The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Green Leaf Area Index Estimation in Maize and Soybean: Combining Vegetation Indices to Achieve Maximal Sensitivity
Abstract
Vegetation indices (VIs), traditionally used for estimation of green leaf area index (gLAI), have different sensitivities along the range of gLAI variability. The goals of this study were to: (i) test 12 VIs for estimating gLAI in maize (Zea mays L.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]; (ii) estimate gLAI in both crops without the need to reparameterize the algorithms for different crops; and (iii) devise a combined VI that is maximally sensitive to gLAI along its entire range of variability. The study was performed for eight growing seasons (2001–2008) in one irrigated and one rainfed field under a maize–soybean rotation and one irrigated field under continuous maize in eastern Nebraska for a total of 24 field‐years. The gLAI ranged from 0 to 6.5 m 2/m 2 in maize and 0 to 5.5 m 2/m 2 in soybean. Normalized difference indices, e.g., the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) were most sensitive to gLAI below 2 m 2/m 2, while ratio indices, e.g., simple ratio (SR) and chlorophyll indices (CIs), were most sensitive to gLAI above 2 m 2/m 2. For the crops evaluated, relationships between gLAI and the VIs were species specific with the exception of the red‐edge NDVI and the CI red‐edge. To benefit from the different sensitivities of VIs along the entire gLAI range, we suggest combining VIs. For sensors with spectral bands in the red and near‐infrared regions, the best combination was NDVI and SR (maize: coefficient of variation [CV] = 20%; soybean: CV = 23%); however, this combined index is species specific. For sensors with bands in the red‐edge and near‐infrared regions, the best combination was red‐edge NDVI and CI red‐edge, which was capable of accurately estimating gLAI in both crops with a CV < 20% and with no reparameterization.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Study of Cross-Validation and Bootstrap for Accuracy Estimation and Model Selection
Kohavi, R. (1995) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.19712698 · Cited by 10,909
Cited by
Li, X., Xiao, J., He, B., Altaf Arain, M., Beringer, J., Desai, A. R., Emmel, C., Hollinger, D. Y., Krasnova, A., Mammarella, I., et al. (2018) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.14297 · Cited by 431
Yue, J., Yang, G., Tian, Q., Feng, H., Xu, K., & Zhou, C. (2019) · ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2019.02.022 · Cited by 423
Youssef, N. A. (2021) · International Journal of Phytoremediation · doi:10.1080/15226514.2020.1812508 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Nguy-Robertson, A., Gitelson, A., Peng, Y., Viña, A., Arkebauer, T., & Rundquist, D.
- Venue
- Agronomy Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1336-1347
- ISSN
- 0002-1962 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-0645
- OpenAlex
- W1987997875
- Cited by
- 292
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Green Leaf Area Index Estimation in Maize and Soybean: Combining Vegetation Indices to Achieve Maximal Sensitivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2134/agronj2012.0065
- The paper
- Nguy-Robertson, A., Gitelson, A., Peng, Y., Viña, A., Arkebauer, T., & Rundquist, D. (2012). Green Leaf Area Index Estimation in Maize and Soybean: Combining Vegetation Indices to Achieve Maximal Sensitivity. Agronomy Journal. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2012.0065
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.