Comparing how accurately four different proximal spectrometers can estimate pasture nutritive characteristics: effects of spectral range and data type

Abstract

The nutrition of grazing ruminants can be optimized by allocating pasture according to its nutritive characteristics, provided that nutritive concentrations are determined in near-real time. Current proximal spectrometers can provide accurate predictive results but are bulky and expensive. This study compared an industry standard, ‘control’, proximal spectrometer, often used for scientific estimation of pasture nutrient concentrations in situ (350–2500 nm spectral range), with three lower-cost, ‘next-generation’, handheld spectrometers. The candidate sensors included a hyperspectral camera (397–1004 nm), and two handheld spectrometers (908–1676 nm and 1345–2555 nm respectively). Pasture samples (n = 145) collected from two paddocks on a working Australian dairy farm, over three timepoints, were scanned in situ by each instrument and then analysed for eight nutritive parameters. Chemometric models were then developed for each nutrient using data from each sensor (split into 80:20 calibration and validation sets). According to Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficient (LCCC) from independent validation (n = 29), the hyperspectral camera was the best candidate instrument (LCCC from 0.31 to 0.85, and 0.67 on average), rivalling the control sensor (LCCC from 0.41 to 0.84, and 0.67 on average). Consideration was given to whether the hyperspectral camera’s success was due to spectral range or data type/capture method. It was found that the 400–920 nm (trimmed) spectral region was slightly less sensitive in principle to nutrient concentrations than higher spectral ranges. Therefore, the predictive performance of the camera was attributed to the advantage of gathering data as hyperspectral images as opposed to single spectra.