4.7 Article

Requirements of a global near-surface soil moisture satellite mission: accuracy, repeat time, and spatial resolution

Journal

ADVANCES IN WATER RESOURCES
Volume 27, Issue 8, Pages 785-801

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2004.05.006

Keywords

soil moisture; remote sensing; mission requirements; data assimilation; modelling

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Soil moisture satellite mission accuracy, repeat time and spatial resolution requirements are addressed through a numerical twill data assimilation study. Simulated soil moisture profile retrievals were made by assimilating near-surface soil moisture observations with various accuracy (0, 1 2, 3 4, 5 and 10%v/v standard deviation) repeat time (1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 days), and spatial resolution (0.5, 6, 12 18, 30, 60 and 120 arc-min). This study found that near-surface soil moisture observation error must be less than the model forecast error required for a specific application when used as data assimilation input, else slight model forecast degradation may result. It also found that near-surface soil moisture observations must have all accuracy better than 5%v/v to positively impact soil moisture forecasts, and that daily near-surface soil moisture observations achieved the best soil moisture and evapotranspiration forecasts for the repeat times assessed, with 1-5 day repeat times having the greatest impact. Near-surface soil moisture observations with a spatial resolution finer than the land surface model resolution (similar to30 arc-min) produced the best results, with spatial resolutions coarser than the model resolution yielding only a slight degradation. Observations at half the land surface model spatial resolution were found to be appropriate for our application. Moreover, it was found that satisfying the spatial resolution and accuracy requirements was much more important than repeat time. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available