从树冠光谱反射率中分离出土壤的直接反射率

IF 11.1 1区 地球科学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Remote Sensing of Environment Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1016/j.rse.2024.114500
Peiqi Yang , Christiaan van der Tol , Jing Liu , Zhigang Liu
{"title":"从树冠光谱反射率中分离出土壤的直接反射率","authors":"Peiqi Yang ,&nbsp;Christiaan van der Tol ,&nbsp;Jing Liu ,&nbsp;Zhigang Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.rse.2024.114500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Separation of soil effects from top-of-canopy (TOC) reflectance is crucial for quantitative remote sensing of vegetation. Soil affects TOC reflectance via the soil-vegetation interaction and the direct reflection by soil. Various vegetation indices have been developed semi-empirically to mitigate the interferences caused by soil for specific applications, such estimating biomass and monitoring vegetation phenology. However, a practical approach to separate soil effects from the entire TOC spectral reflectance is still lacking. In this study, we investigate the radiative transfer process in a vegetation canopy with soil contamination and develop three methods to estimate the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. Theoretical analysis reveals that the soil's direct reflection can be quantified and separated from TOC reflectance due to the distinct spectral characteristics of soil and vegetation. We identify three key features: a) Bands in the visible region where the reflectance of soil-uncontaminated green vegetation approaches zero due to strong pigment absorption. b) Two bands in the visible region where the vegetation reflectance is similar, but soil reflectance is distinguishable. c) Soil reflectance within the range of 400 nm to 1000 nm exhibits a near-linear dependence on wavelength. Using these features, we develop three methods to quantify the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. For given soil reflectance, feature a) or b) alone allows estimating the fraction of soil that directly contributes to TOC reflectance, and thus the soil's direct reflection. Using all three features enables estimation of the soil's direct reflection without knowing soil reflectance.</div><div>The proposed methods, along with certain assumptions made during their development, are tested and evaluated using field and synthetic datasets of soil, leaf, and canopy. The evaluation of the three methods demonstrates that the estimation of the soil's direct reflection can be achieved through: i) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and soil spectral reflectance, termed the red-band-based method (Method-RBB). ii) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and 438 nm, along with soil spectral reflectance, termed as the two-band-based method (Method-TBB). iii) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and 438 nm, assuming linear dependence of soil reflectance on wavelength in the visible and near-infrared region, termed as the linear-assumption-based method (Method-LAB). Our evaluation indicates that the linearity from 400 nm to 1000 nm holds true for a wide range of soil types. The conditions outlined in features a) and b) are valid for green vegetation with moderate to high leaf chlorophyll content: when leaf chlorophyll content exceeds 20 μg cm<sup>−2</sup>, the leaf albedo at 675 nm is generally below 0.15, and the difference in leaf albedo at 675 nm and 438 nm is sufficiently small. The results reveal that when leaf albedo at 675 nm is less than 0.15 and NDVI is less than 0.8, all three methods perform satisfactorily, exhibiting an R<sup>2</sup> value of approximately 0.9 between the true and estimated contribution of soil's direct reflection. The R<sup>2</sup> values are 0.92 for both Method-RBB and Method-LAB, while Method-TBB has an R<sup>2</sup> of 0.95. The performance of Method-RBB is particularly sensitive to leaf albedo at the red band, which correlates with leaf chlorophyll content. Canopies exhibiting higher red-band leaf albedo usually indicate lower chlorophyll content and less resemblance to typical green vegetation. The accuracy of Method-TBB diminishes as the differences in leaf albedo between the selected two bands increase. Similarly, deviations from the linear dependence of soil reflectance on wavelength negatively impact the accuracy of Method-LAB. Overall, these proposed methods work reasonably well for sparse canopies and healthy vegetation. Method-TBB exhibits the highest level of accuracy, followed by Method-RBB, while Method-LAB is more convenient to use as it does not require prior knowledge of soil reflectance. The proposed methods offer practical ways to estimate the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. Utilizing TOC reflectance after the soil adjustment facilitates more direct monitoring of canopy structural characteristics, and biochemical and physiological information of leaves.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":417,"journal":{"name":"Remote Sensing of Environment","volume":"316 ","pages":"Article 114500"},"PeriodicalIF":11.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Separation of the direct reflection of soil from canopy spectral reflectance\",\"authors\":\"Peiqi Yang ,&nbsp;Christiaan van der Tol ,&nbsp;Jing Liu ,&nbsp;Zhigang Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rse.2024.114500\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Separation of soil effects from top-of-canopy (TOC) reflectance is crucial for quantitative remote sensing of vegetation. Soil affects TOC reflectance via the soil-vegetation interaction and the direct reflection by soil. Various vegetation indices have been developed semi-empirically to mitigate the interferences caused by soil for specific applications, such estimating biomass and monitoring vegetation phenology. However, a practical approach to separate soil effects from the entire TOC spectral reflectance is still lacking. In this study, we investigate the radiative transfer process in a vegetation canopy with soil contamination and develop three methods to estimate the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. Theoretical analysis reveals that the soil's direct reflection can be quantified and separated from TOC reflectance due to the distinct spectral characteristics of soil and vegetation. We identify three key features: a) Bands in the visible region where the reflectance of soil-uncontaminated green vegetation approaches zero due to strong pigment absorption. b) Two bands in the visible region where the vegetation reflectance is similar, but soil reflectance is distinguishable. c) Soil reflectance within the range of 400 nm to 1000 nm exhibits a near-linear dependence on wavelength. Using these features, we develop three methods to quantify the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. For given soil reflectance, feature a) or b) alone allows estimating the fraction of soil that directly contributes to TOC reflectance, and thus the soil's direct reflection. Using all three features enables estimation of the soil's direct reflection without knowing soil reflectance.</div><div>The proposed methods, along with certain assumptions made during their development, are tested and evaluated using field and synthetic datasets of soil, leaf, and canopy. The evaluation of the three methods demonstrates that the estimation of the soil's direct reflection can be achieved through: i) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and soil spectral reflectance, termed the red-band-based method (Method-RBB). ii) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and 438 nm, along with soil spectral reflectance, termed as the two-band-based method (Method-TBB). iii) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and 438 nm, assuming linear dependence of soil reflectance on wavelength in the visible and near-infrared region, termed as the linear-assumption-based method (Method-LAB). Our evaluation indicates that the linearity from 400 nm to 1000 nm holds true for a wide range of soil types. The conditions outlined in features a) and b) are valid for green vegetation with moderate to high leaf chlorophyll content: when leaf chlorophyll content exceeds 20 μg cm<sup>−2</sup>, the leaf albedo at 675 nm is generally below 0.15, and the difference in leaf albedo at 675 nm and 438 nm is sufficiently small. The results reveal that when leaf albedo at 675 nm is less than 0.15 and NDVI is less than 0.8, all three methods perform satisfactorily, exhibiting an R<sup>2</sup> value of approximately 0.9 between the true and estimated contribution of soil's direct reflection. The R<sup>2</sup> values are 0.92 for both Method-RBB and Method-LAB, while Method-TBB has an R<sup>2</sup> of 0.95. The performance of Method-RBB is particularly sensitive to leaf albedo at the red band, which correlates with leaf chlorophyll content. Canopies exhibiting higher red-band leaf albedo usually indicate lower chlorophyll content and less resemblance to typical green vegetation. The accuracy of Method-TBB diminishes as the differences in leaf albedo between the selected two bands increase. Similarly, deviations from the linear dependence of soil reflectance on wavelength negatively impact the accuracy of Method-LAB. Overall, these proposed methods work reasonably well for sparse canopies and healthy vegetation. Method-TBB exhibits the highest level of accuracy, followed by Method-RBB, while Method-LAB is more convenient to use as it does not require prior knowledge of soil reflectance. The proposed methods offer practical ways to estimate the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. Utilizing TOC reflectance after the soil adjustment facilitates more direct monitoring of canopy structural characteristics, and biochemical and physiological information of leaves.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":417,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Remote Sensing of Environment\",\"volume\":\"316 \",\"pages\":\"Article 114500\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Remote Sensing of Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034425724005261\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Remote Sensing of Environment","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034425724005261","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

将土壤效应从树冠顶部(TOC)反射率中分离出来对于植被定量遥感至关重要。土壤通过土壤-植被相互作用和土壤直接反射影响 TOC 反射率。为了减轻土壤对特定应用(如估算生物量和监测植被物候)造成的干扰,人们以半经验方式开发了各种植被指数。然而,从整个 TOC 光谱反射率中分离土壤影响的实用方法仍然缺乏。在本研究中,我们研究了有土壤污染的植被冠层中的辐射传递过程,并开发了三种方法来估算土壤直接反射对 TOC 反射率的贡献。理论分析表明,由于土壤和植被的光谱特性不同,土壤的直接反射可以量化并与 TOC 反射分离。我们发现了三个关键特征:a) 在可见光区域,未受污染的绿色植被的土壤反射率因色素吸收强而趋近于零;b) 在可见光区域有两个波段,植被反射率相似,但土壤反射率可区分;c) 在 400 纳米到 1000 纳米范围内,土壤反射率与波长呈近似线性关系。利用这些特征,我们开发了三种方法来量化土壤直接反射对 TOC 反射率的贡献。对于给定的土壤反射率,仅使用特征 a) 或 b) 就能估算出直接影响 TOC 反射率的土壤部分,从而估算出土壤的直接反射率。通过使用土壤、叶片和冠层的实地数据集和合成数据集,对所提出的方法及其开发过程中的某些假设进行了测试和评估。对三种方法的评估表明,可以通过以下方法估算土壤的直接反射率:i) 使用约 675 纳米波长的 TOC 反射率和土壤光谱反射率,称为基于红波段的方法(Method-RBB)。iii) 使用约 675 纳米和 438 纳米的 TOC 反射率,假设土壤反射率与可见光和近红外区域的波长呈线性关系,称为基于线性假设的方法(Method-LAB)。我们的评估表明,从 400 纳米到 1000 纳米的线性关系适用于多种土壤类型。特征 a) 和 b) 中概述的条件适用于叶片叶绿素含量中等至高的绿色植被:当叶片叶绿素含量超过 20 μg cm-2 时,675 纳米波段的叶片反照率一般低于 0.15,并且 675 纳米波段和 438 纳米波段的叶片反照率差足够小。结果表明,当 675 nm 波长的叶片反照率小于 0.15 且 NDVI 小于 0.8 时,三种方法的性能都令人满意,土壤直接反射的真实贡献与估计贡献之间的 R2 值约为 0.9。方法-RBB 和方法-LAB 的 R2 值均为 0.92,而方法-TBB 的 R2 值为 0.95。方法-RBB 的性能对红光波段的叶片反照率特别敏感,而叶片反照率与叶绿素含量相关。红色波段叶片反照率较高的树冠通常表明叶绿素含量较低,与典型绿色植被的相似度较低。随着所选两个波段之间叶片反照率差异的增大,方法-TBB 的准确性也会降低。同样,偏离土壤反射率与波长的线性关系也会对方法-LAB 的准确性产生负面影响。总体而言,这些建议的方法对于稀疏的树冠和健康的植被效果相当不错。方法-TBB 的准确度最高,其次是方法-RBB,而方法-LAB 则更方便使用,因为它不需要事先了解土壤反射率。所提出的方法为估算土壤直接反射对 TOC 反射率的贡献提供了实用的方法。利用土壤调整后的 TOC 反射率可以更直接地监测冠层结构特征以及叶片的生化和生理信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Separation of the direct reflection of soil from canopy spectral reflectance
Separation of soil effects from top-of-canopy (TOC) reflectance is crucial for quantitative remote sensing of vegetation. Soil affects TOC reflectance via the soil-vegetation interaction and the direct reflection by soil. Various vegetation indices have been developed semi-empirically to mitigate the interferences caused by soil for specific applications, such estimating biomass and monitoring vegetation phenology. However, a practical approach to separate soil effects from the entire TOC spectral reflectance is still lacking. In this study, we investigate the radiative transfer process in a vegetation canopy with soil contamination and develop three methods to estimate the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. Theoretical analysis reveals that the soil's direct reflection can be quantified and separated from TOC reflectance due to the distinct spectral characteristics of soil and vegetation. We identify three key features: a) Bands in the visible region where the reflectance of soil-uncontaminated green vegetation approaches zero due to strong pigment absorption. b) Two bands in the visible region where the vegetation reflectance is similar, but soil reflectance is distinguishable. c) Soil reflectance within the range of 400 nm to 1000 nm exhibits a near-linear dependence on wavelength. Using these features, we develop three methods to quantify the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. For given soil reflectance, feature a) or b) alone allows estimating the fraction of soil that directly contributes to TOC reflectance, and thus the soil's direct reflection. Using all three features enables estimation of the soil's direct reflection without knowing soil reflectance.
The proposed methods, along with certain assumptions made during their development, are tested and evaluated using field and synthetic datasets of soil, leaf, and canopy. The evaluation of the three methods demonstrates that the estimation of the soil's direct reflection can be achieved through: i) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and soil spectral reflectance, termed the red-band-based method (Method-RBB). ii) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and 438 nm, along with soil spectral reflectance, termed as the two-band-based method (Method-TBB). iii) Using TOC reflectance at approximately 675 nm and 438 nm, assuming linear dependence of soil reflectance on wavelength in the visible and near-infrared region, termed as the linear-assumption-based method (Method-LAB). Our evaluation indicates that the linearity from 400 nm to 1000 nm holds true for a wide range of soil types. The conditions outlined in features a) and b) are valid for green vegetation with moderate to high leaf chlorophyll content: when leaf chlorophyll content exceeds 20 μg cm−2, the leaf albedo at 675 nm is generally below 0.15, and the difference in leaf albedo at 675 nm and 438 nm is sufficiently small. The results reveal that when leaf albedo at 675 nm is less than 0.15 and NDVI is less than 0.8, all three methods perform satisfactorily, exhibiting an R2 value of approximately 0.9 between the true and estimated contribution of soil's direct reflection. The R2 values are 0.92 for both Method-RBB and Method-LAB, while Method-TBB has an R2 of 0.95. The performance of Method-RBB is particularly sensitive to leaf albedo at the red band, which correlates with leaf chlorophyll content. Canopies exhibiting higher red-band leaf albedo usually indicate lower chlorophyll content and less resemblance to typical green vegetation. The accuracy of Method-TBB diminishes as the differences in leaf albedo between the selected two bands increase. Similarly, deviations from the linear dependence of soil reflectance on wavelength negatively impact the accuracy of Method-LAB. Overall, these proposed methods work reasonably well for sparse canopies and healthy vegetation. Method-TBB exhibits the highest level of accuracy, followed by Method-RBB, while Method-LAB is more convenient to use as it does not require prior knowledge of soil reflectance. The proposed methods offer practical ways to estimate the contribution of soil's direct reflection to TOC reflectance. Utilizing TOC reflectance after the soil adjustment facilitates more direct monitoring of canopy structural characteristics, and biochemical and physiological information of leaves.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Remote Sensing of Environment
Remote Sensing of Environment 环境科学-成像科学与照相技术
CiteScore
25.10
自引率
8.90%
发文量
455
审稿时长
53 days
期刊介绍: Remote Sensing of Environment (RSE) serves the Earth observation community by disseminating results on the theory, science, applications, and technology that contribute to advancing the field of remote sensing. With a thoroughly interdisciplinary approach, RSE encompasses terrestrial, oceanic, and atmospheric sensing. The journal emphasizes biophysical and quantitative approaches to remote sensing at local to global scales, covering a diverse range of applications and techniques. RSE serves as a vital platform for the exchange of knowledge and advancements in the dynamic field of remote sensing.
期刊最新文献
Assessing lead fraction derived from passive microwave images and improving estimates at pixel-wise level Estimating anthropogenic CO2 emissions from China's Yangtze River Delta using OCO-2 observations and WRF-Chem simulations A dual-branch network for crop-type mapping of scattered small agricultural fields in time series remote sensing images From theory to hydrological practice: Leveraging CYGNSS data over seven years for advanced soil moisture monitoring An adaptive spatiotemporal tensor reconstruction method for GIMMS-3g+ NDVI
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1