Accuracy and Precision of Near Infra-red Spectroscopy (NIRS) versus Wet Chemistry in Forage Analysis
Description
Near Infra-red Spectroscopy (NIRS) is an attractive option for forage analysis. NIRS is less labor intensive, nondestructive, rapid, environmentally friendly and provides accurate and precise results. However, many nutritionists are quick to brush off NIRS, citing ‘poor accuracy’. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of dry matter (DM), crude protein (CP), acid detergent fiber (ADF), and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) of 33 National Forage Testing Association (NFTA) proficiency test (PT) alfalfa hay samples analyzed by NIRS in 7 NIRS Forage and Feed Testing Consortium (NIRSC) member laboratories. The reference method averages (RMA), used to evaluate the NIRS results, were based on the wet chemistry results reported by numerous laboratories participating in the corresponding NFTA proficiency testing rounds. Thus, this study is a robust comparison of NIRS determined results with the corresponding wet chemistry results, which is still a “gold standard” to many nutritionists. These results demonstrate that when NIRS calibrations are developed using good science and applied properly, NIRS is as accurate as wet chemistry in forage nutritional analysis. Further, both intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory precision of NIRS methods are superior to wet chemistry methods
Included in
Agricultural Science Commons, Agronomy and Crop Sciences Commons, Plant Biology Commons, Plant Pathology Commons, Soil Science Commons, Weed Science Commons
Accuracy and Precision of Near Infra-red Spectroscopy (NIRS) versus Wet Chemistry in Forage Analysis
Near Infra-red Spectroscopy (NIRS) is an attractive option for forage analysis. NIRS is less labor intensive, nondestructive, rapid, environmentally friendly and provides accurate and precise results. However, many nutritionists are quick to brush off NIRS, citing ‘poor accuracy’. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of dry matter (DM), crude protein (CP), acid detergent fiber (ADF), and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) of 33 National Forage Testing Association (NFTA) proficiency test (PT) alfalfa hay samples analyzed by NIRS in 7 NIRS Forage and Feed Testing Consortium (NIRSC) member laboratories. The reference method averages (RMA), used to evaluate the NIRS results, were based on the wet chemistry results reported by numerous laboratories participating in the corresponding NFTA proficiency testing rounds. Thus, this study is a robust comparison of NIRS determined results with the corresponding wet chemistry results, which is still a “gold standard” to many nutritionists. These results demonstrate that when NIRS calibrations are developed using good science and applied properly, NIRS is as accurate as wet chemistry in forage nutritional analysis. Further, both intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory precision of NIRS methods are superior to wet chemistry methods
