Foliar Nutrient Data Normalization Methods

normalization of foliar nutrient data n.w
1 / 43
Embed
Share

Learn about the importance of normalizing foliar nutrient data to account for differences in laboratory methodology, and how inter-laboratory comparisons can help ensure accurate interpretation of analytical results. Explore the effects of different analytical methods on foliar N and S data, and understand how known differences in laboratory results can be used to normalize data for better interpretation.

  • Nutrient Data
  • Normalization
  • Laboratory Methodology
  • Foliar
  • Analytical Results
rayaanacharya
saes365 Follow

Uploaded on | 0 Views

Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.

Download Presentation

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Normalization of Foliar Nutrient Data

  2. Normalization of Foliar Nutrient Data Differences in laboratory methodology may affect analytical results

  3. Relationship between foliar N analytical methodologies dry combustion vs. wet digestion 2.0 1.9 1.8 % N (wet digestion) 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 % N (dry combustion)

  4. Relationship between foliar S analytical methodologies dry combustion vs. wet digestion 0.09 % S (wet digestion) 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 % S (dry combustion)

  5. Normalization of Foliar Nutrient Data Differences in laboratory methodology may affect analytical results Inter-laboratory differences may be large enough to affect interpretation

  6. Normalization of Foliar Nutrient Data Differences in laboratory methodology may affect analytical results Inter-laboratory differences may be large enough to affect interpretation Nutrient interpretative criteria do not account for differences in methodology

  7. Normalization of Foliar Nutrient Data Differences in laboratory methodology may affect analytical results Inter-laboratory differences may be large enough to affect interpretation Nutrient interpretative criteria do not account for differences in methodology Known differences in laboratory analytical results can be used to normalize foliar data prior to interpretation

  8. Normalization of Foliar Nutrient Data Differences in laboratory methodology may affect analytical results Inter-laboratory differences may be large enough to affect interpretation Nutrient interpretative criteria do not account for differences in methodology Known differences in laboratory analytical results can be used to normalize foliar data prior to interpretation Normalization requires inter-laboratory comparisons

  9. Normalization of Foliar Nutrient Data Differences in laboratory methodology may affect analytical results Inter-laboratory differences may be large enough to affect interpretation Nutrient interpretative criteria do not account for differences in methodology Known differences in laboratory analytical results can be used to normalize foliar data prior to interpretation Normalization requires inter-laboratory comparisons The normalization process does not make inferences about the quality of foliar nutrient data

  10. Laboratory foliar N comparison (2012) PSAI vs. MoE 1.4 1.3 % Nitrogen (PSAI) 1.2 1.1 1.0 y = 0.786x + 0.1336 R2= 0.775 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 % Nitrogen (MoE)

  11. Laboratory foliar S comparison (2012) PSAI vs. MoE 0.10 % Sulphur (PSAI) 0.09 0.08 y = 1.005x + 0.0064 R2= 0.762 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 % Sulphur (MoE)

  12. Normalization spreadsheet (2012) PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 P (%) 0.145 K (%) 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 S (%) 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 N:S N:P N:K N:Ca N:Mg

  13. Normalization spreadsheet (2012) PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 P (%) 0.145 0.133 K (%) 0.450 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 0.144 Mg (%) 0.110 0.105 S (%) 0.091 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 N:S 13.2 N:P 9.0 N:K 2.7 N:Ca 8.3 N:Mg 11.5

  14. Normalization spreadsheet (2012) PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 = 0.561x + 0.052 P (%) 0.145 0.133 = 0.840x + 0.036 K (%) 0.450 0.450 = 0.677x + 0.019 Ca (%) 0.185 0.144 = 0.720x + 0.026 Mg (%) 0.110 0.105 S (%) 0.091 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 N:S 13.2 13.2 N:P 8.3 9.0 N:K 2.7 2.7 N:Ca 6.5 8.3 N:Mg 10.9 11.5

  15. Normalization spreadsheet (2012) PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized = 0.786x + 0.134 N (%) 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.077 P (%) 0.145 0.133 0.145 0.145 K (%) 0.450 0.415 0.450 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 0.144 0.185 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 0.105 0.110 0.110 = 1.004x + 0.007 S (%) 0.091 0.091 0.091 0.098 = 1.057x 8.03 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 75.0 71.3 = 0.903x + 1.73 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.3 N:S 13.2 13.2 13.2 11.0 N:P 8.3 9.0 8.3 7.4 N:K 2.7 2.9 2.7 2.4 N:Ca 6.5 8.3 6.5 5.8 N:Mg 10.9 11.5 10.9 9.8

  16. Inter-laboratory comparison Pacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment The 2012 inter-laboratory comparison was repeated in early 2013 following analytical equipment upgrade at the MoE lab

  17. Inter-laboratory comparison Pacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment The 2012 inter-laboratory comparison was repeated in early 2013 following analytical equipment upgrade at the MoE lab 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used

  18. Inter-laboratory comparison Pacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment The 2012 inter-laboratory comparison was repeated in early 2013 following analytical equipment upgrade at the MoE lab 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used Samples were selected to cover a broader range of species and foliar nutrient levels than used in the 2012 comparison

  19. Inter-laboratory comparison Pacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment The 2012 inter-laboratory comparison was repeated in early 2013 following analytical equipment upgrade at the MoE lab 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used Samples were selected to cover a broader range of species and foliar nutrient levels than used in the 2012 comparison Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples

  20. Inter-laboratory comparison Pacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment The 2012 inter-laboratory comparison was repeated in early 2013 following analytical equipment upgrade at the MoE lab 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used Samples were selected to cover a broader range of species and foliar nutrient levels than used in the 2012 comparison Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples One sub-sample was shipped to each lab

  21. Inter-laboratory comparison Pacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment The 2012 inter-laboratory comparison was repeated in early 2013 following analytical equipment upgrade at the MoE lab 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used Samples were selected to cover a broader range of species and foliar nutrient levels than used in the 2012 comparison Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples One sub-sample was shipped to each lab For each nutrient, laboratory results were subjected to regression analysis

  22. Inter-laboratory comparison Pacific Soil Analysis vs. Ministry of Environment The 2012 inter-laboratory comparison was repeated in early 2013 following analytical equipment upgrade at the MoE lab 50 previously analyzed foliage samples were used Samples were selected to cover a broader range of species and foliar nutrient levels than used in the 2012 comparison Each sample was thoroughly mixed and split into two sub-samples One sub-sample was shipped to each lab For each nutrient, laboratory results were subjected to regression analysis The new equations were used to revise the 2012 normalization spreadsheet

  23. Laboratory foliar N comparison PSAI vs. MoE 2.0 1.9 1.8 % Nitrogen (PSAI) 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 y = 0.958x R2 = 0.959 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 % Nitrogen (MoE)

  24. Laboratory foliar S comparison PSAI vs. MoE 0.20 0.18 % Sulphur (PSAI) y = -0.6267x2 + 0.9558x R = 0.8885 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 % Sulphur (MoE)

  25. Laboratory foliar P comparison PSAI vs. MoE 0.35 0.30 % Phosphorus (PSAI) 0.25 0.20 y = 0.9492x R = 0.9783 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 % Phosphorus (MoE)

  26. Laboratory foliar K comparison PSAI vs. MoE 0.35 0.30 % Potassium (PSAI) 0.25 0.20 y = 0.9492x R = 0.9783 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 % Potassium (MoE)

  27. Laboratory foliar Ca comparison PSAI vs. MoE 1.20 1.00 % Calcium (PSAI) 0.80 0.60 0.40 y = 0.3592x2 + 0.7346x R = 0.9831 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 % Calcium (MoE)

  28. Laboratory foliar Mg comparison PSAI vs. MoE 0.24 0.22 % Magnesium (PSAI) 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.14 y = 1.0249x R = 0.9797 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 % Magnesium (MoE)

  29. Laboratory foliar B comparison PSAI vs. MoE 60 50 ppm Boron (PSAI) 40 30 20 y = -0.0012x2 + 0.8732x R = 0.9838 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 ppm Boron (MoE)

  30. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) P (%) K (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) S (%) SO4 (ppm) B (ppm) N:S N:P N:K N:Ca N:Mg

  31. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 P (%) 0.145 K (%) 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 S (%) 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 N:S N:P N:K N:Ca N:Mg

  32. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 P (%) 0.145 K (%) 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 S (%) 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 N:S 13.2 N:P 8.3 N:K 2.7 N:Ca 6.5 N:Mg 10.9

  33. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 P (%) 0.145 0.138 K (%) 0.450 0.413 Ca (%) 0.185 0.148 Mg (%) 0.110 0.113 S (%) 0.091 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 N:S 13.2 13.2 N:P 8.3 8.7 N:K 2.7 2.9 N:Ca 6.5 8.1 N:Mg 10.9 10.6

  34. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 P (%) 0.145 0.138 = 0.9492x K (%) 0.450 0.413 = (0.1714x2) + (0.8504x) Ca (%) 0.185 0.148 = (0.3592x2) + (0.7346x) Mg (%) 0.110 0.113 = 1.0249x S (%) 0.091 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 N:S 13.2 13.2 N:P 8.3 8.7 N:K 2.7 2.9 N:Ca 6.5 8.1 N:Mg 10.9 10.6

  35. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw Normalized Raw Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 P (%) 0.145 0.138 K (%) 0.450 0.413 Ca (%) 0.185 0.148 Mg (%) 0.110 0.113 S (%) 0.091 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 N:S 13.2 13.2 N:P 8.3 8.7 N:K 2.7 2.9 N:Ca 6.5 8.1 N:Mg 10.9 10.6

  36. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 P (%) 0.145 K (%) 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 S (%) 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 N:S N:P N:K N:Ca N:Mg

  37. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 P (%) 0.145 K (%) 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 S (%) 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 N:S 13.2 N:P 8.3 N:K 2.7 N:Ca 6.5 N:Mg 10.9

  38. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.150 P (%) 0.145 0.138 0.145 0.145 K (%) 0.450 0.413 0.450 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 0.148 0.185 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 0.113 0.110 0.110 S (%) 0.091 0.091 0.091 0.082 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 75.0 101.7 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.8 N:S 13.2 13.2 13.2 14.1 N:P 8.3 8.7 8.3 7.9 N:K 2.7 2.9 2.7 2.6 N:Ca 6.5 8.1 6.5 6.2 N:Mg 10.9 10.6 10.9 10.5

  39. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.150 = 0.9584x P (%) 0.145 0.138 0.145 0.145 K (%) 0.450 0.413 0.450 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 0.148 0.185 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 0.113 0.110 0.110 S (%) 0.091 0.091 0.091 0.082 = (0.9558x) (0.6267x2) SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 75.0 101.7 = (1.4164x) (0.0008x2) B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.8 = (0.8732x) (0.0012x2) N:S 13.2 13.2 13.2 14.1 N:P 8.3 8.7 8.3 7.9 N:K 2.7 2.9 2.7 2.6 N:Ca 6.5 8.1 6.5 6.2 N:Mg 10.9 10.6 10.9 10.5

  40. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.150 P (%) 0.145 0.138 0.145 0.145 K (%) 0.450 0.413 0.450 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 0.148 0.185 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 0.113 0.110 0.110 S (%) 0.091 0.091 0.091 0.082 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 75.0 101.7 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.8 N:S 13.2 13.2 13.2 14.1 N:P 8.3 8.7 8.3 7.9 N:K 2.7 2.9 2.7 2.6 N:Ca 6.5 8.1 6.5 6.2 N:Mg 10.9 10.6 10.9 10.5

  41. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 P (%) 0.145 0.145 K (%) 0.450 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 0.110 S (%) 0.091 0.091 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 N:S 13.2 13.2 N:P 8.3 8.3 N:K 2.7 2.7 N:Ca 6.5 6.5 N:Mg 10.9 10.9

  42. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.150 P (%) 0.145 0.138 0.145 0.145 K (%) 0.450 0.413 0.450 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 0.148 0.185 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 0.113 0.110 0.110 S (%) 0.091 0.091 0.091 0.082 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 75.0 101.7 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.8 N:S 13.2 13.2 13.2 14.1 N:P 8.3 8.7 8.3 7.9 N:K 2.7 2.9 2.7 2.6 N:Ca 6.5 8.1 6.5 6.2 N:Mg 10.9 10.6 10.9 10.5

  43. Normalization of laboratory foliar nutrient data PSAI MoE Element Raw data Normalized Raw data Normalized N (%) 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.077 P (%) 0.145 0.133 0.145 0.145 K (%) 0.450 0.415 0.450 0.450 Ca (%) 0.185 0.144 0.185 0.185 Mg (%) 0.110 0.105 0.110 0.110 S (%) 0.091 0.091 0.091 0.098 SO4 (ppm) 75.0 75.0 75.0 71.2 B (ppm) 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.3 N:S 13.2 13.2 13.2 14.1 N:P 8.3 8.7 8.3 7.9 N:K 2.7 2.9 2.7 2.6 N:Ca 6.5 8.1 6.5 6.2 N:Mg 10.9 10.6 10.9 10.5

Related


Normalisation

Normalisation

kataleya
Agricultural Microbials Market

Agricultural Microbials Market

ankita
Global biofertilizer market- Emerging trends and opportunities

Global biofertilizer market- Emerging trends and opportunities

Richa
Building a local facet in Primo VE for Decolonization work

Building a local facet in Primo VE for Decolonization work

kate
fMRI Coregistration and Spatial Normalization Methods

fMRI Coregistration and Spatial Normalization Methods

sofia
Coregistration and Spatial Normalization in fMRI Analysis

Coregistration and Spatial Normalization in fMRI Analysis

eryx
Agricultural Microbials Market

Agricultural Microbials Market

Komal1
Concept of Foliar Nutrition

Concept of Foliar Nutrition

warner
Database Normalization and Aggregation Concepts

Database Normalization and Aggregation Concepts

rayyan
Database Normalization and Functional Dependencies

Database Normalization and Functional Dependencies

rumaisa
Methods of Mark Adjustment in Educational Assessment

Methods of Mark Adjustment in Educational Assessment

louise
Foliar Nutrition: Droplet Size and Wetting Agents

Foliar Nutrition: Droplet Size and Wetting Agents

adelina
Alterations in Rhizosphere Microflora Due to Chemical Applications

Alterations in Rhizosphere Microflora Due to Chemical Applications

alannah
Database Normalization Process

Database Normalization Process

ledger
FlashNormalize: Programming by Examples for Text Normalization

FlashNormalize: Programming by Examples for Text Normalization

zebedee
Normalization in Database Management

Normalization in Database Management

abelia
Database Normalization: Understanding Sets and Normal Forms

Database Normalization: Understanding Sets and Normal Forms

kaer455
Data Preparation in Data Science

Data Preparation in Data Science

myers
Effect of Normalization of Relations with Cuba on Georgia

Effect of Normalization of Relations with Cuba on Georgia

biscardi_p
Database Normalization: A Comprehensive Guide

Database Normalization: A Comprehensive Guide

emori
Database Normalization Techniques

Database Normalization Techniques

slabaugh_h
Best Practices in Neural Network Initialization and Normalization

Best Practices in Neural Network Initialization and Normalization

amaryll

More Related Content