
doi: 10.1002/csc2.70063
AbstractDespite the well‐documented merits of near‐infrared reflectance (NIR) spectroscopy for forage nutritive value analysis, recent studies reveal inconsistencies in accuracy of NIR‐predicted values. These findings underscore the critical need for robust validation efforts to ensure reliability. Employing visual tools, such as scatter plots comparing laboratory‐measured with NIR‐predicted values, enhances the interpretation and qualification of data. Standardized reporting of validation outcomes, including key metrics and best practices, is essential for ensuring data quality and fostering broader adoption of NIR spectroscopy across research and industry. In this article, we suggest guidelines for reporting NIR spectroscopy predictions and emphasize the need for independent validation as a required procedure to enhance the credibility and application of NIR spectroscopy for forage analysis.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
