitrogen content; LLNC: lower layer nitrogen content; ΔLNC: the difference between ULNC and LLNC. LSCP: spectral characteristics of leaf layers. NDVI: normalized difference vegetation index; PRI: pigment ratio index; PPR: plant pigment ratio; OSAVI: optical soil adjusted index; RVI: ratio of vegetation index.

## 3.5 Model relating grads of spectral parameter and those of nitrogen content across leaf layers

The following models were developed from the significant correlations between grads of spectral parameter and those of nitrogen content in leaf layers:
Flowering stage of Jingdong8:

$$ \Delta\text{LNC}(\%) = 35.2842\Delta\text{RVI}+0.3822 \\ R^2=0.8267^{**}, \quad n=24 \quad (1) $$

Milking stage of Zhongyou9507:

$$ \Delta\text{LNC}(\%) = -8.0692\Delta\text{RVI}+1.5506 \\ R^2=0.8099^{**}, \quad n=24 \quad (2) $$

## 3.6 Leaf layer spectral model for protein content in wheat grains

A prediction model for GPC based on spectra of leaf layers was developed as follows:

a) Jingdong8 at the flowering stage:

$$ \text{GPC}(\%) = 12.0168\Delta\text{RVI} + 15.6975 $$

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 7 Estimated and measured grain protein contents (GPC) in Jingdong 8 and Zhongyou 9507</figcaption></figure>

The root mean square error (RMSE) was used to test the reliability and estimation accuracy of these models for grain protein content. The RMSE of Jingdong8 was 0.7500 while that of Zhongyou9507 was 0.6461. The

$$ R^2=0.7727^{**}, \quad n=24 \quad (3) $$

b) Zhongyou9507 at the milk stage:

$$ \text{GPC}(\%) = -8.9028\Delta\text{RVI}+18.7397 $$

$$ R^2=0.7838^{**}, \quad n=24 \quad (4) $$

The conventional spectral model using 90° view angle was also developed as follows:

a) Jingdong8 at the flowering stage:

$$ \text{GPC}(\%) = 11.98\text{RVI} + 16.71 $$

$$ R^2=0.6537^{**}, \quad n=24 \quad (5) $$

b) Zhongyou9507 at the milk stage:

$$ \text{GPC}(\%) = 19.21\text{RVI} + 13.59 $$

$$ R^2=0.6659^{**}, \quad n=24 \quad (6) $$

The determinant coefficients, R² of models (5) and (6) were 18 and 17% higher than those of models (3) and (4), hence, the predicted GPC model of leaf layer spectral was better.

## 3.7 Validation of the predicted GPC model of leaf layer spectra

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /></figure>

determinant coefficients, R² between measured and estimated grain protein contents were 0.7467 and 0.7599, respectively (Fig. 7). These result indicated
that prediction of grain protein using the leaf layer
spectral model is reliable.

4 Conclusions

The crop canopy has a three-dimensional structure
whose characteristics are determined by species
composition and the three-dimensional distribution of
leaves. The biochemical content has some regulatory
role in the distribution of the canopy space. The
horizontal radiation balances are likely to occur if the
internal variability of derived surface products, the
typical distances that photons may travel horizontally
within such 3-D media extend to spatial scales that are
similar to or larger than those of the measuring sensor
In order to maintain the energy balance of the overal
forest domain, lacal canopy volumes with rather large
positive net horizontal fluxes must also exist, thus
underscoring the importance of properly locating local
flux measurement equipment(Jean-Luc Widlowski,
2006). The more accurate modeling of energy are
required for remotely measure the vertical and spatial
distribution of forest structure. The potential of using
a multi-angle spectral sensor to predict forest vertical
structure were researched, the results showed the
multi-angle spectral provided a relatively direct
measure of vertical structure(D.S.Kimes 2006). The
anisotropic scattering of both the vegetation canopy
and the background is taken into consideration in a
two-layer model of the bidirectional reflectance of
homogeneous vegetation canopies(S.Liangrocapart,
2002).

In this study, two wheat varieties differing in
plant-type were studied using the leaf layer slice
method by analyzing the spectral changes for different
leaf layers at different view angles in the plane of
vertical wheat line. We noted that:

(1) The spectral characteristics varied in 300-700nm, 800-1300nm and 1400-1800nm wave bands because of removal of leaf layers and differences in view angle. The change in the visible wave bands was less than that

in near infrared wave bands and that in Jingdong8 was
less than that in Zhongyou9507.

(2) Compared with the traditional 90° view angle, the spectral information of under leaves were more at 30 and 60° than other view angles; for upper leaves the information was more at 0° view angle. The spectral influence of upper leaves of Zhongyou9507 at 0° view angle was less than that of Jingdong8. The upper leaves of the lax-leafed wheat captured much radiation because of their horizontal orientation, the proportion of upward leaves was bigger than that of downwards leaves. In contrast, the radiation characteristics were complicated in the erect leaf plant-type.

(3) The predicted GPC model by leaf layer spectra using 0° view angle were feasible, the RMSE was 0.7500 for Jingdong8 and 0.6461 for Zhongyou9507. The determinant coefficients, R² between measured and estimated grain protein contents were 0.7467 and 0.7599. Thus, the leaf layer model would be reliable for predicting grain protein content.

In precision agriculture, it is important to accurately
measure the state of a crop's growth using remote
sensing techniques. In this study, we analyzed the
canopy spectral characteristics of two wheat types and
observed that canopy spectra were influenced by leaf
layers and view angles; the spectral response of under
leaves varied with different view angles. A quantitative
study of different leaf layers and their spectra is needed
for precise crop management. Since results were
obtained only in Peking region, more experiments
should done in other regions.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported with grants
(2006AA10Z207, 2006AA10A302) from the National
High Tech R&D Program and (30760109) from the
National Natural Science Foundation of China and
(2002BAH12B02) National Key Technology R&D
Program
References

[1] W. A. Dorigo, R. Zurita-Milla, A. J. W. de Wit, J. Brazile, R. Singh, M. E. Schaepman. A review on reflective remote sensing and data assimilation techniques for enhanced agroecosystem modeling. *International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation*. 2006,5:1~29

[2] D.S.Kimes, K.J.Ranson, G.Sun, J.B.Blair. Predicting lidar measured forest vertical structure from multi-angle spectral data. *Remote Sensing of Environment*, 2006,100:503~511.

[3] José A.Sobrino,Juan C.Jiménez-Muñoz,Wout Verhoef. Canopy directional emissivity: comparison between models. *Remote Sensing of Environment*, 2005,99:304 – 314.

[4] A.L.O'Neill, J.A.Kupiec, P.J.Curran. Biochemical and reflectance variation throughout a sitka spruce canopy. *Remote Sensing of Environment*. 2002,80:134 -142.

[5]Wang Z J, Wang J H, Huang W J, Ma Z H, Wang B H, Zhao C J, Zhao M. The properties of temporal and spatial distributions relationship between leaf nitrogen and grain quality leaf nitrogen and the winter wheat. *Acta Agronomica Sinica*,2004,7:700-707(in Chinese).

[6]Wang J H, Wang Z J, Huang W J, Ma Z H, Liu L Y, Zhao C J. The vertical distribution characteristic and spectral response of canopy nitrogen in different layer of winter wheat. *Journal of Remote Sensing*, 2004, 7: 309-315(in Chinese).

[7] Lee F.Johnson. Nitrogen influence on fresh-leaf NIR spectra. *Remote Sensing of Environment*, 2001,78:314 – 320.

[8] Lydia Serrano,Josep Peñuelas, Susan L. Ustin. Remote sensing of nitrogen and lignin in mediterranean vegetation from AVIRIS data: decomposing biochemical from structural signals. *Remote Sensing of Environment*.2002,81:355-364.

[9] Moses Azong Cho, Andrew K. Skidmore. A new technique for extracting the red edge position from hyperspectral data: The linear extrapolation method. *Remote Sensing of Environment*, 2006,101: 181 – 193.

[10]Li Y X, Zhu Y, Tian Y C, Yao X, Qin X D, Cao W X. Quantitative relationship between leaf nitrogen accumulation and canopy reflectance spectra in wheat. *Acta Agronomica Sinica*, 2006,2:203-209(in Chinese).

[11]Xue L H, Cao W X, Luo W H, Jiang D, Meng Y L, Zhu Y. Diagnosis of nitrogen status in rice leaves with the canopy

spectral reflectance. *Scientia Agricultura Sinica*, 2003,36 (7):807-812(in Chinese).

[12] Lu Y L, Wang J H, Li S K, Xie R Z, Gao S J, Ma D L. Identification of wheat canopy structure using hyperspectral data. *Scientia Agricultura Sinica*, 2005, 4(9): 668-672

[13] Bai J H, Li S K, Wang K R, Zhang X J, Xiao C H, Sui X Y. The response of canopy reflectance spectrum for the cotton LAI and LAI inversion. *Scientia Agricultura Sinica*, 2007,40(1):63-69(in Chinese).

[14] LIU Wei-dong, XIANG Yue-qin, ZHENG Lan-fen, TONG Qing-xi, WU Chang-shan. Relationships between rice LAI, CH.D and hyperspectra data. *Journal of Remote Sensing*, 2000, 4(4):279-283(in Chinese).

[15]WU Chang-shan, XIANH Yue-qin, ZHENG Lan-fen, TONG Qing-xi. Estimating chlorophyll density of crop canopies by using hyperspectral data. *Journal of Remote Sensing*, 2000, 4(3):228-232(in Chinese).

[16]ZHANG Xia, LIU Liang-yun, ZHAO Chun-jiang, ZHANG Bing. Estimating wheat nitrogen concentration with high spectral resolution image. *Journal of Remote Sensing*, 2003, 7(3):176-181(in Chinese).

[17] Jean-Luc Widlowski, Bernard Pinty, Thomas Lavergne, Michel M. Verstraete, Nadine Gobron. Horizontal radiation transport in 3-D forest canopies at multiple spatial resolutions: Simulated impact on canopy absorption. *Remote Sensing of Environment*,2006,103: 379 – 397.

[18] E. A. Walter-Shea, J. Privette, D. Cornell. M. A. Mesarch, and C. J. Hays. Relations between directional spectral vegetation indices and leaf area and absorbed radiation in alfalfa1. *Remote Sensing of Environment*,1997, 61:16-177.

[19] Andres Kuusk and Tiit Nilson. A directional multispectral forest reflectance model. *Remote Sensing of Environment*, 2000,72: 244–252

[20] Fraser Gemmell and Adrian J. McDonald. View zenith angle effects on the forest information content of three spectral indices. *Remote Sensing of Environment*, 2000, 72:139–158.

[21] Laurent Bousquet, Sophie Lachérade, Stéphane Jacquemoud, Ismaë Moya. Leaf BRDF measurements and
model for specular and diffuse components differentiation.
*Remote Sensing of Environment*, 2005, 98: 201–211.

[22] Gao F, Zhu Q J. The advance in multi-angle remote sensing of vegetation canopy. *Scientia Geographica Sinica* 1997,11:346-355.

[23] Lu Y L, Li S K, Wang K R, Xie R Z, Gao S J, Wang G. Prediction of grain protein content using ear layer spectral reflectance data. *Acta Agron Sinica*,2006,(32)2:232-236.

[24] Lu Y L, Li S K, Wang J H. Prediction of grain protein content of wheat based on the ear level spectrum. 25th

Anniversay IGARSS (International Geoscience and Remote
Sensing Symposium) 2005, 25-29 July, 2005, Seoul. Ko rea

[25] Xiao C H, Li S K, Wang K R, Lu Y L, Xie R Z, Gao S J. Prediction canopy leaf nitrogen content of winter wheat based on reflectance spectra in different directions. *Acta Agron Sinica*,2007,33(7):1141-1145.