Shanshan Cai review , Lorenzo Cremaschi & Afshin J. Ghajar ...
Uncertainties of global moderate resolution Leaf Area Index (LAI) products derived from satellite...
-
Upload
oswin-morton -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Uncertainties of global moderate resolution Leaf Area Index (LAI) products derived from satellite...
Uncertainties of global moderate Uncertainties of global moderate resolution Leaf Area Index (LAI) resolution Leaf Area Index (LAI)
products derived from satellite dataproducts derived from satellite data
Hongliang FangHongliang Fangaa, Shanshan Wei, Shanshan Weia,ba,b, Shunlin Liang, Shunlin Liangcc
aaLREIS, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources LREIS, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research,Research,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China.Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China. bbDepartment of Geography, School of Urban and Environmental Department of Geography, School of Urban and Environmental
Sciences, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, Jilin Province, Sciences, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, Jilin Province, 130024, China. 130024, China.
ccDepartment of Geography, University of Maryland, College Park, Department of Geography, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 20742, USA. Maryland, 20742, USA.
IGARSS’01, Vancouver, Canada, Jul 24-27, 2011IGARSS’01, Vancouver, Canada, Jul 24-27, 2011
OutlineOutline
I.I. IntroductionIntroduction
II.II. Validation methodValidation method
III.III. ResultsResults
IV.IV. ConclusionsConclusions
BackgroundBackground
Leaf Area Index (LAI): the one-sided green leaf Leaf Area Index (LAI): the one-sided green leaf area per unit of ground area in broadleaf area per unit of ground area in broadleaf canopies and the projected needle leaf area in canopies and the projected needle leaf area in coniferous canopies coniferous canopies (Myneni et al., 2002; Chen and Cihlar, 1996)(Myneni et al., 2002; Chen and Cihlar, 1996)
An Essential Climate Variable (ECV) necessary An Essential Climate Variable (ECV) necessary fo many process modelsfo many process models
Observational requirement by the Global Observational requirement by the Global Climate Observation System (GCOS): Climate Observation System (GCOS): ±0.5±0.5 (GCOS, (GCOS, 2006)2006)
Project EOSCYCLOPES
GLOBCARBON
ECOCLIMAP
POLDER
Spatial1km, 4km, 0.25°
1/112D1km, 10km, 0.25D,0.5D
30” to 1D 1/9°(monthly)
Temporal
8-day 10-day Monthly Monthly10-day (L3) and monthly (HDF)
Time1999-present
1999-2007
1998-2007 [Sep 2006]
1996.11.5-1997.6.25; 2003.4.5-2003.10.25
InputRED, NIR
SZA, TOC ref in RED, NIR, & SWIR
VGT, ATSR, (MERIS) ref.
AVHRR NDVI
11 directional reflectance in G, R, NIR bands and angular config.
Alg.LUT (3D model)+VI
NN (PROSPECT+SAIL+5 TYPICAL SOIL)
SR method for forest and non-forest based on model
Linear regression of literature LAI and NDVI
NN (MCRM: PROSPECT+SAIL+PRICE/WALTHALL)
Ref.
Knyazikhin, 1998. JGR
Baret, 2007. RSE
Deng, 2006. TGRS
Masson, 2003. JOC
Lacaze, 2005. User Manual
Four stages of validation defined by the Committee on Four stages of validation defined by the Committee on
Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS)Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) Stage Explanation Scale Support studies
1 Validation in a small number of selected locations, time periods and validation efforts
Local-regional
Fang and Liang (2005), Cohen et al. (2006), Hill et al. (2006), Pisek and Chen (2007), Sprintsin et al. (2009)
2 Validation over a widely distributed set of locations, and validation efforts;
Regional-continental
Verger et al. (2011; 2009), Luo et al. (2004)
3 Product accuracy assessed systematically and globally. Product uncertainties well established.
Global Weiss et al. (2007)Garrigues et al. (2008)Aim of our study
4 Validation results systematically updated with new releases and new data.
Systematic and global
Adapted From LPV/WGCV/CEOS (http://lpvs.gsfc.nasa.gov/)
ObjectivesObjectives
To extend the Stage 3 validation for both MODIS and To extend the Stage 3 validation for both MODIS and
CYCLOPES LAI products with a global field measurement CYCLOPES LAI products with a global field measurement
database.database.
To investigate whether the current global LAI products could To investigate whether the current global LAI products could
meet the observational requirements proposed by GCOS. meet the observational requirements proposed by GCOS. • MODIS suite: Terra C4 (MOD15 C4), Terra C5 (MOD15 C5) and MODIS suite: Terra C4 (MOD15 C4), Terra C5 (MOD15 C5) and
Terra+Aqua C5 (MCD15 C5) Terra+Aqua C5 (MCD15 C5)
• SPOT/VEGETATION CYCLOPES V3.1 SPOT/VEGETATION CYCLOPES V3.1
• Consideration of the MODIS quality control (QC) layer and the CYCLOPES Consideration of the MODIS quality control (QC) layer and the CYCLOPES
status mask (SM)status mask (SM)
OutlineOutline
I.I. IntroductionIntroduction
II.II. Validation methodValidation method
III.III. ResultsResults
IV.IV. ConclusionsConclusions
Validation schemes Validation schemes
1.1. Direct comparisonDirect comparison with with in situin situ data data collected over validation sites (collected over validation sites (this this studystudy); );
2.2. Bridging methodBridging method: comparison with : comparison with products derived from high resolution products derived from high resolution airborne or spaceborne sensors (e.g., airborne or spaceborne sensors (e.g., Landsat TM/ETM+); Landsat TM/ETM+);
3.3. Cross-validationCross-validation with other independently with other independently obtained products; obtained products;
4.4. IntercomparisonIntercomparison and analysis with and analysis with process model simulations. process model simulations.
((http://lpvs.gsfc.nasa.gov/; Morisette et al, 2006; Justice et al., 2002) et al, 2006; Justice et al., 2002)
Direct field measurementDirect field measurement
Destructive sampling or collection of Destructive sampling or collection of total leaf litterfall. total leaf litterfall.
Calculation through the specific leaf area Calculation through the specific leaf area ((SLA: square centimeters of fresh leaf area per SLA: square centimeters of fresh leaf area per gram of dry foliage massgram of dry foliage mass) in the laboratory. ) in the laboratory. Multiplication of the SLA and total dry Multiplication of the SLA and total dry mass of each foliage age class to mass of each foliage age class to calculate the LAI. calculate the LAI.
Allometric method, based on the Allometric method, based on the relationship between leaf area and the relationship between leaf area and the diameter at breast height (DBH).diameter at breast height (DBH).
Indirect field measurementIndirect field measurement
Indirect contact methods, e.g, the Indirect contact methods, e.g, the point quadrats method. point quadrats method.
LAI 2000 and hemispherical LAI 2000 and hemispherical photography with no clumping photography with no clumping correction (Effective LAI).correction (Effective LAI).
LAI 2000, TRAC and hemispherical LAI 2000, TRAC and hemispherical photography with clumping photography with clumping correction (True LAI).correction (True LAI).
Direct validation campaignsDirect validation campaigns
BigFoot (Cohen & Justice, 1999)BigFoot (Cohen & Justice, 1999) CCRS (Fernandes et al., 2003)CCRS (Fernandes et al., 2003) MODLAND (Morisette et al., 2002)MODLAND (Morisette et al., 2002) VALERI (Baret et al., 2006)VALERI (Baret et al., 2006) CEOS LPV (Morisette et al., 2006)CEOS LPV (Morisette et al., 2006)
Share ground LAI data and maps Share ground LAI data and maps among the entire communityamong the entire community
Global field LAI measurement sitesGlobal field LAI measurement sites from from campaigns and literaturecampaigns and literature
219 observations over 129 sites
Fang et al., to be submitted.
MODIS and CYCLOPES quality indicatorsMODIS and CYCLOPES quality indicators DN range Binary, Quality description
MODIS QC (DN range) and SCF_QC (binary, decimal values)
QC<32 000=0 Main (RT) method with the best possible results
32QC<64 001=1 Main (RT) method with saturation
64QC<96 010=2 Empirical method used (Main method failed due to geometry problems)
96QC<128 011=3 Empirical method used (Main method failed due to problems other than geometry)
128QC<255 100=4 Couldn't retrieve pixel
CYCLOPES SM SM<16 Bit 1 Land 0 / sea 1
Bit 2 Snow status: no 0 / snow 1
Bit 3 Cloud/shadow: no 0 / suspected 1
Bit 4 Aerosol status: pure 0 / mixed 1
Bit 5 Aerosol source: MODIS 0 / climatology 1
Bit 6 Parameter validity: ok 0 / no 1
Bit 7 B0 (blue) saturation: ok 0 / no 1
Bit 8 B2 (red) saturation: ok 0 / no 1
Bit 9 B3 (NIR) saturation: ok 0 / no 1
OutlineOutline
I.I. IntroductionIntroduction
II.II. Validation methodValidation method
III.III. ResultsResults
IV.IV. ConclusionsConclusions
Statistics of field measured LAIStatistics of field measured LAI
Biome type True Effective Overall
n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD)
1. Grasses and cereal crops
39 1.63 (1.09) 39 1.63 (1.09)
2. Shrubs 17 0.50 (0.58) 8 1.08 (0.79) 25 0.68 (0.70)
3. Broadleaf crops 4 2.36 (1.11) 4 2.36 (1.11)
4. Savanna 39 0.83 (0.84) 3 3.08 (2.53) 42 0.99 (1.14)
5. Broadleaf forest 31 3.31 (1.61) 20 3.64 (1.74) 51 3.44 (1.65)
6. Needleleaf forest 10 3.65 (1.88) 46 1.87 (1.10) 56 2.19 (1.43)
Overall 140 1.81 (1.61) 77 2.30 (1.57) 217 1.98 (1.61)
Fang et al., to be submitted.
MODIS/Terra C4(QC<128) Main: 85.8% R2=0.435RMSE=1.42
MODIS/Terra C5(QC<128)
Main: 92.5%R2=0.307
RMSE=1.53
MODIS/Terra+Aqua C5(QC<128)Main: 97.6%R2=0.526RMSE=1.09
VGT/CYCLYPES V3.1(LAI<6.0)R2=0.557
RMSE=0.97
Field true LAI
MODIS/Terra C4(QC<128) R2=0.234RMSE=2.08
MODIS/Terra C5(QC<128) R2=0.290
RMSE=1.74
MODIS/Terra+Aqua C5(QC<128) R2=0.186RMSE=1.63
VGT/CYCLYPES V3.1(LAI<6.0)R2=0.399
RMSE=1.34
Field effective LAI
Comparison of MODIS and CYCLOPES LAI with field LAI
Herbaceous Woody All biomes
n R2 RMSE n R2 RMSE n R2 RMSE
MOD15 C4 55 0.137 1.29 79 0.481 1.50 134 0.436 1.42
QC<64 52 (94.5%
)
0.061 1.25 63 (79.7%
)
0.718 1.13 115(85.8%
)
0.559 1.19
MOD15 C5 54 0.171 1.18 52 0.140 1.82 106 0.307 1.53
QC<64 52 (96.3%
)
0.221 1.09 46 (88.5%
)
0.382 1.27 98 (92.5%
)
0.465 1.17
MCD15 C5 24 0.042 1.16 59 0.593 1.06 83 0.526 1.09
QC<64 24 0.042 1.16 57 (96.6%
)
0.599 1.05 81 (97.6%
)
0.528 1.09
CYCLOPES(true)
53 0.449 0.87 58 0.629 1.05 111 0.557 0.97
CYCLOPES(effective)
7 0.005 0.82 56 0.348 1.39 63 0.399 1.34
Herbaceous Woody All biomes
n R2 RMSE n R2 RMSE n R2 RMSE
MOD15 C4 23 0.087 0.914 25 0.513 1.249 48 0.534 1.101MOD15 C5 46 0.270 0.994 32 0.509 1.012 78 0.478 1.001MCD15 C5 12 0.083 1.053 21 0.674 0.797 33 0.542 0.898CYCLOPES(True)
39 0.508 0.84 37 0.655 1.12 76 0.557 0.99
CYCLOPES(Effective )
1 — 1.00 19 0.004 1.774 20 0.043 1.74
Comparison of best MODIS (QC=0) and CYCLOPES (SM=0) with field LAI
MOD15 C5 (QC<64)MCD15 C5 (QC<64)SPOT/VGT CYCLOPES2000.1-2005.12
Global Monthly AverageGlobal Monthly Average MODIS, MODIS, CYCLOPES and GLOBCARBON LAICYCLOPES and GLOBCARBON LAI
OutlineOutline
I.I. IntroductionIntroduction
II.II. Validation methodValidation method
III.III. ResultsResults
IV.IV. ConclusionsConclusions
ConclusionsConclusions MODIS LAI has MODIS LAI has improvedimproved consistently over all consistently over all
releases MOD15 C4releases MOD15 C4↗↗MOD15 C5MOD15 C5↗↗MCD15 C5. RMSE MCD15 C5. RMSE decreased by decreased by ~0.1~0.1 for each new release. for each new release.
MODIS C5 retrieved with the main algorithm MODIS C5 retrieved with the main algorithm (QC<64) and CYCLOPES showed similar range of (QC<64) and CYCLOPES showed similar range of uncertainties (uncertainties (1.0~1.21.0~1.2). ).
Uncertainties for the best MODIS C5 (QC=0) and Uncertainties for the best MODIS C5 (QC=0) and CYCLOPES (SM=0) were around CYCLOPES (SM=0) were around 0.9-1.00.9-1.0..
The overall mean differences between the best The overall mean differences between the best MODIS C5 and CYCLOPES were within MODIS C5 and CYCLOPES were within 0.100.10. .
The uncertainties of current LAI products (within The uncertainties of current LAI products (within 1.0) are still 1.0) are still unableunable to meet the accuracy to meet the accuracy requirement by GCOS (requirement by GCOS (0.5). 0.5).
Future workFuture work
Broadleaf crops, broadleaf treesBroadleaf crops, broadleaf trees Complex background/understoryComplex background/understory Low LAI (<1.0) regions: arid and Low LAI (<1.0) regions: arid and
semi-arid, tundra, permafrostsemi-arid, tundra, permafrost Beginning and ending periods of Beginning and ending periods of
growing season growing season Points other than NA and Europe Points other than NA and Europe
Seeking collaboration
Thank you!Thank you!
Questions, comments?Questions, comments?
Hongliang Fang (Hongliang Fang ( 方红亮)方红亮)Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources
Research (IGSNRR), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS)Research (IGSNRR), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS)Email: [email protected]: [email protected]
MODIS LAIMODIS LAI
3D Radiative Transfer model (Myneni 1997)3D Radiative Transfer model (Myneni 1997)• Parameterization for each of 6 biomesParameterization for each of 6 biomes• 25 modeled soil reflectances (Jacquemoud 1992)25 modeled soil reflectances (Jacquemoud 1992)
Retrieval with Look-up Table methodRetrieval with Look-up Table method• From MODIS B1 (Red) and B2 (NIR) From MODIS B1 (Red) and B2 (NIR)
Backup algorithm based on empirical NDVI-Backup algorithm based on empirical NDVI-LAI relationship for each biomeLAI relationship for each biome
True LAITrue LAI
http://wist.echo.nasa.govhttp://wist.echo.nasa.gov
CYCLOPESCYCLOPES
SPOT/VGT bi-directional normalization SPOT/VGT bi-directional normalization SAIL + PROSPECT + empirical soil SAIL + PROSPECT + empirical soil
description description Neural network Neural network
• Nadir normalized reflectance B2 (Red), B3 Nadir normalized reflectance B2 (Red), B3 (NIR), MIR (NIR), MIR
• SZA 10:00 local time SZA 10:00 local time • Daily fAPAR Daily fAPAR
Effective LAIEffective LAI
http://postel.mediasfrance.org
GLOBCARBONGLOBCARBON
SPOT/VGT, ERS/ATSR, (ENDVISAT/MERIS)SPOT/VGT, ERS/ATSR, (ENDVISAT/MERIS) 2 algorithms to retrieve LAIe: 2 algorithms to retrieve LAIe:
• LAIe = f(RSR, fBRDF) for forest classes LAIe = f(RSR, fBRDF) for forest classes • LAIe = f(SR, fBRDF) for other vegetation LAIe = f(SR, fBRDF) for other vegetation
fBRDF from modified Roujean model fBRDF from modified Roujean model Empirical clumping indexEmpirical clumping index True LAI True LAI
http://geofront.vgt.vito.be/geosuccess/relay.do?dispatch=LAI_infohttp://geofront.vgt.vito.be/geosuccess/relay.do?dispatch=LAI_info
ClumpingClumping
MODIS: canopy clumping parameters for MODIS: canopy clumping parameters for each biomeeach biome
CYCLOPES: account for clumping at the CYCLOPES: account for clumping at the landscape scale, each pixel was supposed landscape scale, each pixel was supposed to be made of a fraction to be made of a fraction vCovervCover of pure of pure vegetation and (1-vegetation and (1-vCovervCover) of pure bare ) of pure bare soil. (SAIL does not describe clumping at soil. (SAIL does not describe clumping at canopy level) canopy level)
ECOCLIMAP LAI: (not obvious)ECOCLIMAP LAI: (not obvious)
Rice paddy with waterRice paddy with water
http://spl.bnu.edu.cn
Mature crop with yellow leavesMature crop with yellow leaves
Big reflectance changes but small LAI variation; photosynthesis?http://spl.bnu.edu.cn
Gray/dead leavesGray/dead leaves
http://spl.bnu.edu.cn
Snow backgroundSnow background
Comparison of MODIS (QC<64) and CYCLOPES LAI with common field observations for 6 biome types
BELMANIPBELMANIP
Global Partnership and a benchmark for Global Partnership and a benchmark for indirect validation (Baret et al., 2006)indirect validation (Baret et al., 2006)
Use of additional networksUse of additional networks• FLUXNET, AERONETFLUXNET, AERONET
Eliminating replicates and sites with water Eliminating replicates and sites with water >25% @ 8>25% @ 88 km²8 km²
Adding sites to improve Adding sites to improve representativenessrepresentativeness• Surface typesSurface types• Latitudinal distributionLatitudinal distribution• Longitudinal distributionLongitudinal distribution
http://lpvs.gsfc.nasa.gov/lai_intercomp.php
BELMANIPBELMANIP
D
D
D DDD D
D
D
D
D D
D
D
DD
D
D
DDD
D
D
D
D D
D
DD
D
D
DD
D
D
DD
D
D
DD
D
D DDDD
D
D
D
DD
D
D
DDD
D
D
DD
D
D
DD DD D DD
DDD
DD D
DDD DD D
D
D
D
D
DD
D
DD
DD
D
FFF
F
FF
F
FF
F
FFFF
F F
F
FFFF
FFF FFF
F FFFFFF
FFF
F
F
F
FF
FF
FF
FF
F
F
F
FFFFFF
FF
FFF
F
FFFFFFFFF
FFFFF
F
F
F
FFF
FFFFFF FF
FFF
F FFFFFF
F
FFF
F
FF
FFF F
F
FFF
F
F
FF
FFF
FFFFFF
FF
FFFFF
F FF F
FF
FFF FFFFFF
FF
F
FF FF F
F F
F
FF FF
FFF
AA
A
A
A
A
A
A
AA
AA
AAA
AA
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
AA
A
A
A
A
A
AA
A A
A
AA
CC C
CC C
C
C
C C CC
C
C C
CC
CCCC
CC
CC C C
C
C
CC C
C
C
CCCC
C
C
CC
C CC C
CC
C C
CCC
CC C
C CCC
C
C C
C
C
C
C
CC
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
-180 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150
90
60
30
0
-30
-60
100 DIRECT + 218 FLUXNET + 58 AERONET + 78 COMPLET= 377 BELMANIP
Baret et al., EGU, 2005