A Leaf Layer Spectral Model for Estimating Protein Content of Wheat Grains 3.3 Analysis of Variance(ANOVA)of Spectral Reflectivity for Different Leaf Layers The ANOVA of mean reflectivities across six wavelengths showed that the reflectivity of Jingdong&was lower than that of Zhongyou9507 (Table 1).For Jingdong8,the response of canopy spectra due to ILLC-1 and ELC were significant at the 0view angle;at 30 as for6o°，the effects of ELC.LLC-l,LLC-2 and ILLC-3 were significant:at90°，thc ELC and ILLC-1 were important and at 120.150 and 180 view angles.the ELC and ILLC-1 were significant.The ELC and ILLC-1 were important for the influence of lower leaves were les s.For the the under leaves were less influential;at 30 and 60,the response of lower leaves were significant.The canopy spectral responses of different leaves for Zhongyou9507 differed from that of Jingdong8;at 0 and 90 view angles,the ELC and ILLC-1 effects were significant at 30 and 60,the ELC,ILLC-1,ILLC-2 effects were significant. At the same view angle.the ELC and ILLC-1 were more important than the lower leaves The spectral response of lo leaves was related to the view angle.With vertica and horizontal measurements,the influence of lower leaves were less than that of othe view angles Table 1.Canopy spectral characteristic of different leaf layers of Jingdong8 and Zhongyou9507 Average value Angles° Treatments Jingdong8 Zhongyou9507 0 wWC 0.2254 A 0.1657 A ILLC-3 0.2110 9 A 0.1643 A Π1C4 02046 AB 0.1662 ILLC-2 0.1974 ab AB 0.1573 A L.1 0.1690 bc BC 0.1354 h ELC 0.1508 c 0.1308 b B 30 wwC 0.2265 A 0.1713 A ILLC-4 0.2196 ab 0.1646 AB ILLC-3 0.1951 be AB 0.1619 ab ILLC-2 0.1886 AB 0.1398 be BC ILLC.I 0.1591 BC 0.1276 cd. ELC 0.1487 C 0.1143 d WWC 0.2064 a A 0.1784 A ILLC-4 0.2021 a A 0.1553 A ILLC.3 0.1816 ab AB 0.1503 ab AB ILLC-2 0.1645 bc ABC 0.1323 ABO ILLC-1 0.1412 BC 0.1052 c BC ELC 0.1225 C 0.0974 c CA Leaf Layer Spectral Model for Estimating Protein Content of Wheat Grains 23 3.3 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) of Spectral Reflectivity for Different Leaf Layers The ANOVA of mean reflectivities across six wavelengths showed that the reflectivity of Jingdong8 was lower than that of Zhongyou9507 (Table 1). For Jingdong8, the response of canopy spectra due to ILLC-1 and ELC were significant at the 0° view angle; at 30° as for 60°, the effects of ELC, ILLC-1, ILLC-2 and ILLC-3 were significant; at 90°, the ELC and ILLC-1 were important and at 120, 150 and 180° view angles, the ELC and ILLC-1 were significant. The ELC and ILLC-1 were important for canopy spectra and the influence of lower leaves were less. For the view angles of 0°, 90°, 120°, 150°, 180°), the under leaves were less influential; at 30 and 60°, the response of lower leaves were significant. The canopy spectral responses of different leaves for Zhongyou9507 differed from that of Jingdong8; at 0 and 90° view angles, the ELC and ILLC-1 effects were significant at 30 and 60°, the ELC, ILLC-1, ILLC-2 effects were significant. At the same view angle, the ELC and ILLC-1 were more important than the lower leaves. The spectral response of lower leaves was related to the view angle. With vertical and horizontal measurements, the influence of lower leaves were less than that of other view angles. Table 1. Canopy spectral characteristic of different leaf layers of Jingdong8 and Zhongyou9507 Average value Angles° Treatments Jingdong8 Zhongyou9507 WWC 0.2254 a A 0.1657 a A ILLC-3 0.2110 a A 0.1643 a A ILLC-4 0.2046 a AB 0.1662 a A ILLC-2 0.1974 ab AB 0.1573 a A ILLC-1 0.1690 bc BC 0.1354 b B 0 ELC 0.1508 c C 0.1308 b B WWC 0.2265 a A 0.1713 a A ILLC-4 0.2196 ab A 0.1646 a AB ILLC-3 0.1951 bc AB 0.1619 ab AB ILLC-2 0.1886 c AB 0.1398 bc BC ILLC-1 0.1591 d BC 0.1276 cd C 30 ELC 0.1487 d C 0.1143 d C WWC 0.2064 a A 0.1784 a A ILLC-4 0.2021 a A 0.1553 ab A ILLC-3 0.1816 ab AB 0.1503 ab AB ILLC-2 0.1645 bc ABC 0.1323 bc ABC ILLC-1 0.1412 bc BC 0.1052 c BC 60 ELC 0.1225 c C 0.0974 c C