4.7 Article

A visible band index for remote sensing leaf chlorophyll content at the canopy scale

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2012.07.020

关键词

Spectral indices; Triangular greenness index (TGI); Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS); PROSPECT; SAIL; Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM); Nitrogen fertilization; Zea mays

资金

  1. NASA Earth Observations Commercialization and Applications Program (EOCAP)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Leaf chlorophyll content is an important variable for agricultural remote sensing because of its close relationship to leaf nitrogen content. The triangular greenness index (TGI) was developed based on the area of a triangle surrounding the spectral features of chlorophyll with points at (670 nm, R-670), (550 nm, R-550), and (480 nm, R-480), where R-lambda is the spectral reflectance at wavelengths of 670, 550 and 480, respectively. The equation is TGI = -0.5[(670 - 480)(R-570 - R-550) (670 - 550)(R-670 - R-480)]. In 1999, investigators funded by NASA's Earth Observations Commercialization and Applications Program collaborated on a nitrogen fertilization experiment with irrigated maize in Nebraska. Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) data and Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM) data were acquired along with leaf chlorophyll meter and other data on three dates in July during late vegetative growth and early reproductive growth. TGI was consistently correlated with plot-averaged chlorophyll-meter values at the spectral resolutions of AVIRIS, Landsat TM, and digital cameras. Simulations using the Scattering by Arbitrarily Inclined Leaves (SAIL) canopy model indicate an interaction among TGI, leaf area index (LAI) and soil type at low crop LAI, whereas at high LAI and canopy closure, TGI was only affected by leaf chlorophyll content. Therefore, TGI may be the best spectral index to detect crop nitrogen requirements with low-cost digital cameras mounted on low-altitude airborne platforms. (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据