Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of Different Multispectral Sensors for Photosynthetic and Non-Photosynthetic Vegetation-Fraction Retrieval
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of Different Multispectral Sensors for Photosynthetic and Non-Photosynthetic Vegetation-Fraction Retrieval
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of Different Multispectral Sensors for Photosynthetic and Non-Photosynthetic Vegetation-Fraction Retrieval
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparison of Different Multispectral Sensors for Photosynthetic and Non-Photosynthetic Vegetation-Fraction Retrieval
2020
Overview
It is very difficult and complex to acquire photosynthetic vegetation (PV) and non-PV (NPV) fractions (fPV and fNPV) using multispectral satellite sensors because estimations of fPV and fNPV are influenced by many factors, such as background-noise interference of pixel-, spatial-, and spectral-scale effects. In this study, comparisons between Sentinel-2A Multispectral Instrument (S2 MSI), Landsat-8 Operational Land Imager (L8 OLI), and GF1 Wide Field View (GF1 WFV) sensors for retrieving sparse photosynthetic and non-photosynthetic vegetation coverage are presented. The analysis employed a linear spectral-mixture model (LSMM) and nonlinear spectral-mixture model (NSMM) to unmix pixels with different spectral and spatial resolution images based on field endmembers; the estimated endmember fractions were later validated with reference to fraction measurements. The results demonstrated that: (1) with higher spatial and spectral resolution, the S2 MSI sensor had a clear advantage for retrieving PV and NPV fractions compared to L8 OLI and GF1 WFV sensors; (2) through incorporating more red edge (RE) and near-infrared (NIR) bands, the accuracy of NPV fraction estimation could be greatly improved; (3) nonlinear spectral mixing effects were not obvious on the 10–30 m spatial scale for desert vegetation; (4) in arid regions, a shadow endmember is a significant factor for sparse vegetation coverage estimated with remote-sensing data. The estimated NPV fractions were especially affected by the shadow effects and could increase root mean square by 50%. The utilized approaches in the study could effectively assess the performance of major multispectral sensors to extract fPV and fNPV through the novel method of spectral-mixture analysis.
Publisher
MDPI AG
Subject
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.