4.7 Article

The Performances of MODIS-GPP and -ET Products in China and Their Sensitivity to Input Data (FPAR/LAI)

期刊

REMOTE SENSING
卷 7, 期 1, 页码 135-152

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs70100135

关键词

gross primary production (GPP); evapotranspiration (ET); MODIS; uncertainty; land cover types; ChinaFLUX

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41371409]
  2. Key Projects in the National Science & Technology Pillar Program [2013BAC03B04]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aims are to validate and assess the performances of MODIS gross primary production (MODIS-GPP) and evapotranspiration (MODIS-ET) products in China's different land cover types and their sensitivity to remote sensing input data. In this study, MODIS-GPP and -ET are evaluated using flux derived/measured data from eight sites of ChinaFLUX. Results show that MODIS-GPP generally underestimates GPP (R-2 is 0.58, bias is -6.7 gC/m(2)/8-day and RMSE is 19.4 gC/m(2)/8-day) at all sites and MODIS-ET overestimates ET (R-2 is 0.36, bias is 6 mm/8-day and RMSE is 11 mm/8-day) when comparing with derived GPP and measured ET, respectively. For evergreen forests, MODIS-GPP gives a poor performance with R-2 varying from 0.03 to 0.44; in contrast, MODIS-ET provides more reliable results. In croplands, MODIS-GPP can explain 80% of GPP variance, but it overestimates flux derived GPP in non-growing season and underestimates flux derived GPP in growing season; similar overestimations also presented in MODIS-ET. For grasslands and mixed forests, MODIS-GPP and -ET perform good estimating accuracy. By designing four experimental groups and taking GPP simulation as an example, we suggest that the maximum light use efficiency of croplands should be optimized, and the differences of meteorological data have little impact on GPP estimation, whereas remote sensing leaf area index/fraction of photo-synthetically active radiation (LAI/FPAR) can greatly affect GPP/ET estimations for all land cover types. Thus, accurate remote sensing parameters are important for achieving reliable estimations.

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