Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 

Topic Editors

National Satellite Meteorological Center, Beijing 100081, China
Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
NTSG, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, USA
Prof. Dr. Kebiao Mao
Institute of agricultural resources and regional planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100094, China

Progress in Satellite Remote Sensing of Land Surface: New Algorithms, Sensors and Datasets

Abstract submission deadline
closed (30 October 2023)
Manuscript submission deadline
closed (30 December 2023)
Viewed by
30113

Topic Information

Dear Colleagues,

In scientific research on Earth systems, satellite remote sensing plays the most important role in quantifying land surface states, which are represented by soil moisture, land surface temperature, vegetation, snow cover, water bodies, and glaciers. In addition to providing direct support for various industrial applications, it can also provide vital input data for researchers in the fields of climate change, river basin hydrology, agricultural application, energy budget, and the water and carbon cycle. This Topic on “Progress in Satellite Remote Sensing of Land Surface: New Algorithms, Sensors and Datasets” will cover recent advances in remote sensing sensors, algorithms, and datasets for quantifying land surface parameters. Original research reports, review articles, and commentaries are welcome. The issue will host papers covering remote sensing algorithms for retrieving land surface parameters including, but not limited to, soil, snow and ice, forest, grass land, farmland, and water and urban areas. Papers focusing on new orbital sensors and land surface datasets are also welcome. Data from new satellites, such as the recently launched FengYun satellite series, are warmly encouraged to be used in this Topic.

Dr. Shengli Wu
Dr. Lingmei Jiang
Dr. Jinyang Du
Prof. Dr. Kebiao Mao
Dr. Tianjie Zhao
Topic Editors

Keywords

  • soil moisture
  • vegetation index
  • snow depth
  • snow water equivalents
  • water body
  • glacier
  • land surface temperature

Participating Journals

Journal Name Impact Factor CiteScore Launched Year First Decision (median) APC
Atmosphere
atmosphere
2.5 4.6 2010 15.8 Days CHF 2400
Climate
climate
3.0 5.5 2013 21.9 Days CHF 1800
Land
land
3.2 4.9 2012 17.8 Days CHF 2600
Remote Sensing
remotesensing
4.2 8.3 2009 24.7 Days CHF 2700
Sensors
sensors
3.4 7.3 2001 16.8 Days CHF 2600

Preprints.org is a multidiscipline platform providing preprint service that is dedicated to sharing your research from the start and empowering your research journey.

MDPI Topics is cooperating with Preprints.org and has built a direct connection between MDPI journals and Preprints.org. Authors are encouraged to enjoy the benefits by posting a preprint at Preprints.org prior to publication:

  1. Immediately share your ideas ahead of publication and establish your research priority;
  2. Protect your idea from being stolen with this time-stamped preprint article;
  3. Enhance the exposure and impact of your research;
  4. Receive feedback from your peers in advance;
  5. Have it indexed in Web of Science (Preprint Citation Index), Google Scholar, Crossref, SHARE, PrePubMed, Scilit and Europe PMC.

Published Papers (12 papers)

Order results
Result details
Journals
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
21 pages, 5666 KiB  
Article
Remote Sensing Monitoring of Grassland Locust Density Based on Machine Learning
by Qiang Du, Zhiguo Wang, Pingping Huang, Yongguang Zhai, Xiangli Yang and Shuai Ma
Sensors 2024, 24(10), 3121; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24103121 - 14 May 2024
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 984
Abstract
The main aim of this study was to utilize remote sensing data to establish regression models through machine learning to predict locust density in the upcoming year. First, a dataset for monitoring grassland locust density was constructed based on meteorological data and multi-source [...] Read more.
The main aim of this study was to utilize remote sensing data to establish regression models through machine learning to predict locust density in the upcoming year. First, a dataset for monitoring grassland locust density was constructed based on meteorological data and multi-source remote sensing data in the study area. Subsequently, an SVR (support vector regression) model, BP neural network regression model, random forest regression model, BP neural network regression model with the PCA (principal component analysis), and deep belief network regression model were built on the dataset. The experimental results show that the random forest regression model had the best prediction performance among the five models. Specifically, the model achieved a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.9685 and a root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.0144 on the test set, which were the optimal values achieved among all the models tested. Finally, the locust density in the study area for 2023 was predicted and, by comparing the predicted results with actual measured data, it was found that the prediction accuracy was high. This is of great significance for local grassland ecological management, disaster warning, scientific decision-making support, scientific research progress, and sustainable agricultural development. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of the Study Area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Map of Locust Survey Points in 2021 and 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Remote sensing data: (<b>A</b>) soil moisture data; (<b>B</b>) precipitation data; (<b>C</b>) land surface temperature data; and (<b>D</b>) NDVI data (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index data).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Schematic Diagram of the BP Neural Network Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Schematic Diagram of the Random Forest Regression Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Schematic Diagram of the Deep Belief Network Regression Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparison of Predicted and Actual Values in the PCA-BP Neural Network Regression Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparison of Predicted and Actual Values in the SVR Regression Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Results of the Backpropagation Neural Network: (<b>a</b>) variation of the backpropagation loss function; (<b>b</b>) comparison between predicted values and actual values in the Backpropagation Neural Network.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Comparison of Predicted and Actual Values in the Deep Belief Network Regression Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Comparison of Predicted and Actual Values in the Random Forest Regression Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The inversion map of locust density in Xiwuzhumuqin Banner in 2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Distribution map of locust density inversion errors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Fitting curve of predicted values and actual values.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 26178 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of ICESat-2 Significant Wave Height Data with Buoy Observations in the Great Lakes and Application in Examination of Wave Model Predictions
by Linfeng Li, Ayumi Fujisaki-Manome, Russ Miller, Dan Titze and Hayden Henderson
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(4), 679; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16040679 - 14 Feb 2024
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1906
Abstract
High waves and surges associated with storms pose threats to the coastal communities around the Great Lakes. Numerical wave models, such as WAVEWATCHIII, are commonly used to predict the wave height and direction for the Great Lakes. These predictions help determine risks and [...] Read more.
High waves and surges associated with storms pose threats to the coastal communities around the Great Lakes. Numerical wave models, such as WAVEWATCHIII, are commonly used to predict the wave height and direction for the Great Lakes. These predictions help determine risks and threats associated with storm events. To verify the reliability and accuracy of the wave model outputs, it is essential to compare them with observed wave conditions (e.g., significant wave height), many of which come from buoys. However, in the Great Lakes, most of the buoys are retrieved before those lakes are frozen; therefore, winter wave measurements remain a gap in the Great Lakes’ data. To fill the data gap, we utilize data from the Inland Water Surface Height product of the Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite-2 (ICESat-2) as complements. In this study, the data quality of ICESat-2 is evaluated by comparing with wave conditions from buoy observations in the Great Lakes. Then, we evaluate the model quality of NOAA’s Great Lakes Waves-Unstructured Forecast System version 2.0 (GLWUv2) by comparing its retrospective forecast simulations for significant wave height with the significant wave height data from ICESat-2, as well as data from a drifting Spotter buoy that was experimentally deployed in the Great Lakes. The study indicates that the wave measurements obtained from ICESat-2 align closely with the in situ buoy observations, displaying a root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 0.191 m, a scatter index (SI) of 0.46, and a correlation coefficient of 0.890. Further evaluation suggests that the GLWUv2 tends to overestimate the wave conditions in high wave events during winter. The statistics show that the RMSE in 0–0.8 m waves is 0.257 m, while the RMSE in waves higher than 1.5 m is 0.899 m. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The locations of the regular buoys in the Great Lakes, and the trajectory of the drifting Spotter buoy in Lake Michigan during 10–18 February 2022 (zoomed in image on the left).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The ICESat-2 ATL13 significant wave height (SWH) measurements compared with regular buoy observations on 8 example days.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The significant wave height comparisons between ICESat-2 measurements and buoy observations. (<b>a</b>) All matched data pairs. The statistical parameters are listed in <a href="#remotesensing-16-00679-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>. (<b>b</b>) Matched data pairs in high wave events (SWH &gt; 0.8 m). The statistical parameters are listed in <a href="#remotesensing-16-00679-t003" class="html-table">Table 3</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The GLWUv2 significant wave height retrospective forecast in comparison with ICESat-2 significant wave height measurements for two low wave scenarios (<b>a</b>) Lake Huron and Lake Erie on 22 January 2022, (<b>b</b>) Lake Ontario on 1 February 2022, and two high wave scenarios (<b>c</b>) Lake Huron on 23 January 2022, (<b>d</b>) Lake Huron on 27 February 2022. Dark red (invalid values) at the edge of the gray area (ice coverage) has no meaning and was removed from the comparison.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The significant wave height comparisons between GLWUv2’s retrospective predictions and ICESat-2 measurements in winter (January and February 2022). The color gradient indicates that most of the data points gather at low wave height.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Trajectory of the drifting Spotter buoy (red) from 10 to 18 February 2022 in Lake Michigan, as well as the locations where ICESat-2 (dark blue) took measurements on 20 February 2022. The latter is the next available ICESat-2 track following the period of Spotter buoy deployment in Lake Michigan. The locations of the meteorological observation stations are denoted as yellow stars.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Significant wave height prediction of GLWUv2 compared to the Spotter buoy observations during 10–18 February 2022 in Lake Michigan. (<b>b</b>) Significant wave height prediction of GLWUv2 compared to ICESat-2 measurements on 20 February 2022 in Lake Michigan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Wind speed forcing data for GLWUv2 (NDFD) compared to wind speed records from (<b>a</b>) the Spotter buoy, (<b>b</b>) the meteorological observation station LDTM4, (<b>c</b>) station HLNM4, (<b>d</b>) station MKGM4, (<b>e</b>) station SVNM4, and (<b>f</b>) station MLWW3 during 10–18 February 2022 in Lake Michigan. The locations of the stations are shown in <a href="#remotesensing-16-00679-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 7384 KiB  
Article
Spatiotemporal Analysis of Urban Heat Islands and Vegetation Cover Using Emerging Hotspot Analysis in a Humid Subtropical Climate
by Abdolazim Ghanghermeh, Gholamreza Roshan, Kousar Asadi and Shady Attia
Atmosphere 2024, 15(2), 161; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15020161 - 25 Jan 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2597
Abstract
Research on the temporal and spatial changes of the urban heat island effect can help us better understand how urbanization, climate change, and the environment are interconnected. This study uses a spatiotemporal analysis method that couples the Emerging Hot Spot Analysis (EHSA) technique [...] Read more.
Research on the temporal and spatial changes of the urban heat island effect can help us better understand how urbanization, climate change, and the environment are interconnected. This study uses a spatiotemporal analysis method that couples the Emerging Hot Spot Analysis (EHSA) technique with the Mann–Kendall technique. The method is applied to determine the intensity of the heat island effect in humid subtropical climates over time and space. The data used in this research include thermal bands, red band (RED) and near-infrared band (NIR), and Landsat 7 and 8 satellites, which were selected from 2000 to 2022 for the city of Sari, an Iranian city on the Caspian Sea. Pre-processed spectral bands from the ‘Google Earth Engine’ database were used to estimate the land surface temperature. The land surface temperature difference between the urban environment and the outer buffer (1500 m) was modeled and simulated. The results of this paper show the accuracy and novelty of using Emerging Hotspot Analysis to evaluate the effect of vegetation cover on the urban heat island intensity. Based on the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), the city’s land surface temperature increased by approximately 0.30 °C between 2011 and 2022 compared to 2001 to 2010. However, the intensity of the urban heat island decreased during the study period, with r = −0.42, so an average −0.031 °C/decade decrease has been experienced. The methodology can be transferred to other cities to evaluate the role of urban green spaces in reducing heat stress and to estimate the heat budget based on historical observations. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Satellite image of Sari’s growth between 2001 and 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Changes in LST (°C) (<b>a</b>) and average UHI (<b>b</b>) in urban and rural areas.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Area changes related to LST classes based on 5-year averages.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Spatial-temporal changes of LST, UHI and NDVI based on 5-year average intervals.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Area changes related to UHII classes based on 5-year averages.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Changing trend map of Sari’s UHII calculated using the Mann–Kendall method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Changing trend map of Sari’s NDVI calculated using the Mann–Kendall method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Area changes related to NDVI classes based on 5-year averages.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Revealing spatiotemporal anomalies of UHII in Sari City using EHSA analysis.</p>
Full article ">
30 pages, 12524 KiB  
Article
A Novel ICESat-2 Signal Photon Extraction Method Based on Convolutional Neural Network
by Wenjun Qin, Yan Song, Yarong Zou, Haitian Zhu and Haiyan Guan
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(1), 203; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16010203 - 4 Jan 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1850
Abstract
When it comes to the application of the photon data gathered by the Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite-2 (ICESat-2), accurately removing noise is crucial. In particular, conventional denoising algorithms based on local density are susceptible to missing some signal photons when there [...] Read more.
When it comes to the application of the photon data gathered by the Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite-2 (ICESat-2), accurately removing noise is crucial. In particular, conventional denoising algorithms based on local density are susceptible to missing some signal photons when there is uneven signal density distribution, as well as being susceptible to misclassifying noise photons near the signal photons; the application of deep learning remains untapped in this domain as well. To solve these problems, a method for extracting signal photons based on a GoogLeNet model fused with a Convolutional Block Attention Module (CBAM) is proposed. The network model can make good use of the distribution information of each photon’s neighborhood, and simultaneously extract signal photons with different photon densities to avoid misclassification of noise photons. The CBAM enhances the network to focus more on learning the crucial features and improves its discriminative ability. In the experiments, simulation photon data in different signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) levels are utilized to demonstrate the superiority and accuracy of the proposed method. The results from signal extraction using the proposed method in four experimental areas outperform the conventional methods, with overall accuracy exceeding 98%. In the real validation experiments, reference data from four experimental areas are collected, and the elevation of signal photons extracted by the proposed method is proven to be consistent with the reference elevation, with R2 exceeding 0.87. Both simulation and real validation experiments demonstrate that the proposed method is effective and accurate for extracting signal photons. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Overview of the experimental areas A, B, C and D.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Method flow chart.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic diagram of the photon transformation process.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Schematic diagram of the Inception module [<a href="#B39-remotesensing-16-00203" class="html-bibr">39</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Schematic diagram of the CAM module [<a href="#B35-remotesensing-16-00203" class="html-bibr">35</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Schematic diagram of the SAM module [<a href="#B35-remotesensing-16-00203" class="html-bibr">35</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The training process of network model in experimental areas A and B. (<b>a</b>) Change curve of accuracy; (<b>b</b>) change curve of loss.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The training process of the network model in experimental area C. (<b>a</b>) Change curve of accuracy; (<b>b</b>) change curve of loss.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Typical photon neighborhood of photon A, B, C and D and comparison of denoised results. (<b>a</b>) The denoised result of the proposed method (SNR = 80 dB); (<b>b</b>) the denoised result of DBSCAN (SNR = 80 dB); (<b>c</b>) validation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Photon images of typical photons A, B, C, and D in <a href="#remotesensing-16-00203-f009" class="html-fig">Figure 9</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Overall distribution of photon data in experimental area A. (<b>a</b>) Original photon data; (<b>b</b>) signal photon data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Comparison of the details of the gt2L track results in the experimental area A (SNR = 70 dB). (<b>a</b>) validation; (<b>b</b>) optical remote sensing image; (<b>c</b>) the proposed method; (<b>d</b>) DBSCAN; (<b>e</b>) OPTICS; (<b>f</b>) BED.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12 Cont.
<p>Comparison of the details of the gt2L track results in the experimental area A (SNR = 70 dB). (<b>a</b>) validation; (<b>b</b>) optical remote sensing image; (<b>c</b>) the proposed method; (<b>d</b>) DBSCAN; (<b>e</b>) OPTICS; (<b>f</b>) BED.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Curves of change in four validation indicators with SNR in experimental area A. (<b>a</b>) Precision; (<b>b</b>) Recall; (<b>c</b>) OA; (<b>d</b>) Kappa.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13 Cont.
<p>Curves of change in four validation indicators with SNR in experimental area A. (<b>a</b>) Precision; (<b>b</b>) Recall; (<b>c</b>) OA; (<b>d</b>) Kappa.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Overall distribution of photon data in experimental area B. (<b>a</b>) Original photon data; (<b>b</b>) signal photon data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Comparison of the details of the results of the gt2R track in experimental area B (SNR = 70 dB). (<b>a</b>) Validation; (<b>b</b>) optical remote sensing image; (<b>c</b>) the proposed method; (<b>d</b>) DBSCAN; (<b>e</b>) OPTICS; (<b>f</b>) BED.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Curves of change in four validation indicators with SNR in experimental area B. (<b>a</b>) Precision; (<b>b</b>) Recall; (<b>c</b>) OA; (<b>d</b>) Kappa.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Overall distribution of photon data in experimental area C. (<b>a</b>) Original photon data; (<b>b</b>) signal photon data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Comparison of the details of the gt3L track results in experimental area C (SNR = 80 dB). (<b>a</b>) Validation; (<b>b</b>) optical remote sensing image; (<b>c</b>) the proposed method; (<b>d</b>) DBSCAN; (<b>e</b>) OPTICS; (<b>f</b>) BED.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18 Cont.
<p>Comparison of the details of the gt3L track results in experimental area C (SNR = 80 dB). (<b>a</b>) Validation; (<b>b</b>) optical remote sensing image; (<b>c</b>) the proposed method; (<b>d</b>) DBSCAN; (<b>e</b>) OPTICS; (<b>f</b>) BED.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Curves of change in four validation indicators with SNR in experimental area C. (<b>a</b>) Precision; (<b>b</b>) Recall; (<b>c</b>) OA; (<b>d</b>) Kappa.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Overall distribution of photon data in experimental area D. (<b>a</b>) Original photon data; (<b>b</b>) signal photon data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 21
<p>Comparison of the details of the gt2R track results in experimental area D (SNR = 80 dB). (<b>a</b>) Validation; (<b>b</b>) optical remote sensing image; (<b>c</b>) the proposed method; (<b>d</b>) DBSCAN; (<b>e</b>) OPTICS; (<b>f</b>) BED.</p>
Full article ">Figure 21 Cont.
<p>Comparison of the details of the gt2R track results in experimental area D (SNR = 80 dB). (<b>a</b>) Validation; (<b>b</b>) optical remote sensing image; (<b>c</b>) the proposed method; (<b>d</b>) DBSCAN; (<b>e</b>) OPTICS; (<b>f</b>) BED.</p>
Full article ">Figure 22
<p>Curves of change in four validation indicators with SNR in experimental area D. (<b>a</b>) Precision; (<b>b</b>) Recall; (<b>c</b>) OA; (<b>d</b>) Kappa.</p>
Full article ">Figure 22 Cont.
<p>Curves of change in four validation indicators with SNR in experimental area D. (<b>a</b>) Precision; (<b>b</b>) Recall; (<b>c</b>) OA; (<b>d</b>) Kappa.</p>
Full article ">Figure 23
<p>Schematic of real reference verification in experimental area A. (<b>a</b>) Scatterplot of elevation and actual elevation of gt2R track signal photons in experimental area A; (<b>b</b>) track distribution diagram in experimental area A.</p>
Full article ">Figure 24
<p>Schematic of real reference verification in experimental area B. (<b>a</b>) Scatterplot of elevation and actual elevation of gt1R track signal photons in the experimental area B; (<b>b</b>) track distribution diagram in the experimental area B.</p>
Full article ">Figure 25
<p>Schematic of real reference verification in experimental area C. (<b>a</b>) Scatterplot of elevation and actual elevation of gt3L track signal photons in experimental area C; (<b>b</b>) track distribution diagram in experimental area C.</p>
Full article ">Figure 26
<p>Schematic of real reference verification in experimental area D. (<b>a</b>) Scatterplot of elevation and actual elevation of gt2R track signal photons in experimental area D; (<b>b</b>) track distribution diagram in experimental area D.</p>
Full article ">
12 pages, 11263 KiB  
Article
Application of FY Satellite Data in Precipitation of Eastward-Moving Southwest China Vortex: A Case Study of Precipitation in Zhejiang Province
by Chengyan Mao, Yiyu Qing, Zhitong Qian, Chao Zhang, Zhenhai Gu, Liqing Gong, Junyu Liao and Haowen Li
Atmosphere 2023, 14(11), 1664; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14111664 - 9 Nov 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1187
Abstract
Based on the high-resolution data from April to October (the warm season) during the 2010 to 2020 timeframe provided by the FY-2F geostationary meteorological satellite, the classification and application evaluation of the eastward-moving southwest vortex cloud system affecting Zhejiang Province was conducted using [...] Read more.
Based on the high-resolution data from April to October (the warm season) during the 2010 to 2020 timeframe provided by the FY-2F geostationary meteorological satellite, the classification and application evaluation of the eastward-moving southwest vortex cloud system affecting Zhejiang Province was conducted using cloud classification (CLC) and black body temperature (TBB) products. The results show that: (1) when the intensity of the eastward-moving southwest vortex is strong, the formed precipitation is predominantly regional convective precipitation. The cloud system in the center and southeast quadrant of the southwest vortex is dominated by cumulonimbus and dense cirrus clouds with convective precipitation, while the other quadrants are mainly composed of stratiform clouds, resulting in stable precipitation; (2) The original text is modified as follows: By using the TBB threshold method to identify stratiform and mixed cloud rainfall, we observed a deviation of one order of magnitude. This deviation is advantageous for moderate rain. However, the precipitation results from mixed clouds identified by the TBB threshold method are being overestimated; By means of the application of stratiform and mixed cloud rainfall identified by the TBB threshold method, an order of magnitude deviation was identified (3) The TBB can be consulted to estimate the precipitation, above which there is a large error. Moreover, the dispersion of precipitation produced by deep convective clouds is the largest, while the dispersion of precipitation produced by stratiform clouds is the smallest and has better predictability. Compared to CLC products, cloud type results based on TBB identification are better for convective cloud precipitation application. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Spatial distribution of accumulated precipitation from 13:00 BST on 29 to 23:00 BST on 30 April 2013 (<b>a</b>), 06:00 BST on 29 to 07:00 BST on 30 May 2015 (<b>b</b>), 18:00 BST on 11 to 08:00 BST on 12 May 2017 (<b>c</b>), 17:00 BST on 25 to 17:00 BST on 26 May 2018 (<b>d</b>) in Zhejiang province (unit: mm).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The FY-2F satellite CLC distribution of eastward-moving southwest vortex at 18:30 BST on 29 April 2013 (<b>a</b>), 22:30 BST on 29 May 2015 (<b>b</b>), 22:00 BST on 11 May 2017 (<b>c</b>), and 01:00 BST on 26 May 2018 (<b>d</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The FY-2F satellite cloud types corresponding to TBB thresholds during eastward-moving southwest vortex at 18:30 BST on 29 April 2013 (<b>a</b>), 22:30 BST on 29 May 2015 (<b>b</b>), 22:00 BST on 11 May 2017 (<b>c</b>), and 01:00 BST on 26 May 2018 (<b>d</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatter plots of 1 h precipitation (<b>a</b>) and 3 h precipitation (<b>b</b>) versus TBB from 2010 to 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Boxplots of 1 h precipitation (<b>a</b>) and 3 h precipitation (<b>b</b>) versus cloud types classified by TBB threshold (unit: mm). (The highest and lowest short horizontal lines represent the statistical maximum and the minimum, respectively; the upper and bottom box lines represent the upper and bottom quartile, respectively, and the line within the box represents the median).</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 7252 KiB  
Article
Surface Properties of Global Land Surface Microwave Emissivity Derived from FY-3D/MWRI Measurements
by Ronghan Xu, Zharong Pan, Yang Han, Wei Zheng and Shengli Wu
Sensors 2023, 23(12), 5534; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23125534 - 13 Jun 2023
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2012
Abstract
Land surface microwave emissivity is crucial to the accurate retrieval of surface and atmospheric parameters and the assimilation of microwave data into numerical models over land. The microwave radiation imager (MWRI) sensors aboard on Chinese FengYun-3 (FY-3) series satellites provide valuable measurements for [...] Read more.
Land surface microwave emissivity is crucial to the accurate retrieval of surface and atmospheric parameters and the assimilation of microwave data into numerical models over land. The microwave radiation imager (MWRI) sensors aboard on Chinese FengYun-3 (FY-3) series satellites provide valuable measurements for the derivation of global microwave physical parameters. In this study, an approximated microwave radiation transfer equation was used to estimate land surface emissivity from MWRI by using brightness temperature observations along with corresponding land and atmospheric properties obtained from ERA-Interim reanalysis data. Surface microwave emissivity at the 10.65, 18.7, 23.8, 36.5, and 89 GHz vertical and horizontal polarizations was derived. Then, the global spatial distribution and spectrum characteristics of emissivity over different land cover types were investigated. The seasonal variations of emissivity for different surface properties were presented. Furthermore, the error source was also discussed in our emissivity derivation. The results showed that the estimated emissivity was able to capture the major large-scale features and contains a wealth of information regarding soil moisture and vegetation density. The emissivity increased with the increase in frequency. The smaller surface roughness and increased scattering effect may result in low emissivity. Desert regions showed high emissivity microwave polarization difference index (MPDI) values, which suggested the high contrast between vertical and horizontal microwave signals in this region. The emissivity of the deciduous needleleaf forest in summer was almost the greatest among different land cover types. There was a sharp decrease in the emissivity at 89 GHz in the winter, possibly due to the influence of deciduous leaves and snowfall. The land surface temperature, the radio-frequency interference, and the high-frequency channel under cloudy conditions may be the main error sources in this retrieval. This work showed the potential capabilities of providing continuous and comprehensive global surface microwave emissivity from FY-3 series satellites for a better understanding of its spatiotemporal variability and underlying processes. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Global land cover data in IGBP classification system from MODIS product. Classification legends: 0-Water Bodies, 1-Evergreen Needleleaf Forests, 2-Evergreen Broadleaf Forests, 3-Deciduous Needleleaf Forests, 4-Deciduous Broadleaf Forests, 5-Mixed Forests, 6-Closed Shrublands, 7-Open Shrublands, 8-Woody Savannas, 9-Savannas, 10-Grasslands, 11-Permanent Wetlands, 12-Croplands, 13-Urban and Built-up Lands, 14-Cropland/Natural Vegetation Mosaics, 15-Permanent Snow and Ice, 16-Barren or Sparsely Vegetated.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Data-processing flow of microwave land surface emissivity retrieval.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Land surface microwave emissivity for July 2018 from MWRI ascending observations at vertical (left) and horizontal (right) polarizations for the 10.65, 18.7, 23.8, 36.5, and 89 GHz channels (from top to down): (<b>a</b>) emissivity for 10.65 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>b</b>) emissivity for 10.65 GHz horizontal polarization; (<b>c</b>) emissivity for 18.7 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>d</b>) emissivity for 18.7 GHz horizontal polarization; (<b>e</b>) emissivity for 23.8 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>f</b>) emissivity for 23.8 GHz horizontal polarization; (<b>g</b>) emissivity for 36.5 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>h</b>) emissivity for 36.5 GHz horizontal polarization; (<b>i</b>) emissivity for 89 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>j</b>) emissivity for 89 GHz horizontal polarization.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3 Cont.
<p>Land surface microwave emissivity for July 2018 from MWRI ascending observations at vertical (left) and horizontal (right) polarizations for the 10.65, 18.7, 23.8, 36.5, and 89 GHz channels (from top to down): (<b>a</b>) emissivity for 10.65 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>b</b>) emissivity for 10.65 GHz horizontal polarization; (<b>c</b>) emissivity for 18.7 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>d</b>) emissivity for 18.7 GHz horizontal polarization; (<b>e</b>) emissivity for 23.8 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>f</b>) emissivity for 23.8 GHz horizontal polarization; (<b>g</b>) emissivity for 36.5 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>h</b>) emissivity for 36.5 GHz horizontal polarization; (<b>i</b>) emissivity for 89 GHz vertical polarization; (<b>j</b>) emissivity for 89 GHz horizontal polarization.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Emissivity variations at vertical and horizontal polarizations for different land cover types from 10.65, 18.7, 23.8, 36.5, and 89 GHz frequencies of MWRI in July 2018.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Emissivity microwave polarization difference index (MPDI) for July 2018 from MWRI ascending observations for the 10.65, 18.7, 23.8, 36.5, and 89 GHz channels (from top to down): (<b>a</b>) MPDI for 10.65 GHz; (<b>b</b>) MPDI for 18.7 GHz; (<b>c</b>) MPDI for 23.8 GHz; (<b>d</b>) MPDI for 36.5 GHz; (<b>e</b>) MPDI for 89 GHz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>Emissivity microwave polarization difference index (MPDI) for July 2018 from MWRI ascending observations for the 10.65, 18.7, 23.8, 36.5, and 89 GHz channels (from top to down): (<b>a</b>) MPDI for 10.65 GHz; (<b>b</b>) MPDI for 18.7 GHz; (<b>c</b>) MPDI for 23.8 GHz; (<b>d</b>) MPDI for 36.5 GHz; (<b>e</b>) MPDI for 89 GHz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Seasonal emissivity variations at vertical (left) and horizontal (right) polarizations for different land cover types from 10.65, 18.7, 23.8, 36.5, and 89 GHz frequencies of MWRI: (<b>a</b>) winter variations in vertical emissivity; (<b>b</b>) winter variations in horizontal emissivity; (<b>c</b>) spring variations in vertical emissivity; (<b>d</b>) spring variations in horizontal emissivity; (<b>e</b>) summer variations in vertical emissivity; (<b>f</b>) summer variations in horizontal emissivity; (<b>g</b>) autumn variations in vertical emissivity; (<b>h</b>) autumn variations in horizontal emissivity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>Seasonal emissivity variations at vertical (left) and horizontal (right) polarizations for different land cover types from 10.65, 18.7, 23.8, 36.5, and 89 GHz frequencies of MWRI: (<b>a</b>) winter variations in vertical emissivity; (<b>b</b>) winter variations in horizontal emissivity; (<b>c</b>) spring variations in vertical emissivity; (<b>d</b>) spring variations in horizontal emissivity; (<b>e</b>) summer variations in vertical emissivity; (<b>f</b>) summer variations in horizontal emissivity; (<b>g</b>) autumn variations in vertical emissivity; (<b>h</b>) autumn variations in horizontal emissivity.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 4270 KiB  
Article
A Disturbance Frequency Index in Earthquake Forecast Using Radio Occultation Data
by Tao Zhang, Guangyuan Tan, Weihua Bai, Yueqiang Sun, Yuhe Wang, Xiaotian Luo, Hongqing Song and Shuyu Sun
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(12), 3089; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15123089 - 13 Jun 2023
Viewed by 1691
Abstract
Earthquake forecasting is the process of forecasting the time, location, and magnitude of an earthquake, hoping to gain some time to prepare to reduce the disasters caused by earthquakes. In this paper, the possible relationship between the maximum electron density, the corresponding critical [...] Read more.
Earthquake forecasting is the process of forecasting the time, location, and magnitude of an earthquake, hoping to gain some time to prepare to reduce the disasters caused by earthquakes. In this paper, the possible relationship between the maximum electron density, the corresponding critical frequency, and the occurrence of earthquakes is explored by means of radio occultation data based on mechanism analysis and actual earthquake-nearby data. A new disturbance frequency index is proposed in this paper as a novel method to help forecast earthquakes. Forecasting of the location and timing of earthquakes is based on the connection between proven new frequency distributions and earthquakes. The effectiveness of this index is verified by backtracking observation around the 2022 Ya’an earthquake. Using this index, occultation data can forecast the occurrence of earthquakes five days ahead of detection, which can help break the bottleneck in earthquake forecasting. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Schematic diagram of the radio occultation measurements.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic diagram of the instantaneous geometric relationship of occultation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic diagram of hypothesis of seismo-ionospheric disturbance mechanisms.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Changing of the maximum electron density distribution at intervals of 5 days.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Changing of the maximum electron density distribution at intervals of 3 days.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Changing of the maximum electron density around the earthquake.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Change in the maximum electron density spatial distribution around the earthquake. (<b>a</b>) 24 May 2022; (<b>b</b>) 26 May 2022; (<b>c</b>) 27 May 2022; (<b>d</b>) 29 May 2022; (<b>e</b>) 1 June 2022; (<b>f</b>) 3 June 2022. The “*” symbol denotes the epicenter.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Changing of the critical frequency at maximum electron density at intervals of 1 day.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Change in the critical frequency spatial distribution around the earthquake. (<b>a</b>) 24 May 2022; (<b>b</b>) 26 May 2022; (<b>c</b>) 27 May 2022; (<b>d</b>) 29 May 2022; (<b>e</b>) 1 June 2022; (<b>f</b>) 3 June 2022; * denotes the epicenter.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9 Cont.
<p>Change in the critical frequency spatial distribution around the earthquake. (<b>a</b>) 24 May 2022; (<b>b</b>) 26 May 2022; (<b>c</b>) 27 May 2022; (<b>d</b>) 29 May 2022; (<b>e</b>) 1 June 2022; (<b>f</b>) 3 June 2022; * denotes the epicenter.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Changing of the critical frequency at maximum electron density at intervals of 1 day. The red points and curve denote the period, during which the earthquake occurred.</p>
Full article ">
28 pages, 12745 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of Copernicus DEM and Comparison to the DEM Used for Landsat Collection-2 Processing
by Shannon Franks and Rajagopalan Rengarajan
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(10), 2509; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15102509 - 10 May 2023
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 4832
Abstract
Having highly accurate and reliable Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) of the Earth’s surface is critical to orthorectify Landsat imagery. Without such accuracy, pixel locations reported in the data are difficult to assure as accurate, especially in more mountainous landscapes, where the orthorectification process [...] Read more.
Having highly accurate and reliable Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) of the Earth’s surface is critical to orthorectify Landsat imagery. Without such accuracy, pixel locations reported in the data are difficult to assure as accurate, especially in more mountainous landscapes, where the orthorectification process is the most challenging. To this end, the Landsat Calibration and Validation Team (Cal/Val) compared the Copernicus DEM (CopDEM) to the DEM that is currently used in Collection-2 processing (called “Collection-2 DEM”). NGS ground-surveyed and lidar-based ICESat-2 points were used, and the CopDEM shows improvement to be less than 1 m globally, except in Asia where the accuracy and resolution of the DEM were greater for the CopDEM compared to the Collection-2 DEM. Along with slightly improved accuracy, the CopDEM showed more consistent results globally due to its virtually seamless source and consistent creation methods throughout the dataset. While CopDEM is virtually seamless, having greater than 99% of their data coming from a single source (Tandem-X), there are significantly more voids in the higher elevations which were mostly filled with SRTM derivatives. The accuracy of the CopDEM fill imagery was also compared to the Collection-2 DEM and the results were very similar, showing that the choice of fill imagery used by CopDEM was appropriate. A qualitative assessment using terrain-corrected products processed with different DEMs and viewing them as anaglyphs to evaluate the DEMs proved useful for assessing orbital path co-registration. While the superiority of the CopDEM was not shown to be definitive by the qualitative method for many of the regions assessed, the CopDEM showed a clear advantage in Northern Russia, where the Collection-2 DEM uses some of the oldest and least accurate datasets in the compilation of the Collection-2 DEM. This paper presents results from the comparison study, along with the justification for proceeding with using the Copernicus DEM in future Landsat processing. As of this writing, the Copernicus DEM is planned to be used in Collection-3 processing, which is anticipated to be released no earlier than 2025. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Landsat Collection-1 Digital Elevation Model (DEM) source data: Shuttle Radar Topography Mission [<a href="#B3-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">3</a>], the Radarsat Antarctic Mapping Project (RAMP) [<a href="#B4-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">4</a>], Global Multiresolution Terrain Elevation Data 2010 (GMTED2010) [<a href="#B5-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">5</a>], National Elevation Dataset (NED) [<a href="#B6-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">6</a>], Canadian Digital Elevation Data (CDED) [<a href="#B7-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">7</a>], Greenland Icesheet Mapping Project (GIMP) [<a href="#B8-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">8</a>], and NPI (Norwegian Polar Institute) [<a href="#B9-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">9</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Landsat Collection-2 Digital Elevation Model (DEM) source map: Alaska-National Elevation Dataset (AK_NED) [<a href="#B6-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">6</a>], Canadian DEM (CDEM) [<a href="#B7-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">7</a>], NASADEM [<a href="#B14-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">14</a>], Greenland Icesheet Mapping Project (GIMP) [<a href="#B8-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">8</a>], NPI (Norwegian Polar Institute) [<a href="#B9-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">9</a>], Sweden–Norway–Finland (SNF) [<a href="#B15-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">15</a>,<a href="#B16-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">16</a>,<a href="#B17-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">17</a>], Global Multiresolution Terrain Elevation Data 2010 (GMTED2010) [<a href="#B5-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">5</a>], the Radarsat Antarctic Mapping Project (RAMP) DEM in Antarctica [<a href="#B4-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">4</a>], and ArcticDEM [<a href="#B18-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">18</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Copernicus Digital Elevation Model (DEM) coverage.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Map of Copernicus latitudinal reduction factor [<a href="#B29-remotesensing-15-02509" class="html-bibr">29</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>NGS point distribution in (<b>a</b>) the United States and (<b>b</b>) Canada/Mexico.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Site distribution for ICESat-2 analysis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>As seen in the left image (<b>a</b>), when there is no elevation error, the view angles (α and β) along with the elevation height (h<sub>A</sub>) calculate two horizontal displacements (∆HT<sub>S1</sub> and ∆HT<sub>S2</sub>) that locate the points to the same horizontal coordinates, A. As seen in the right image (<b>b</b>), when calculating this based on an incorrect Digital Elevation Model (DEM) height, the displacements (∆HA<sub>S1</sub> and ∆HA<sub>S2</sub>) place the horizontal coordinates in differing locations (A′<sub>S1</sub> and A′<sub>S2</sub>) causing misalignment (∆d).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Illustration of parallax for Anaglyph creation (<b>a</b>) using Collection-2 Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and (<b>b</b>) the Copernicus DEM (CopDEM). The methodology is exactly the same in each, except that they use different DEMs for creation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Anaglyph example in Austria using a national Digital Elevation Model (DEM) (from Austria) and WorldDEM, the precursor DEM to Copernicus DEM (CopDEM).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) slope map showing locations of the study sites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Landsat Worldwide Reference System−2 (WRS-2) overlap example.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Anaglyph locations south of 60°.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Anaglyph locations north of 60°.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Anaglyphs created in Austria (Landsat Worldwide Reference System-2 (WRS-2 192/27 and 193/27)) showing varying quality. The left image, processed using the Collection-2 Digital Elevation Model (DEM), shows misalignment in the lower circled region, while the right image, processed using the Copernicus DEM (CopDEM), shows misalignment just north of it. Color variations (red and cyan) indicate images that are misaligned, while grayscale indicates images that are perfectly aligned.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Voids edited by the Copernicus Digital Elevation Model (CopDEM). Panels depict FDM and EDM quality layers for a tile in the same region in Austria (WRS-2 192/27 and 193/27) as shown in <a href="#remotesensing-15-02509-f014" class="html-fig">Figure 14</a>. In the right image, where the EDM shows the pixels were smoothed (upper circle) the CopDEM produced misalignment in the processed image (<a href="#remotesensing-15-02509-f014" class="html-fig">Figure 14</a>, right image, upper circle). In the left image, where the FDM shows the pixels were filled with Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) DEM data (lower circle), there were no misalignments of the processed image evident in the anaglyph (<a href="#remotesensing-15-02509-f014" class="html-fig">Figure 14</a>, lower region of right image). SRTM90, Shuttle Radar Topography Mission 90 m resolution; SRTM30, SRTM 30 m resolution; GMTED2010, Global Multiresolution Terrain Elevation Data 2010.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Anaglyph in the Himalayan region along the China/Nepal border where there is more misalignment (indicated by the spread of red color) when processing the imagery using the Collection-2 DEM (<b>left</b>) which is not evident in the imagery processed using the Copernicus DEM (CopDEM) (<b>right</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Anaglyph in the Pakistan region of the Himalayas where there is more misalignment when processing the imagery using the Copernicus Digital Elevation Model (CopDEM) (<b>right</b>) which is not as prevalent (less red and blue) in the imagery processed using the Collection-2 DEM (<b>left</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Anaglyph made using the Collection-2 Digital Elevation Model (DEM) showing significant misalignments (indicated by the red and cyan) on the mountain ridges (<b>a</b>), and the anaglyph made with the Copernicus DEM (CopDEM) having none (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>The top row shows two locations in the Collection-2 Digital Elevation Model (DEM) where a 7.5-arcsecond Global Multiresolution Terrain Elevation Data (GMTED) was the source DEM (<b>a</b>), and where the same locations in the GLO–30 Copernicus DEM (CopDEM) were the source DEM (<b>b</b>). The difference in sharpness due to the increased spatial resolution of the CopDEM is evident.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Histogram of Copernicus pixels in the Fill Layer Mask (FLM) tiles in Austria (<b>a</b>), Central Himalayas (<b>b</b>), and Northern Himalayas (<b>c</b>) showing the percentage of Copernicus-edited pixels, unedited pixels, and alternate Digital Elevation Model (DEM) sources used. ASTER, Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer; SRTM90, 30, and 30plus, Shuttle Radar Topography Mission for 90, 30, and 30 plus meter resolution; AW3D30,(ALOS World 3D-30 m).</p>
Full article ">
25 pages, 5119 KiB  
Article
Delineation of Orchard, Vineyard, and Olive Trees Based on Phenology Metrics Derived from Time Series of Sentinel-2
by Mukhtar Adamu Abubakar, André Chanzy, Fabrice Flamain, Guillaume Pouget and Dominique Courault
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(9), 2420; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15092420 - 5 May 2023
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 2641
Abstract
This study aimed to propose an accurate and cost-effective analytical approach for the delineation of fruit trees in orchards, vineyards, and olive groves in Southern France, considering two locations. A classification based on phenology metrics (PM) derived from the Sentinel-2 time series was [...] Read more.
This study aimed to propose an accurate and cost-effective analytical approach for the delineation of fruit trees in orchards, vineyards, and olive groves in Southern France, considering two locations. A classification based on phenology metrics (PM) derived from the Sentinel-2 time series was developed to perform the classification. The PM were computed by fitting a double logistic model on temporal profiles of vegetation indices to delineate orchard and vineyard classes. The generated PM were introduced into a random forest (RF) algorithm for classification. The method was tested on different vegetation indices, with the best results obtained with the leaf area index. To delineate the olive class, the temporal features of the green chlorophyll vegetation index were found to be the most appropriate. Obtained overall accuracies ranged from 89–96% and a Kappa of 0.86–0.95 (2016–2021), respectively. These accuracies are much better than applying the RF algorithm to the LAI time series, which led to a Kappa ranging between 0.3 and 0.52 and demonstrates the interest in using phenological traits rather than the raw time series of the remote sensing data. The method can be well reproduced from one year to another. This is an interesting feature to reduce the burden of collecting ground-truth information. If the method is generic, it needs to be calibrated in given areas as soon as a phenology shift is expected. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Map of France depicting the two selected study sites (Ouveze-Ventoux and Crau).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Map of the two study areas displaying locations of the selected ground-truth plot.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Double logistic fitting showing SOS and EOS.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>DC class with the fitted curve (<b>a</b>), VY class with the fitted curve (<b>b</b>), and OC class with the fitted curve (<b>c</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Temporal profile of DC (<b>a</b>), VY (<b>b</b>), OC (<b>c</b>) in Ouveze-Ventoux and temporal profile of DC (<b>d</b>), VY (<b>e</b>) and OC (<b>f</b>) in Crau site.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Temporal profile of a young VY misclassified as DC in Ouveze-Ventoux.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Spatial distribution of OC, VY, and DC classes in the Ouveze-Ventoux site for the year 2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Vegetation indices time series observed on OL plots (red) and DC (green). In (<b>a</b>), the vegetation indices are the LAI; in (<b>b</b>), the vegetation indices are GCVI.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Average vegetation indices during the summer period (DOY 150–250) as a function of the average vegetation indices at the beginning of the year (DOY 1–100) for olive plots (red triangle) and end DC plots (blue triangle). In (<b>a</b>), the vegetation indices are the LAI; in (<b>b</b>), the vegetation indices are GCVI.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Feature importance ranking (mean decrease accuracy) for Ouveze-Ventoux (<b>a</b>) and Crau (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Temporal profile of OC and VY in Ouveze-Ventoux (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) and Crau (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) study areas from 2019 to 2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Temporal pattern of a young OC field and a temporal pattern of a young VY.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 10391 KiB  
Article
Snow Density Retrieval in Quebec Using Space-Borne SMOS Observations
by Xiaowen Gao, Jinmei Pan, Zhiqing Peng, Tianjie Zhao, Yu Bai, Jianwei Yang, Lingmei Jiang, Jiancheng Shi and Letu Husi
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(8), 2065; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15082065 - 13 Apr 2023
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2175
Abstract
Snow density varies spatially, temporally, and vertically within the snowpack and is the key to converting snow depth to snow water equivalent. While previous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of retrieving snow density using a multiple-angle L-band radiometer in theory and in ground-based [...] Read more.
Snow density varies spatially, temporally, and vertically within the snowpack and is the key to converting snow depth to snow water equivalent. While previous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of retrieving snow density using a multiple-angle L-band radiometer in theory and in ground-based radiometer experiments, this technique has not yet been applied to satellites. In this study, the snow density was retrieved using the Soil Moisture Ocean Salinity (SMOS) satellite radiometer observations at 43 stations in Quebec, Canada. We used a one-layer snow radiative transfer model and added a τ-ω vegetation model over the snow to consider the forest influence. We developed an objective method to estimate the forest parameters (τ, ω) and soil roughness (SD) from SMOS measurements during the snow-free period and applied them to estimate snow density. Prior knowledge of soil permittivity was used in the entire process, which was calculated from the Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) soil simulations using a frozen soil dielectric model. Results showed that the retrieved snow density had an overall root-mean-squared error (RMSE) of 83 kg/m3 for all stations, with a mean bias of 9.4 kg/m3. The RMSE can be further reduced if an artificial tuning of three predetermined parameters (τ, ω, and SD) is allowed to reduce systematic biases at some stations. The remote sensing retrieved snow density outperforms the reanalysis snow density from GLDAS in terms of bias and temporal variation characteristics. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Spatial distribution of stations in Quebec, Canada. International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP) land surface types are represented in colors according to the MODIS-MCD12Q1 product. Stations marked with stars and triangles are stations with good and bad retrieval performances, respectively, described in detail in <a href="#sec4-remotesensing-15-02065" class="html-sec">Section 4</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The histogram of (<b>a</b>) soil–snow interface roughness <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>S</mi> <mi>D</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, (<b>b</b>) canopy single scattering albedo <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>ω</mi> </semantics></math>, and (<b>c</b>) transmissivity <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>τ</mi> </semantics></math> determined by SMOS-observed T<sub>B</sub> during the snow-free period at station HQ-CM4L in Quebec, Canada. The red vertical lines are the final estimations of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>τ</mi> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>ω</mi> </semantics></math>, and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>S</mi> <mi>D</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Flow chart for snow density retrieval.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Examples of SMOS-observed T<sub>B</sub> (triangles) versus the forward-model-simulated T<sub>B</sub> (lines) to fit the observations. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>ρ</mi> <mrow> <mrow> <mi>s</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mo> </mo> <mi mathvariant="italic">obs</mi> </mrow> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> is the in-situ snow density. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>ρ</mi> <mrow> <mrow> <mi>s</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mo> </mo> <mi mathvariant="italic">ret</mi> </mrow> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>τ</mi> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="italic">ret</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>ω</mi> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="italic">ret</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> are the retrieved snow density, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>τ</mi> </semantics></math>, and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>ω</mi> </semantics></math>, respectively. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>ε</mi> <mrow> <mrow> <mi>G</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mo> </mo> <mi mathvariant="italic">gldas</mi> </mrow> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> is the soil permittivity calculated from the GLDAS soil simulations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Time series (left) and scatterplots (right) of in-situ and retrieved snow density at the three stations with good performance among 43 stations: (<b>a</b>) HQ-CM4E, (<b>b</b>) HQ-CM4L, (<b>c</b>) HQ-CM4J, compared with the GLDAS snow density. In the right subplots, all points (pink triangles and green circles) and the statistics in the upper left corner present the validation in the entire snow season (October to June), whereas green circles and the statistics in the lower right corner present the validation from December to March. R is the Pearson correlation coefficient with the confidence interval of 95%, bias represents the mean bias, RMSE is the root-mean-squared error, and ubRMSE is the unbiased root-mean-squared error.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Time series (left) and scatterplots (right) of in-situ and retrieved snow density at the three stations with poor performance among 43 stations: (<b>a</b>) HQ-CM3D, (<b>b</b>) HQ-CM4G, (<b>c</b>) HQ-CMPX, compared with the GLDAS snow density. Labels and statistics in the right subplots are the same as those in <a href="#remotesensing-15-02065-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Scatterplots of (<b>a</b>) retrieved snow density and (<b>b</b>) reanalysis snow density from GLDAS against observed snow density, and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) the sensitivity of biases to observed snow depth (SD<sub>obs</sub>), from October, 2019 to June, 2020 at 43 stations located in Quebec, Canada. In (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>), the validation metrics from the entire snow season (October to June) are presented in the upper left corner, whereas those from December to March are presented in the lower right corner.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Distribution of Pearson correlation coefficient (R) (<b>a</b>), mean bias (Bias) (<b>b</b>), root-mean-squared error (RMSE) (<b>c</b>), and unbiased (ubRMSE) (<b>d</b>) of retrieved snow density at stations on map. The background is the MCD12Q1 IGBP classification.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Summary of Pearson correlation coefficient (R), mean bias (Bias), root-mean-squared error (RMSE), and unbiased (ubRMSE) of retrieved snow density at different stations. Different colors represent different dominant IGBP land surface types from MCD12Q1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Time series and scatterplots of in-situ and retrieved snow density using manually adjusted predetermined parameters (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">τ</mi> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>ω</mi> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>S</mi> <mi>D</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>) at the three stations: (<b>a</b>) HQ-CM3D, (<b>b</b>) HQ-CM4G, (<b>c</b>) HQ-CMPX.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Scatterplots of (<b>a</b>) observed SD (snow depth) against reanalysis SD from GLDAS, (<b>b</b>) observed SWE against reanalysis SWE from GLDAS, and (<b>c</b>) time series of observed SD and GLDAS SD at station HQ-CM4L.</p>
Full article ">
25 pages, 11803 KiB  
Article
Reprocessed MODIS Version 6.1 Leaf Area Index Dataset and Its Evaluation for Land Surface and Climate Modeling
by Wanyi Lin, Hua Yuan, Wenzong Dong, Shupeng Zhang, Shaofeng Liu, Nan Wei, Xingjie Lu, Zhongwang Wei, Ying Hu and Yongjiu Dai
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(7), 1780; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15071780 - 27 Mar 2023
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 3841
Abstract
Satellite-based leaf area index (LAI) products, such as the MODIS LAI, play an essential role in land surface and climate modeling research, from regional to global scales. However, data gaps and high-level noise can exist, thus limiting their applications to a broader scope. [...] Read more.
Satellite-based leaf area index (LAI) products, such as the MODIS LAI, play an essential role in land surface and climate modeling research, from regional to global scales. However, data gaps and high-level noise can exist, thus limiting their applications to a broader scope. Our previous work has reprocessed the MODIS LAI Collection 5 (C5) product, and the reprocessed data have been widely used these years. In this study, the MODIS C6.1 LAI data were reprocessed to broaden its application as a successor. We updated the integrated two-step method that is used for MODIS C5 LAI and implemented it into the MODIS C6.1 LAI product. Comprehensive evaluations for the original and reprocessed products were conducted. The results showed that the reprocessed LAI data had better performance in validation against reference maps. In addition, the site scale time series of reprocessed data was much smoother and more consistent with adjacent values. The global scale comparison showed that, though the MODIS C6.1 LAI does have improvements in ground validation with LAI reference maps, its spatial continuity, temporal continuity, and consistency showed little improvement when compared to C5. In contrast, the reprocessed data were more spatiotemporally continuous and consistent. Based on this evaluation, some suggestions for using various MODIS LAI products were given. This study assessed the quality of these different versions of MODIS LAI products and demonstrated the improvement of the reprocessed C6.1 data, which we recommended for use as a substitute for the reprocessed C5 data in land surface and climate modeling. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Schematic diagrams for calculating (<b>a</b>) spatial discontinuity index (SDI), (<b>b</b>) temporal discontinuity index (TDI), and (<b>c</b>) temporal inconsistency index (TII). <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mrow> <mo>|</mo> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <mi>LAI</mi> </mrow> <mo>|</mo> </mrow> </mrow> </semantics></math> represents the absolute difference between the adjacent LAI values. TDIs and TIIs of different time series were calculated as an example to exhibit different extents of (<b>b</b>) temporal discontinuity, and (<b>c</b>) temporal inconsistency.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Validation of MODIS C6.1 LAI products and reprocessed LAI data against (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) reference maps used in the validation of MOD C5 LAI [<a href="#B55-remotesensing-15-01780" class="html-bibr">55</a>], (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) combined LAI reference maps (VALERI, BigFoot, Boston University, SMEX02, and ImagineS datasets), and (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>) GBOV LAI reference maps. The shaded area stands for the uncertainty agreement ratio [<a href="#B1-remotesensing-15-01780" class="html-bibr">1</a>,<a href="#B74-remotesensing-15-01780" class="html-bibr">74</a>], and the distance between the diagonal and the upper or lower bound of the shaded area is equal to the greater 20% of the reference map value and 1 m<sup>2</sup> m<sup>−2</sup>. “MD” is the average difference between the LAI values shown on the y and x axes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Time series plot of spatial mean MCD15A2H C6.1 LAI and reprocessed MODIS LAI within the reference map extent. MOD15A2H C6.1 LAI was used for the time prior to 26 June 2002, in the cases of the reference map data existing. QC information that indicates retrieval algorithms was plotted above the time series, and corresponded with the five categories listed in <a href="#remotesensing-15-01780-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Spatial and temporal comparisons between MCD15A2H C6.1 and reprocessed MODIS LAI in tile h19v08. The location of the center of this tile (1200 × 1200 km<sup>2</sup>) is 15.055°E, 5.002°N. The first column’s first five subplots show the MODIS LAI for the five 8-day compositing periods that are labeled to the figure’s left. The second column’s first five frames refer to reprocessed MODIS LAI. Information on quality control is divided into five categories, as listed in <a href="#remotesensing-15-01780-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>, and displayed in the “QC” column. The last two columns display, respectively, the spatial discontinuity index (SDI) of MODIS and reprocessed MODIS. The last row displays the temporal discontinuity index (TDI) of MODIS and reprocessed MODIS of the above five 8-day compositing periods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>14-year (2003–2016) means of spatial discontinuity index (SDI) maps of (<b>a</b>) MCD15A2H C6.1, (<b>b</b>) reprocessed MODIS, (<b>c</b>) MOD15A2H C6.1, (<b>d</b>) MOD15A2H C5 LAI products, and (<b>e</b>) the numbers of domains in SDI maps over different intervals.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Temporal discontinuity index (TDI) maps of (<b>a</b>) MCD15A2H C6.1, (<b>b</b>) reprocessed MODIS, (<b>c</b>) MOD15A2H C6.1, and (<b>d</b>) MOD15A2H C5 LAI products for the 14-year (2013–2016) period, and (<b>e</b>) the numbers of domains in TDI maps over different intervals.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The same as <a href="#remotesensing-15-01780-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a> but for temporal inconsistency index (TII).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Linear trends of the growing season mean LAIs of (<b>a</b>) MCD15A2H C6.1, (<b>b</b>) reprocessed MODIS, (<b>c</b>) MOD15A2H C6.1, and (<b>d</b>) their global mean values in 2003–2021. Trends of LAI mean values of all products in (<b>d</b>) are significant (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05 in the Mann–Kendall test).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Proportion of LAI data retrieved from the main algorithm in 2003–2021 for (<b>a</b>) MOD15A2H C6.1 product, and (<b>b</b>) MCD15A2H C6.1 product.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Difference between reprocessed MODIS LAI and MCD15A2H C6.1 LAI constrained by QC ≤ 2, QC &lt; 32, and QC &lt; 64 in (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) January, and (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) July of the year 2010.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Difference in temporal mean value between MCD15A2H C6.1 and MOD15A2H C6.1 LAI products at (<b>a</b>) pixel ‘h12v09, x = 1200, y = 1200’ (lat = −4.998, lon = −65.250), and (<b>b</b>) the global scale. The black star in (<b>b</b>) indicates the location of the pixel plotted in (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 5945 KiB  
Article
Laboratory Radiometric Calibration Technique of an Imaging System with Pixel-Level Adaptive Gain
by Ze Li, Jun Wei, Xiaoxian Huang and Feifei Xu
Sensors 2023, 23(4), 2083; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23042083 - 13 Feb 2023
Viewed by 2145
Abstract
In a routine optical remote sensor, there is a contradiction between the two requirements of high radiation sensitivity and high dynamic range. Such a problem can be solved by adopting pixel-level adaptive-gain technology, which is carried out by integrating multilevel integrating capacitors into [...] Read more.
In a routine optical remote sensor, there is a contradiction between the two requirements of high radiation sensitivity and high dynamic range. Such a problem can be solved by adopting pixel-level adaptive-gain technology, which is carried out by integrating multilevel integrating capacitors into photodetector pixels and multiple nondestructive read-outs of the target charge with a single exposure. There are four gains for any one pixel: high gain (HG), medium gain (MG), low gain (LG), and ultralow gain (ULG). This study analyzes the requirements for laboratory radiometric calibration, and we designed a laboratory calibration scheme for the distinctive imaging method of pixel-level adaptive gain. We obtained calibration coefficients for general application using one gain output, and the switching points of dynamic range and the proportional conversion relationship between adjacent gains as the adaptive-gain output. With these results, on-orbit quantification applications of spectrometers adopting pixel-level automatic gain adaptation technology are guaranteed. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Flowchart of single-pixel imaging mode.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Comparison of HG imaging and adaptive-gain imaging under the same conditions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Flowchart of the laboratory calibration of an adaptive-gain imaging system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Laboratory radiation calibration system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Experimental design diagram for the determination of the absolute radiometric calibration coefficient.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparison before and after bad-pixel correction.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Image of pixel-level adaptive-gain mode.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Proportional relationship of adjacent gains.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>ASD spectral radiance and photodetector spectral response curve under the same light conditions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Photodetector response curves of four spectral channels with the radiance detected with ASD as reference.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Four gains’ response curve.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Fitting curve of the laboratory absolute radiometric response of MG.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Response curve after nonlinear correction.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop