4.7 Article

Improvement of Soil Moisture Retrieval from Hyperspectral VNIR-SWIR Data Using Clay Content Information: From Laboratory to Field Experiments

期刊

REMOTE SENSING
卷 7, 期 3, 页码 3184-3205

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs70303184

关键词

-

资金

  1. project HUMPER-Mission HYPXIM, of the TOSCA-CNES program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this work is to study the constraints and performance of SMC retrieval methodologies in the VNIR (Visible-Near InfraRed) and SWIR (ShortWave InfraRed) regions (from 0.4 to 2.5 mu m) when passing from controlled laboratory conditions to field conditions. Five different approaches of signal processing found in literature were considered. Four local criteria are spectral indices (WISOIL, NSMI, NINSOL and NINSON). These indices are the ratios between the spectral reflectances acquired at two specific wavelengths to characterize moisture content in soil. The last criterion is based in the convex hull concept and it is a global method, which is based on the analysis of the full spectral signature of the soil. The database was composed of 464 and 9 spectra, respectively, measured over bare soils in laboratory and in-situ. For each measurement, SMC and texture were well-known and the database was divided in two parts dedicated to calibration and validation steps. The calibration part was used to define the empirical relation between SMC and SMC retrieval approaches, with coefficients of determination (R-2) between 0.72 and 0.92. A clay content (CC) dependence was detected for the NINSOL and NINSON indices. Consequently, two new criteria were proposed taking into account the CC contribution (NINSOLCC and NINSONCC). The well-marked regression between SMC and global/local indices, and the interest of using the CC, were confirmed during the validation step using laboratory data (R-2 superior to 0.76 and Root mean square errors inferior to 8.3% m(3)center dot m(-3) in all cases) and using in-situ data, where WISOIL, NINSOLCC and NINSONCC criteria stand out among the NSMI and CH.

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