4.7 Article

Evaluation of IMERG and TRMM 3B43 Monthly Precipitation Products over Mainland China

期刊

REMOTE SENSING
卷 8, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs8060472

关键词

GPM; IMERG; TRMM 3B43; satellite-derived precipitation estimates

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [41401503]
  2. Innovative Research Team in University of Henan Provinces [16IRTSTHN012]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province (China) [2014CFB726]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [91538106]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As the successor of the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM), the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission significantly improves the spatial resolution of precipitation estimates from 0.25 degrees to 0.1 degrees. The present study analyzed the error structures of Integrated Multisatellite Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) monthly precipitation products over Mainland China from March 2014 to February 2015 using gauge measurements at multiple spatiotemporal scales. Moreover, IMERG products were also compared with TRMM 3B43 products. The results show that: (1) overall, IMERG can capture the spatial patterns of precipitation over China well. It performs a little better than TRMM 3B43 at seasonal and monthly scales; (2) the performance of IMERG varies greatly spatially and temporally. IMERG performs better at low latitudes than at middle latitudes, and shows worse performance in winter than at other times; (3) compared with TRMM 3B43, IMERG significantly improves the estimation accuracy of precipitation over the Xinjiang region and the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, especially over the former where IMERG increases Pearson correlation coefficient by 0.18 and decreases root-mean-square error by 54.47 mm for annual precipitation estimates. However, most IMERG products over these areas are unreliable; and (4) IMERG shows poor performance in winter as TRMM 3B43 even if GPM improved its ability to sense frozen precipitation. Most of them over North China are unreliable during this period.

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