Assessment of five different methods for the estimation of surface photosynthetically active radiation from satellite imagery at three sites – application to the monitoring of indoor soft fruit crops in southern UK
Claire Thomas, S. Dorling, William Wandji Nyamsi, L. Wald, S. Rubino, L. Saboret, Mélodie Trolliet, E. Wey
{"title":"Assessment of five different methods for the estimation of surface photosynthetically active radiation from satellite imagery at three sites – application to the monitoring of indoor soft fruit crops in southern UK","authors":"Claire Thomas, S. Dorling, William Wandji Nyamsi, L. Wald, S. Rubino, L. Saboret, Mélodie Trolliet, E. Wey","doi":"10.5194/asr-16-229-2019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. This paper assesses several methods for the retrieval of Photosynthetically\nActive Radiation (PAR) from satellite imagery. The results of five different methods are compared to coincident in-situ measurements collected at three sites in southern UK. PAR retrieval methods are separated into\ntwo distinct groups. The first group comprises three methods that compute\nPAR by multiplying the satellite-retrieved solar broadband irradiance at the surface (SSI) by a constant coefficient. The two methods in the second group are based on more sophisticated modelling of the radiative transfer in the atmosphere involving advanced global aerosol property analyses and\nphysically consistent total column water vapour and ozone produced by the\nCopernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS). Both methods compute a\ncloud modification factor from satellite-retrieved SSI. The five methods\nhave been applied to two satellite-retrieved SSI datasets: HelioClim-3\nversion 5 (HC3v5) and CAMS Radiation Service (CAMS-Rad). Except at the\nseashore site, Group 2 methods combined with the cloud extinction from the\nHC3v5 dataset deliver the best results with small biases of −5 to 0 µmol m−2 s−1 (−1 % to 0 % relative to the mean of the measurements), root mean square errors of 130 µmol m−2 s−1 (28 %) and correlation coefficients exceeding 0.945. For all methods, best results are attained with the HC3v5 data set. These results demonstrate that all methods capture the temporal and spatial variability of the PAR irradiation field well, although several methods require a posteriori bias adjustments for reliable results. Combined with such an adjustment, the Udo et Aro method is a good compromise for this geographical area in terms of reliability, tractability and its ability to run in real-time. Overall, the method performing a spectral discretization in cloud-free conditions, combined with the HC3v5 dataset, outperforms other methods and has great potential for supporting an operational system.\n","PeriodicalId":30081,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Science and Research","volume":"92 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Science and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/asr-16-229-2019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Earth and Planetary Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Abstract. This paper assesses several methods for the retrieval of Photosynthetically
Active Radiation (PAR) from satellite imagery. The results of five different methods are compared to coincident in-situ measurements collected at three sites in southern UK. PAR retrieval methods are separated into
two distinct groups. The first group comprises three methods that compute
PAR by multiplying the satellite-retrieved solar broadband irradiance at the surface (SSI) by a constant coefficient. The two methods in the second group are based on more sophisticated modelling of the radiative transfer in the atmosphere involving advanced global aerosol property analyses and
physically consistent total column water vapour and ozone produced by the
Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS). Both methods compute a
cloud modification factor from satellite-retrieved SSI. The five methods
have been applied to two satellite-retrieved SSI datasets: HelioClim-3
version 5 (HC3v5) and CAMS Radiation Service (CAMS-Rad). Except at the
seashore site, Group 2 methods combined with the cloud extinction from the
HC3v5 dataset deliver the best results with small biases of −5 to 0 µmol m−2 s−1 (−1 % to 0 % relative to the mean of the measurements), root mean square errors of 130 µmol m−2 s−1 (28 %) and correlation coefficients exceeding 0.945. For all methods, best results are attained with the HC3v5 data set. These results demonstrate that all methods capture the temporal and spatial variability of the PAR irradiation field well, although several methods require a posteriori bias adjustments for reliable results. Combined with such an adjustment, the Udo et Aro method is a good compromise for this geographical area in terms of reliability, tractability and its ability to run in real-time. Overall, the method performing a spectral discretization in cloud-free conditions, combined with the HC3v5 dataset, outperforms other methods and has great potential for supporting an operational system.
摘要本文评价了从卫星影像中提取光合有效辐射(PAR)的几种方法。五种不同方法的结果与在英国南部三个地点收集的一致的原位测量结果进行了比较。PAR检索方法分为两个不同的组。第一组包括三种计算par的方法,即将卫星检索到的太阳表面宽带辐照度(SSI)乘以一个常数系数。第二组中的两种方法是基于更复杂的大气辐射传输模型,包括先进的全球气溶胶特性分析和白尼大气监测服务(CAMS)产生的物理一致的总柱水蒸气和臭氧。这两种方法都是根据卫星反演的SSI计算云的改变因子。将这五种方法应用于两个卫星检索的SSI数据集:helioclin -3version 5 (HC3v5)和CAMS Radiation Service (CAMS- rad)。除岸线外,第2组方法结合hc3v5数据集的云消光提供了最佳结果,偏差较小,为- 5至0µmol m - 2 s - 1(相对于测量平均值的- 1%至0%),均方根误差为130µmol m - 2 s - 1(28%),相关系数超过0.945。对于所有方法,使用HC3v5数据集获得最佳结果。这些结果表明,所有方法都能很好地捕捉PAR辐照场的时空变异性,尽管有些方法需要对后验偏差进行调整才能获得可靠的结果。结合这种调整,Udo et Aro方法在可靠性、可追溯性和实时运行能力方面是该地理区域的一个很好的折衷方案。总的来说,在无云条件下进行光谱离散化的方法,结合HC3v5数据集,优于其他方法,并且具有支持操作系统的巨大潜力。