“…However, several factors such as plant growth stage, cultivar, specific leaf weight, leaf thickness, leaf position on the plant, measurement location on a leaf (Muñoz-Huerta et al, 2013; Yuan et al, 2016b) as well as environmental stresses and solar radiation (Zhao et al, 2016a) could significantly affect chlorophyll meter readings. Effective measures such as correlating the SPAD values and leaf N concentration (Esfahani et al, 2008), developing SPAD sufficiency index (Hussain et al, 2000), relative SPAD index (Ziadi et al, 2008; Yuan et al, 2016a), normalized SPAD index (Debaeke et al, 2006; Yuan et al, 2016a), positional difference SPAD indices (Lin et al, 2010; Yuan et al, 2016a; Zhao et al, 2016b), and the relationships between chlorophyll meter readings and canopy color related images obtained by a digital still color camera (Wang et al, 2014) have been widely adopted by researchers to minimize the influences of aforementioned factors on chlorophyll meter readings. Chlorophyll meter readings are well correlated with leaf N concentration, color-related indices from digital still camera, chlorophyll content and soil mineral N concentration (Thind and Gupta, 2010; Wang et al, 2014), yet regulating chlorophyll meter readings to direct units of PNC is still challenging and requires a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between chlorophyll meter readings and PNC across the phenological stages, cultivars, and sites.…”