IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v7y2010i9p3513-3530d9694.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Laboratory and Field Remote Sensing Methods to Measure Forage Quality

Author

Listed:
  • Xulin Guo

    (Department of Geography, University of Saskatchewan, 117 Science Place, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, S7N 5C8, Canada)

  • John F. Wilmshurst

    (Jasper National Park of Canada, Parks Canada, P.O. Box 10, Jasper, AB T0E 1E0, Canada)

  • Zhaoqin Li

    (Department of Geography, University of Saskatchewan, 117 Science Place, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, S7N 5C8, Canada)

Abstract

Recent research in range ecology has emphasized the importance of forage quality as a key indicator of rangeland condition. However, we lack tools to evaluate forage quality at scales appropriate for management. Using canopy reflectance data to measure forage quality has been conducted at both laboratory and field levels separately, but little work has been conducted to evaluate these methods simultaneously. The objective of this study is to find a reliable way of assessing grassland quality through measuring forage chemistry with reflectance. We studied a mixed grass ecosystem in Grasslands National Park of Canada and surrounding pastures, located in southern Saskatchewan. Spectral reflectance was collected at both in-situ field level and in the laboratory. Vegetation samples were collected at each site, sorted into the green grass portion, and then sent to a chemical company for measuring forage quality variables, including protein, lignin, ash, moisture at 135 ºC, Neutral Detergent Fiber (NDF), Acid Detergent Fiber (ADF), Total Digestible, Digestible Energy, Net Energy for Lactation, Net Energy for Maintenance, and Net Energy for Gain. Reflectance data were processed with the first derivative transformation and continuum removal method. Correlation analysis was conducted on spectral and forage quality variables. A regression model was further built to investigate the possibility of using canopy spectral measurements to predict the grassland quality. Results indicated that field level prediction of protein of mixed grass species was possible (r 2 = 0.63). However, the relationship between canopy reflectance and the other forage quality variables was not strong.

Suggested Citation

  • Xulin Guo & John F. Wilmshurst & Zhaoqin Li, 2010. "Comparison of Laboratory and Field Remote Sensing Methods to Measure Forage Quality," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-18, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:7:y:2010:i:9:p:3513-3530:d:9694
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/7/9/3513/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/7/9/3513/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Langevelde, Frank & Drescher, Michael & Heitkönig, Ignas M.A. & Prins, Herbert H.T., 2008. "Instantaneous intake rate of herbivores as function of forage quality and mass: Effects on facilitative and competitive interactions," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 213(3), pages 273-284.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ranjan, Ravi & Bagchi, Sumanta, 2016. "Functional response and body size in consumer–resource interactions: Unimodality favors facilitation," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 25-35.
    2. Mouissie, A. Maarten & Apol, M. Emile F. & Heil, Gerrit W. & van Diggelen, Rudy, 2008. "Creation and preservation of vegetation patterns by grazing," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 218(1), pages 60-72.
    3. Kramer, K. & Prins, H.H.T., 2010. "Allometric scaling of resource acquisition by ruminants in dynamic and heterogeneous environments," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(21), pages 2555-2564.
    4. Baveco, Johannes M. & Kuipers, Harold & Nolet, Bart A., 2011. "A large-scale multi-species spatial depletion model for overwintering waterfowl," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(20), pages 3773-3784.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:7:y:2010:i:9:p:3513-3530:d:9694. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.