Forage analysis by near infrared reflectance (NIR) spectroscopy has had many advancements since it began in the 1970s. There have been steady improvements in instrumentation, in computers, and chemometric algorithms for developing calibrations. Thus, making NIR the most used technique to routinely analyze samples for forage producers, plant breeders, animal nutritionists, cattle farmers, and feed companies. This study compared the performance of prediction across three different portable instruments compared to a bench top laboratory NIR instrument, using a wide range of alfalfa and grass preprocessed dried, ground forage samples. Laboratory instrument scans were replicated with a reduced spectral range to match the range of each portable instrument. Alfalfa tended to have better calibration and test-set statistics than the grasses in this study. Portable instruments evaluated did not scan the upper portion of the spectral range (1652–2498 mn), which had some negative impact on forage calibration. The SCiO instrument scanned a very narrow range (740–1070 nm); and, although it had comparable results to the laboratory instrument constrained to same wavelength range, most major peaks related to forage quality traits are outside this range. The expensive bench top laboratory instrument had the best performance as expected, while the very inexpensive SCiO portable instrument had much greater error of prediction to the point that, for most traits, the prediction would not be considered reliable. However, the AuroraNir and the NIR-S-G1 digital light processing portable NIR may provide an alternative to expensive bench top laboratory equipment while still providing sufficiently accurate predictions. Therefore, some portable instruments have the potential to be used for on-farm analysis of wet, coarsely chopped forage, and this option must be evaluated in future studies.

自1970年代以来，通过近红外反射（NIR）光谱进行的草料分析已取得了许多进步。仪器，计算机和用于建立校准的化学计量学算法一直在稳步改进。因此，使NIR成为常规分析草料生产者，植物育种者，动物营养学家，养牛户和饲料公司的样本的最常用技术。这项研究比较了使用台式苜蓿和草皮预处理过的干燥，地面饲草样本的三种不同便携式仪器与台式实验室近红外仪器的预测性能。以缩小的光谱范围复制实验室仪器扫描，以匹配每种便携式仪器的范围。在本研究中，紫花苜蓿往往具有比草更好的校准和测试集统计数据。被评估的便携式仪器没有扫描光谱范围的上部（1652至2498百万），这对牧草校准产生了一些负面影响。SCiO仪器扫描的范围非常窄（740-1070 nm）；并且，尽管与相同波长范围内的实验室仪器相比具有可比的结果，但与饲草品质性状有关的大多数主要峰均不在此范围内。昂贵的台式实验室仪器具有预期的最佳性能，而非常便宜的SCiO便携式仪器具有更大的预测误差，以至于对于大多数特征而言，该预测将不被认为是可靠的。然而，AuroraNir和NIR-S-G1数字光处理便携式NIR可以替代昂贵的台式实验室设备，同时仍提供足够准确的预测。因此，某些便携式仪器有可能用于农场中对湿的粗碎草料的分析，并且必须在以后的研究中对该选项进行评估。