## 3 Results  
### Protein Content  
The protein content measured via the Kjeldahl method ranged from 11.51% to 17.57%, whereas that obtained via FT-NIR ranged from 11.03% to 17.93% (Figure 1). For samples of the same wheat genotype from different regions, the protein contents measured via the two methods showed different degrees of similarity. For example, in samples of genotype VS44 collected from Hexiling and Zhangjiaguanzhuang, the results obtained via the two methods were similar, but in samples of the same genotype collected from Dazhai, the results obtained via the two methods were not similar even though the sowing dates were almost similar. This may be because of the basal fertilizer of the area or the ambient temperature and humidity on the protein content. The accuracy of their two measurements was high, with r = 0.92 for the protein content measured via both, and there was also a high degree of agreement between the two in the analysis of correlation results. This indicates the reliability of NIR spectroscopy in determining protein measurements in wheat [18].  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Kolmogorov–Smirnov**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Shapiro–Wilk**} \\ \cline{3-6}
**Methods** & **Parameters** & **Statistic** & \(\boldsymbol{p}\) & **Statistic** & \(\boldsymbol{p}\) \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{FT-NIR} & Protein content & 0.131 & 0.2 & 0.976 & 0.724 \\  & Bulk density & 0.125 & 0.2 & 0.937 & 0.083 \\  & Doug extensibility & 0.125 & 0.2 & 0.937 & 0.083 \\  & Development time & 0.122 & 0.2 & 0.969 & 0.537 \\  & Stability time & 0.096 & 0.2 & 0.967 & 0.48 \\  & Wet gluten & 0.133 & 0.2 & 0.966 & 0.453 \\  & Extension area & 0.108 & 0.2 & 0.978 & 0.794 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Physiochemical measurement} & Protein content & 0.14 & 0.15 & 0.951 & 0.191 \\  & Bulk density & 0.193 & 0.007 & 0.909 & 0.016 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Rough extensibility & 0.193 & 0.007 & 0.909 & 0.016 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Development time & 0.301 & 0 & 0.743 & 0 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Stability time & 0.208 & 0.002 & 0.876 & 0.003 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Wet gluten & 0.127 & 0.2 & 0.946 & 0.146 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Extension area & 0.168 & 0.036 & 0.936 & 0.08 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Methods**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Kolmogorov–Smirnov**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Shapiro–Wilk**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & **Parameters** & **Statistic** & \(\boldsymbol{p}\) & **Statistic** & \(\boldsymbol{p}\) \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{FT-NIR} & Protein content & 0.131 & 0.2 & 0.976 & 0.724 \\  & Bulk density & 0.125 & 0.2 & 0.937 & 0.083 \\  & Doug extensibility & 0.125 & 0.2 & 0.937 & 0.083 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Development time & 0.122 & 0.2 & 0.969 & 0.537 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Stability time & 0.096 & 0.2 & 0.967 & 0.48 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Wet gluten & 0.133 & 0.2 & 0.966 & 0.453 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Extension area & 0.108 & 0.2 & 0.978 & 0.794 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Physiochemical measurement} & Protein content & 0.14 & 0.15 & 0.951 & 0.191 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Bulk density & 0.193 & 0.007 & 0.909 & 0.016 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Development time & 0.301 & 0 & 0.743 & 0 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Stability time & 0.208 & 0.002 & 0.876 & 0.003 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Wet gluten & 0.127 & 0.2 & 0.946 & 0.146 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Extension area & 0.168 & 0.036 & 0.936 & 0.08 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Output of the normality test for seven indicators of wheat via two methods.  
Figure 1: Comparison of protein content of wheat genotypes measured via physicochemical and FT-NIR methods. The positive error line in the figure indicates the degree of data variability, where the black lines is the error lines of FT-NIR and the gray lines is the error line of Kjeldahl Method.