[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (19)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = GCOM-C/SGLI

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
23 pages, 5167 KiB  
Article
Optical Characterization of Coastal Waters with Atmospheric Correction Errors: Insights from SGLI and AERONET-OC
by Hiroto Higa, Masataka Muto, Salem Ibrahim Salem, Hiroshi Kobayashi, Joji Ishizaka, Kazunori Ogata, Mitsuhiro Toratani, Kuniaki Takahashi, Fabrice Maupin and Stephane Victori
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(19), 3626; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16193626 - 28 Sep 2024
Viewed by 992
Abstract
This study identifies the characteristics of water regions with negative normalized water-leaving radiance (nLw(λ)) values in the satellite observations of the Second-generation Global Imager (SGLI) sensor aboard the Global Change Observation Mission–Climate (GCOM-C) satellite. SGLI Level-2 [...] Read more.
This study identifies the characteristics of water regions with negative normalized water-leaving radiance (nLw(λ)) values in the satellite observations of the Second-generation Global Imager (SGLI) sensor aboard the Global Change Observation Mission–Climate (GCOM-C) satellite. SGLI Level-2 data, along with atmospheric and in-water optical properties measured by the sun photometers in the AErosol RObotic NETwork-Ocean Color (AERONET-OC) from 26 sites globally, are utilized in this study. The focus is particularly on Tokyo Bay and the Ariake Sea, semi-enclosed water regions in Japan where previous research has pointed out the occurrence of negative nLw(λ) values due to atmospheric correction with SGLI. The study examines the temporal changes in atmospheric and in-water optical properties in these two regions, and identifies the characteristics of regions prone to negative nLw(λ) values due to atmospheric correction by comparing the optical properties of these regions with those of 24 other AERONET-OC sites. The time series results of nLw(λ) and the single-scattering albedo (ω(λ)) obtained by the sun photometers at the two sites in Tokyo Bay and Ariake Sea, along with SGLI nLw(λ), indicate the occurrence of negative values in SGLI nLw(λ) in blue band regions, which are mainly attributed to the inflow of absorptive aerosols. However, these negative values are not entirely explained by ω(λ) at 443 nm alone. Additionally, a comparison of in situ nLw(λ) measurements in Tokyo Bay and the Ariake Sea with nLw(λ) values obtained from 24 other AERONET-OC sites, as well as the inherent optical properties (IOPs) estimated through the Quasi-Analytical Algorithm version 5 (QAA_v5), identified five sites—Gulf of Riga, Long Island Sound, Lake Vanern, the Tokyo Bay, and Ariake Sea—as regions where negative nLw(λ) values are more likely to occur. These regions also tend to have lower nLw(λ)  values at shorter wavelengths. Furthermore, relatively high light absorption by phytoplankton and colored dissolved organic matter, plus non-algal particles, was confirmed in these regions. This occurs because atmospheric correction processing excessively subtracts aerosol light scattering due to the influence of aerosol absorption, increasing the probability of the occurrence of negative nLw(λ) values. Based on the analysis of atmospheric and in-water optical measurements derived from AERONET-OC in this study, it was found that negative nLw(λ)  values due to atmospheric correction are more likely to occur in water regions characterized by both the presence of absorptive aerosols in the atmosphere and high light absorption by in-water substances. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of target water regions and installation locations of SeaPRISM in AERONET-OC: (<b>a</b>) Kemigawa Offshore Tower in Tokyo Bay, Japan, (<b>b</b>) Ariake Sea Observation Tower in Japan, and (<b>c</b>) AERONET-OC sites in various countries. The numbers shown next to each site correspond to the AERONET-OC site numbers listed in <a href="#remotesensing-16-03626-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>SeaPRISM optical measurements for Tokyo Bay (top panels) and the Ariake Sea (bottom panels). Panels (<b>a</b>,<b>d</b>) show <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, (<b>b</b>,<b>e</b>) show <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>τ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>λ</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and (<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>) show <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>ω</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> for Tokyo Bay and the Ariake Sea, respectively. Gray lines represent individual measurement samples, with square markers indicating the measured wavelengths. Black lines denote the mean values across all measured samples, with circle markers representing the observed wavelengths and error bars indicating the standard deviation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>SeaPRISM <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> measurements for Tokyo Bay, illustrating the relationships between <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> and water quality parameters. (<b>a</b>) Shows individual measurements of <span class="html-italic">nL<sub>w</sub>(λ)</span> across varying Chl-a concentrations, and (<b>b</b>) is the mean of each Chl-a range. Relationship between <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> and salinity for (<b>c</b>) individual salinity values and (<b>d</b>) mean of each salinity range. Circles in each spectrum represent the observed wavelengths.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Time series results of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>412</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>ω</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mn>443</mn> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> measured by SeaPRISM for Tokyo Bay and the Ariake Sea from January 2020 to December 2021. For <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>412</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> results, the blue and oranges lines represent the values measured by SeaPRISM, and the values obtained after atmospheric correction by SGLI, respectively. For <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>ω</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mn>443</mn> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> results, “x” symbols indicate measurement samples, and the black lines represent the monthly averages (error bars show their standard deviations).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> measured by SeaPRISM and estimated by SGLI. The target wavelengths are 412, 443, 490, 530, 565, and 673.5 nm. Results for 23 AERONET-OC sites are shown. The left panel for each wavelength shows the individual measurements during the observation period, and the right panel for each wavelength shows the average measured and estimated values for each site, along with their standard deviations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Scatter plots of SGLI-derived <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>412</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> versus SeaPRISM-measured <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>τ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>412</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (top panels) and scatter plots of SGLI-derived <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>412</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> versus <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>ω</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mn>443</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (bottom panels) for various AERONET-OC sites. Red and blue circles indicate Tokyo Bay and the Ariake Sea, respectively. The left plots show individual sample points for each target product and the right plots show the average results and standard deviation for each water region (see legend).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Relationship between <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> from SeaPRISM and SGLI in water regions with more than 30 matchup data points. The left panel compares individual samples, and the right panel shows the mean and standard deviation for each water region. The colored regions represent the five water regions where negative <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> values are more likely to occur (red—Tokyo Bay, blue—the Ariake Sea, pink—the Gulf of Riga, green—Long Island Sound, yellow—Lake Beynell). The gray circles denote results from the other 10 water regions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Relationships between <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>p</mi> <mi>h</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>443</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>b</mi> <mi>p</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>565</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> and between <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>d</mi> <mi>g</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>443</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>b</mi> <mi>p</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>565</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> estimated using QAA based on <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> measurements from SeaPRISM as input. The top row (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) shows the relationships for individual samples and the bottom row (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) shows the mean and standard deviation for each water region. The colored regions represent the five water regions where negative <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> values are more likely to occur (red—Tokyo Bay, blue—the Ariake Sea, pink—the Gulf of Riga, green—Long Island Sound, yellow—Lake Beynell). The gray circles denote results from the other 10 water regions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Relationship between <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>ω</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mn>443</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> estimated by inversion using SeaPRISM and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mn>443</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>. The left panel shows the relationship for individual samples and the right panel shows the mean and standard deviation for each water region. The colored regions represent the five water regions where negative <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>L</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>w</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>λ</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> values are more likely to occur (red—Tokyo Bay, blue—the Ariake Sea, pink—the Gulf of Riga, green—Long Island Sound, yellow—Lake Beynell). The gray circles denote results from the other 10 water regions.</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 9713 KiB  
Article
Biomass Burning Plume from Simultaneous Observations of Polarization and Radiance at Different Viewing Directions with SGLI
by Sonoyo Mukai, Souichiro Hioki and Makiko Nakata
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(22), 5405; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15225405 - 17 Nov 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1113
Abstract
The Earth Observation Satellite Global Change Observation Mission—Climate (GCOM)-C (SHIKISAI in Japanese), carrying a second-generation global imager (SGLI), was launched in 2017 by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency. The SGLI performs wide-swath multi-spectral measurements in 19 channels, from near-ultraviolet to thermal infrared (IR), [...] Read more.
The Earth Observation Satellite Global Change Observation Mission—Climate (GCOM)-C (SHIKISAI in Japanese), carrying a second-generation global imager (SGLI), was launched in 2017 by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency. The SGLI performs wide-swath multi-spectral measurements in 19 channels, from near-ultraviolet to thermal infrared (IR), including the red (674 nm; PL1 channel) and near-IR (869 nm; PL2 channel) polarization channels. This work aimed to demonstrate the advantages of SGLI, particularly the significance of simultaneous off-nadir polarized and nadir multi-spectral observations. The PL1 and PL2 channels were tilted at 45° for the off-nadir measurements, whereas the other channels took a straight downward view for the nadir measurements. As a result, the SGLI provided two-directional total radiance data at two wavelengths (674 and 869 nm) that were included in both off-nadir and nadir observations. Using these bidirectional data, an algorithm was applied to derive the altitude of the aerosol plume. Furthermore, because of the significance of the simultaneous observation of polarized and non-polarized light, the sensitivity difference between the radiance and polarized radiance was demonstrated. Severe wildfire events in Indonesia and California were considered as examples of specific applications. Herein, we present the results of our analysis of optically thick biomass-burning aerosol events. The results of the satellite-based analysis were compared with those of a chemical transport model. Exploring the SGLI’s unique capability and continuous 5-year global record paves the way for advanced data exploitation from future satellite missions as a number of multi-directional polarization sensors are programmed to fly in the late 2020s. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Diagram showing the pre-selection process of SBBA candidate pixels before the main BBA retrieval using GCOM-C/SGLI observations over western North America on 13 September 2020. (<b>a</b>) Color composite image from SGLI data, (<b>b</b>) distribution of AOT (500) from SGLI/L2, (<b>c</b>) distribution of index AAI from SGLI data, (<b>d</b>) same as (<b>c</b>) but for index PRI and (<b>e</b>) the area with AAI ≥ 1.1 is colored by pink. BBA: biomass-burning aerosol; SBBA: severe BBA; SGLI: second-generation global imager; AOT: aerosol optical thickness; AAI: absorbing aerosol index; PRI: polarized radiance index.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>SGLI’s two-directional image acquisition. White triangles show the lines of sight of radiance-only optics, and the green triangles show the lines of slightly tilted polarization optics. (<b>a</b>) Northern Hemisphere configuration; (<b>b</b>) same as (<b>a</b>) but approximately 2 min later; (<b>c</b>) Southern Hemisphere configuration; (<b>d</b>) same as (<b>c</b>) but approximately 2 min later. SGLI: second-generation global imager.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic diagram for estimation of the target position from two-directional data with satellite. LOS: line of sight.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Accumulated hotspot (•) map in September 2019 derived from the MODIS Level 2 Thermal Anomalies/Fire product (MOD14, Collection 6) [<a href="#B31-remotesensing-15-05405" class="html-bibr">31</a>]. MODIS: moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Topographic map over Sumatra islands and the tip of the Malay peninsula.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Wildfires in Sumatra observed by the SGLI at 03:30 UT on 21 September, 2019 with hotspots from MODIS Level 2 Thermal Anomalies/Fire product (MOD14, Collection 6) and Jambi AERONET site. (<b>a</b>) Color composite image: (R, G, B) = (674, 530, 443 nm) with and without cloud/SGLI/L2, (<b>b</b>) AAI, (<b>c</b>) PRI. MODIS: moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer; SGLI: second-generation global imager; PRI: polarized radiance index; AERONET: aerosol robotic network.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>SGLI measurements over Sumatra on 21 September 2019. (<b>a</b>) AOT (500 nm) from SGLI/L2 products; (<b>b</b>) frequency histogram of the R in <a href="#remotesensing-15-05405-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a at wavelengths of 674 and 869 nm; (<b>c</b>) the same as <a href="#remotesensing-15-05405-f007" class="html-fig">Figure 7</a>b, but for PR; (<b>d</b>) distribution of R and PR images, respectively, at 674 nm; (<b>e</b>,<b>e’</b>) the same as (<b>d</b>,<b>d’</b>) but for 869 nm. AOT: aerosol optical thickness; SGLI: second-generation global imager; R: radiance; PR: polarized radiance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Estimation of BBA plume height using the stereoscopic approach over Sumatra wildfire on 21 September 2019. BBA: biomass-burning aerosol.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Sequential measurements over North Sumatra on 21 September, 2019. (<b>a</b>) Color composite images observed by Himawari-8/AHI, (<b>b</b>) AOT measured at Jambi site of NASA/AERONET. AOT: aerosol optical thickness; NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; AERONET: aerosol robotic network.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>BC concentration (μg/m<sup>3</sup>) simulated by a regional meteorological model CTM in 5 × 5 km resolution at altitude h (m). BC: black carbon; CTM: chemical transport model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Forest fires in California observed by SGLI at 18:47 UT on 13 September, 2020. (<b>a</b>) Color composite image: (R, G, B) = (674, 530, 443 nm) with hotspots on 12 and 13 September from MODIS Level 2 Thermal Anomalies/Fire product (MOD14) and AERONET site; (<b>b</b>) AAI distribution; (<b>c</b>) topographic map with hotspots on 13 September, where SGLI: second-generation global imager; MODIS: moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer; AERONET: aerosol robotic network; AAI: absorbing aerosol index.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>SGLI measurements over the west coast of North America on 13 September 2020. (<b>a</b>) Frequency histogram of R at 674 nm and 869 nm wavelengths; (<b>b</b>) the same as <a href="#remotesensing-15-05405-f012" class="html-fig">Figure 12</a>a but for PR; (<b>c</b>) distribution of R at 674 nm; (<b>c’</b>) distribution of PR at 674 nm; (<b>d</b>) distribution of R at 879 nm; (<b>d’</b>) distribution of PR at 869 nm. SGLI: second-generation global imager; R: radiance; PR: polarized radiance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Wind field at the resolution of 5 × 5 km at 19:00 (UT) on 13 September, 2020, used in SCALE. (<b>a</b>) Near the surface superposed on the topographic map; (<b>b1</b>) (light blue area) near valley surface; (<b>b2</b>) at 850 hPa (~1500 m); (<b>b3</b>) (light brown area) near the surface of the mountain; (<b>b4</b>) at 500 hPa (~5000 m). MODIS: moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer; NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration; SCALE: Scalable Computing for Advanced Library and Environment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>The estimated plume height for the entire smoke image observed by SGLI shown in <a href="#remotesensing-15-05405-f011" class="html-fig">Figure 11</a>a. SGLI: second-generation global imager.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>BC concentration in μg/m<sup>3</sup>, simulated by the regional CTM in 5 × 5 km resolution at altitude h (m) on 13 September, 2020, over the west coast of North America. The scale of BC concentration at 25 m altitude is the same as that for the Sumatran case in <a href="#remotesensing-15-05405-f010" class="html-fig">Figure 10</a>, but other figures show different scales of BC concentrations (μg/m<sup>3</sup>). BC: black carbon. A figure in the upper left represents the color composite image and the letters A and B indicate the fire source area.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Schematic diagram of radiative transfer method (VMSOS) in a semi-infinite atmosphere model.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Convergence behavior of reflected intensity for the number of scatterings (n) calculated by radiative transfer method (VMSOS) in the case of Rayleigh scattering at <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>θ</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>60</mn> <mo>°</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>θ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>60</mn> <mo>°</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>φ</mi> <mo>−</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>φ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo>°</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> with several albedos of single scattering (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>ϖ</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>; <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>ω</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> in figure).</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>The mean number of scatterings <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mfenced open="&#x2329;" close="&#x232A;" separators="|"> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="bold">n</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">θ</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>60</mn> <mo>°</mo> <mo>,</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">θ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>60</mn> <mo>°</mo> <mo>,</mo> <mi>φ</mi> <mo>−</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>φ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo>°</mo> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> (refer to the left vertical axis) and the degree of linear polarization “Pol. deg.” in percent according to the scale on the right axis versus albedo for single scattering ω.</p>
Full article ">
14 pages, 4255 KiB  
Communication
Quantitatively Mapping Discolored Seawater around Submarine Volcanoes Using Satellite GCOM-C SGLI Data: A Case Study of the Krakatau Eruption in Indonesia in December 2018
by Yuji Sakuno, Sakito Hirao and Naokazu Taniguchi
GeoHazards 2023, 4(2), 107-120; https://doi.org/10.3390/geohazards4020007 - 3 Apr 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2782
Abstract
The final goal of this paper is to contribute to the difficult task of understanding and forecasting submarine volcanic eruption activity by proposing a method to quantify discolored water. To achieve this purpose, we quantitatively analyzed the discolored seawater seen before and after [...] Read more.
The final goal of this paper is to contribute to the difficult task of understanding and forecasting submarine volcanic eruption activity by proposing a method to quantify discolored water. To achieve this purpose, we quantitatively analyzed the discolored seawater seen before and after the eruption of the marine environment around the Indonesian submarine volcano “Anak Krakatau”, which erupted at the end of December 2018, from the viewpoint of the “dominant wavelength”. The atmospherically corrected COM-C SGLI data for 17 periods from the eruption from October 2018 to March 2019 were used. As a result, the following three main items were found. First, the average ± standard deviation of the entire dominant wavelength was 497 nm ± 2 nm before the eruption and 515 nm ± 35 nm after the eruption. Second, the discolored water area around the island derived from SGLI was detected from the contour line with dominant wavelengths of 500 nm and 560 nm. Third, the size of a dominant wavelength of 500 nm or more in the discolored water areas changed in a complicated manner within the range of almost 0 to 35 km2. The area of the dominant wavelength of 500 nm or more slightly increased just before the eruption. Finally, it was proven that the “dominant wavelength” from the SGLI proposed in this paper can be a very effective tool in understanding or predicting submarine volcanic activity. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study area with bathymetry information.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic of dominant wavelength calculation. (<bold>a</bold>) Spectral reflectance from SGLI data, (<bold>b</bold>) color weighting function of the CIE 1931, (<bold>c</bold>) chromaticity diagram of the CIE 1931, and the relationship between θ and the dominant wavelength (circumferential wavelength trajectory).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Relationship between θ (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="geohazards-04-00007-f002">Figure 2</xref>c) and the dominant wavelength.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison of the satellite data used. The Sentinel-2 image (<bold>a</bold>) was acquired on the same day as the SGLI image (<bold>b</bold>) (31 March 2019), QA flag image (<bold>c</bold>) of the SGLI VGI product, and the SGLI image (<bold>d</bold>) before the eruption. The square surrounded by red in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="geohazards-04-00007-f003">Figure 3</xref>c is the discolored seawater area where the chromaticity judgment of SGLI was performed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Colorimetric data of seawater at the five directions (west, north, east, south, and south-west) around Anak Krakatau from October 2018 to March 2019 using GCOM-C SGLI data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>An example of a dominant wavelength map with 500 nm and 560 nm contours on 8 January 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Dominant wavelength map around Anak Krakatau from 1 October 2018 to 31 March 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Dominant wavelength contour map of 560 nm around Anak Krakatau from 8 January to 31 March 2018 extracted by using SGLI data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Area change of discolored seawater around Anak Krakatau.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 5202 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of Polarization Observation Accuracy of SGLI VNR-PL Using In-Orbit Calibration Data
by Shunji Tsuida, Jun Yoshida, Takahiro Amano and Kazuhiro Tanaka
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(6), 1566; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15061566 - 13 Mar 2023
Viewed by 1418
Abstract
The Second Generation Global Imager (SGLI) on the Global Change Observation Mission—Climate (GCOM-C) “SHIKISAI” has polarization observation channels at wavelengths of red (673.5 nm—P1) and near infrared (868.5 nm—P2), and it is expected to extract information of aerosols on land with higher accuracy [...] Read more.
The Second Generation Global Imager (SGLI) on the Global Change Observation Mission—Climate (GCOM-C) “SHIKISAI” has polarization observation channels at wavelengths of red (673.5 nm—P1) and near infrared (868.5 nm—P2), and it is expected to extract information of aerosols on land with higher accuracy than conventional observation methods by utilizing the scattering by atmospheric particles obtained by polarization observation. The polarization observation of SGLI adopts a method to derive the Stokes parameters I, Q, and U by observing three polarized azimuths. In this paper, the polarization observation accuracy means the polarization degree accuracy and polarization azimuth accuracy, which can be expressed as a relative value of I, Q, and U, and does not include the accuracy of radiance. In order to evaluate the polarization observation accuracy of SGLI on orbit, variations of the Q/I and U/I have been investigated using three kinds of calibration data. The effects of calibration methods and aging have been successfully eliminated by comparing independent evaluations of three kinds of calibration data. As a result, it was concluded that the variations of Q/I and U/I are achieved within a slight variation range of ±0.07% at the P1 telescope and ±0.04% at the P2 telescope. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Environmental Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>SGLI-VNR overview.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Example of measured pre-launch calibration data for polarization observation. (<b>a</b>) Output at linear polarizer rotation, (<b>b</b>) output at 5% partially polarizer rotation in radiance condition of Lmax, and (<b>c</b>) output at 5% partially polarizer rotation in radiance condition of Lstd.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Polarization measurement accuracy result at pre-launch calibration after rotating 5% partial polarizer. (<b>a</b>) P1 and (<b>b</b>) P2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Configuration of internal lamp and solar diffuser calibrations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Internal lamp calibration trend of P1 and P2 telescopes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Trends of I<sub>S09</sub>/I<sub>S10</sub> and I<sub>S11</sub>/I<sub>S10</sub> in the internal lamp calibration. (<b>a</b>) P1 and (<b>b</b>) P2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Trends of ΔQ/I and ΔU/I in the internal lamp calibration. (<b>a</b>) P1 and (<b>b</b>) P2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Trends of φ<sub>s-pol</sub>, φ<sub>obs</sub>, and P<sub>obs</sub>, and difference between φ<sub>obs</sub> and φ<sub>s-pol</sub> (φ<sub>obs</sub>−φ<sub>s-pol</sub>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Polarization component difference converted from polarization azimuth angle difference. (<b>a</b>) P1 and (<b>b</b>) P2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Polarization characteristic trends of the Moon. (<b>a</b>) P1 and (<b>b</b>) P2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Polarization characteristics difference between P1 and P2 of the Moon.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Conversion polarization azimuth angle difference with U/I component in P1 telescope.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Fluctuation trend U/I in P1 of the three calibrations data. (<b>a</b>) ΔU/I and (<b>b</b>) three-month moving average of ΔU/I.</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 3310 KiB  
Article
Comparison of Cloud Properties between SGLI Aboard GCOM-C Satellite and MODIS Aboard Terra Satellite
by Pradeep Khatri and Tadahiro Hayasaka
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(4), 1075; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15041075 - 16 Feb 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1929
Abstract
This study presents a comprehensive comparison of Level 2.0 cloud properties between a Second-generation Global Imager (SGLI) aboard the GCOM-C satellite and a Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) aboard the Terra satellite, to better understand the qualities of cloud properties obtained from SGLI/GCOM-C [...] Read more.
This study presents a comprehensive comparison of Level 2.0 cloud properties between a Second-generation Global Imager (SGLI) aboard the GCOM-C satellite and a Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) aboard the Terra satellite, to better understand the qualities of cloud properties obtained from SGLI/GCOM-C launched on 23 December 2017. The cloud pixels identified as water phase by both satellite sensors are highly consistent to each other by more than 90%, although the consistency is only ~60% for ice phase cloud pixels. A comparison of cloud properties—cloud optical thickness (COT) and cloud particle effective radius (CER)—between these two satellite sensors reveals that water and ice cloud properties can have different degrees of agreement depending on underlying surface. The relative difference (RD) values of 22% (18%) and 37% (24%) for water cloud COT (CER) comparison over ocean and land surfaces and respective values of 35% (42%) and 35% (62%) for comparisons of ice cloud properties, and also other comparison metrics, suggest better agreements for water cloud properties than for ice cloud properties, and for ocean surface than for land surface. Though cloud properties differences between MODIS and SGLI can arise from inherent features of cloud retrieval algorithms, such as differences in ancillary data, surface reflectance, cloud droplet size distribution function, model for ice particle habit, etc., this study further identifies the important roles of cloud thickness and Sun and satellite positions for differences in cloud properties between SGLI and MODIS: the differences in cloud properties are found to increase for thinner clouds, higher solar zenith angle, and higher differences in viewing zenith and azimuth angles between these satellite sensors, and such differences are more distinct for water cloud properties than for ice cloud properties. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Atmospheric Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Comparison between MODIS and SGLI for (<b>a</b>) COT over ocean, (<b>b</b>) CER over ocean, (<b>c</b>) COT over land, and (<b>d</b>) CER over land for water cloud pixels.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Frequencies of (<b>a</b>) COT over ocean, (<b>b</b>) CER over ocean, (<b>c</b>) COT over land, and (<b>d</b>) CER over land for MODIS (red) and SGLI (blue) for water cloud pixels.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison between MODIS and SGLI for (<b>a</b>) COT over ocean, (<b>b</b>) CER over ocean, (<b>c</b>) COT over land, and (<b>d</b>) CER over land for ice cloud pixels.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Frequencies of (<b>a</b>) COT over ocean, (<b>b</b>) CER over ocean, (<b>c</b>) COT over land, and (<b>d</b>) CER over land for MODIS (red) and SGLI (blue) for ice cloud pixels.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Statistical analyses (95 percentile, mean, 5 percentile, and RD values) of differences in (<b>a</b>) COT and (<b>b</b>) CER for water clouds and (<b>c</b>) COT and (<b>d</b>) CER for ice clouds between SGLI and MODIS for different values of MODIS COTs. For detail, see text.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Statistical analyses (95 percentile, mean, 5 percentile, and RD values) of differences in (<b>a</b>) COT and (<b>b</b>) CER for water clouds and (<b>c</b>) COT and (<b>d</b>) CER for ice clouds between SGLI and MODIS for different values of solar zenith angle. For detail, see text.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>RD values as functions of absolute VZA difference between SGLI and MODIS sensors for (<b>a</b>) COT and (<b>b</b>) CER of water clouds and (<b>c</b>) COT and (<b>d</b>) CER of ice clouds.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>RD values as functions of absolute VAZ difference between SGLI and MODIS sensors for (<b>a</b>) COT and (<b>b</b>) CER of water clouds and (<b>c</b>) COT and (<b>d</b>) CER of ice clouds.</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 4175 KiB  
Article
Assessment of GCOM-C Satellite Imagery in Bloom Detection: A Case Study in the East China Sea
by Chi Feng, Yuanli Zhu, Anglu Shen, Changpeng Li, Qingjun Song, Bangyi Tao and Jiangning Zeng
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(3), 691; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15030691 - 24 Jan 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2350
Abstract
The coast of the East China Sea (ECS) is one of the regions most frequently affected by harmful algal blooms in China. Remote sensing monitoring could assist in understanding the mechanism of blooms and their associated environmental changes. Based on imagery from the [...] Read more.
The coast of the East China Sea (ECS) is one of the regions most frequently affected by harmful algal blooms in China. Remote sensing monitoring could assist in understanding the mechanism of blooms and their associated environmental changes. Based on imagery from the Second-Generation Global Imager (SGLI) conducted by Global Change Observation Mission-Climate (GCOM-C) (Japan), the accuracy of satellite measurements was initially validated using matched pairs of satellite and ground data relating to the ECS. Additionally, using SGLI data from the coast of the ECS, we compared the applicability of three bloom extraction methods: spectral shape, red tide index, and algal bloom ratio. With an RMSE of less than 25%, satellite data at 490 nm, 565 nm, and 670 nm showed good consistency with locally measured remote sensing reflectance data. However, there was unexpected overestimation at 443 nm of SGLI data. By using a linear correction method, the RMSE at 443 nm was decreased from 27% to 17%. Based on the linear corrected SGLI data, the spectral shape at 490 nm was found to provide the most satisfactory results in separating bloom and non-bloom waters among the three bloom detection methods. In addition, the capability in harmful algae distinguished using SGLI data was discussed. Both of the Bloom Index method and the green-red Spectral Slope method were found to be applicable for phytoplankton classification using SGLI data. Overall, the SGLI data provided by GCOM-C are consistent with local data and can be used to identify bloom water bodies in the ECS, thereby providing new satellite data to support monitoring of bloom changes in the ECS. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remote Sensing for Monitoring Harmful Algal Blooms)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study area of East China Sea (highlighted circles indicate the in situ observations of blooms; the red star shows the location of in situ <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mi>λ</mi> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> observation by Dongou Ocean Observing Platform).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Comparison of in situ measured <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mi>λ</mi> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> with SGLI-derived <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mi>λ</mi> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) Examples of SGLI <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> linear correction in the short bands. (<b>b</b>) Comparison between original SGLI <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> (443) and linear corrected SGLI <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> (443). The solid and dotted black lines in (<b>a</b>) represent the spectrum of original and corrected SGLI <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mrow> <mn>443</mn> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math>, respectively. The hollow and solid black points in (<b>b</b>) indicate the value of SGLI <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mrow> <mn>443</mn> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> before and after linear correction, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Satellite <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mi>λ</mi> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> of match-up pairs with local bloom records. The orange lines indicate values corresponding to bloom waters, whereas blue lines and gray lines represent clear and turbid waters, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Scatterplots of different water types indicated by (<b>a</b>) SS(490), (<b>b</b>) SS(530), (<b>c</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>a</mi> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and (<b>d</b>) RI. The data were derived from the satellite <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mi>λ</mi> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> in <a href="#remotesensing-15-00691-f004" class="html-fig">Figure 4</a>. The horizontal black dotted lines represent (<b>a</b>) SS(490) = 0, (<b>b</b>) SS(530) = 0, (<b>c</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>a</mi> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> = 1.25, and (<b>d</b>) RI = 2.8. The vertical broken lines represent <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mrow> <mn>565</mn> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> = 0.0014 sr<sup>−1</sup>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>SGLI images of (<b>a</b>) false RGB image and (<b>b</b>) satellite Chl-a map on 29 April 2020. The highlighted circles indicate the location of <span class="html-italic">Prorocentrum donghaiense</span> blooms.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Bloom extraction maps using the methods: (<b>a</b>) SS(490) &lt; 0; (<b>b</b>) SS(530) &lt; 0; (<b>c</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>a</mi> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> &gt; 1.25; and (<b>d</b>) RI &gt; 2.8 from the SGLI image on 29 April 2020. Note that all the bloom pixels were assessed using the criteria of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mrow> <mn>565</mn> </mrow> </mfenced> <mo>&lt;</mo> <mn>0.014</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> sr<sup>−1</sup>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Bloom waters of (<b>a</b>) 24 May 2019 and (<b>b</b>) 7 June 2021 extracted using the adjusted SS(490) method. The areas indicated by the rectangular polygon and the highlighted circles are the main bloom occurrence locations provided by bloom reports from the China Marine Disaster Bulletin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>SGLI-derived (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) bloom index (BI) map based on the bloom detection results in <a href="#remotesensing-15-00691-f008" class="html-fig">Figure 8</a>a,b, respectively; and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>s</mi> <mi>l</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>p</mi> <mi>e</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> map based on the bloom detection results in <a href="#remotesensing-15-00691-f008" class="html-fig">Figure 8</a>a,b, respectively. The black circles and rectangles represent the location of diatom and <span class="html-italic">Prorocentrum donghaiense</span> blooms, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>(<b>a</b>) Local measured <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mrow> <mi>r</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mfenced> <mi>λ</mi> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> of <span class="html-italic">Prorocentrum donghaiense</span> blooms by Tao et al. (2015); (<b>b</b>) spectrum of different water types from SGLI imagery on 29 April 2020. The gray vertical bars in (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) indicate the wavebands of SGLI data. The red vertical lines in (<b>b</b>) describe the values obtained by SS(490) and SS(530).</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 3917 KiB  
Article
Direct Detection of Severe Biomass Burning Aerosols from Satellite Data
by Makiko Nakata, Sonoyo Mukai and Toshiyuki Fujito
Atmosphere 2022, 13(11), 1913; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13111913 - 17 Nov 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 1807
Abstract
The boundary between high-concentration aerosols (haze) and clouds is ambiguous and the mixing of aerosols and clouds is complex in terms of composition and structure. In particular, the contribution of biomass burning aerosols (BBAs) to global warming is a source of uncertainty in [...] Read more.
The boundary between high-concentration aerosols (haze) and clouds is ambiguous and the mixing of aerosols and clouds is complex in terms of composition and structure. In particular, the contribution of biomass burning aerosols (BBAs) to global warming is a source of uncertainty in the global radiation budget. In a previous study, we proposed a method to detect absorption aerosols such as BBAs and dust using a simple indicator based on the ratio of violet to near-ultraviolet wavelengths from the Global Change Observation Mission-Climate/Second-Generation Global Imager (GCOM-C/SGLI) satellite data. This study adds newly obtained SGLI data and proposes a method for the direct detection of severe biomass burning aerosols (SBBAs). Moreover, polarization data derived from polarization remote sensing was incorporated to improve the detection accuracy. This is possible because the SGLI is a multi-wavelength sensor consisting of 19 channels from 380 nm in the near-ultraviolet to thermal infrared, including red (674 nm) and near-infrared (869 nm) polarization channels. This method demonstrated fast SBBA detection directly from satellite data by using two types of wavelength ratio indices that take advantage of the characteristics of the SGLI data. The SBBA detection algorithm derived from the SGLI observation data was validated by using the polarized reflectance calculated by radiative transfer simulations and a regional numerical model—scalable computing for advanced library and environment (SCALE). Our algorithm can be applied to the detection of dust storms and high-concentration air pollution particles, and identifying the type of high-concentration aerosol facilitates the subsequent detailed characterization of the aerosol. This work demonstrates the usefulness of polarization remote sensing beyond the SGLI data. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Satellite Remote Sensing Applied in Atmosphere)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Data sampling areas from GCOM-C/SGLI data from 2018 to 2021. Coastlines are represented using the equal-latitude and equal-longitude projection method from the World Data Bank (<a href="https://www.evl.uic.edu/pape/data/WDB/" target="_blank">https://www.evl.uic.edu/pape/data/WDB/</a>, accessed on 1 September 2022).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) AAI as defined by Equation (1) versus AOT (500) from JAXA/SGLI/L2/ver-2 for BBAs. Gray areas indicate AOT &gt; 5.0 without SGLI/L2/ver-2 products. (<b>b</b>) Frequency histograms of AAI for BBAs. Histograms of AAI divided into three parts (AOT ≤ 0.3, 0.3 &lt; AOT ≤ 2, 2 &lt; AOT ≤ 5) are presented in (<b>b1</b>–<b>b3</b>) for BBAs, where N, m and σ denote the total number of data items, mean value and standard deviation, respectively; (<b>c</b>) same as (<b>a</b>) but for dust; (<b>d</b>) same as (<b>b</b>) but for dust. This is denoted by the arrows at both ends drawn in (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>). The dashed and dashed-dotted lines represent AOT (500) = 0.3 and AOT (500) = 2, respectively. The asterisk in (<b>d3</b>) represents the scale of the vertical axis on the right side. The scale of the vertical axis on the left side is used in (<b>d1</b>,<b>d2</b>). The red dots indicate the average value of the AAI for every 0.001 of the AOT (500).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) PRI as defined by Equation (2) versus AOT (500) from JAXA/SGLI/L2/ver-2 for BBAs. Gray areas indicate AOT &gt; 5.0 without SGLI/L2/ver-2 products. (<b>b</b>) Frequency histograms of AAI for BBAs. Histograms of AAI divided into three parts (AOT ≤ 0.3, 0.3 &lt; AOT ≤ 2, 2 &lt; AOT ≤ 5) are presented in (<b>b1</b>–<b>b3</b>) for BBAs, where N, m, and σ denote the total number of data items, mean value, and standard deviation, respectively; (<b>c</b>) same as (<b>a</b>) but for dust; (<b>d</b>) same as (<b>b</b>) but for dust. The asterisk in (<b>d3</b>) represents the scale of the vertical axis on the right side. The red dots indicate the average value of the PRI for every 0.001 of the AOT (500).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatterplots of AAI and PRI at each pixel; γ represents the correlation coefficient. (<b>a</b>) BBAs, (<b>b</b>) dust, and (<b>c</b>) BBAs + dust, where the green color represents the overlapping cases.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>SGLI observation results in western North America on 12 September 2020. (<b>a</b>) SGLI color composite image with MODIS hot spots from Terra/MODIS/MOD14 [<a href="#B36-atmosphere-13-01913" class="html-bibr">36</a>]. Orange and red dots represent the AERONET/PNNL site and MODIS/hot spot on 11 and 12 September, (<b>b</b>) SGLI AOT (500) from SGLI/L2/ver.2 with NASA/AERONET sites [<a href="#B37-atmosphere-13-01913" class="html-bibr">37</a>], (<b>c</b>) the candidate areas for the existence of SBBAs.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) AAI over whole land area, (<b>b</b>) AAI over candidate area for SBBAs, (<b>c</b>) PRI over whole land area, (<b>d</b>) PRI over candidate area for SBBAs, (<b>e</b>) COT, and (<b>f</b>) AOT and COT derived from GCOM-C/SGLI over the same scene as <a href="#atmosphere-13-01913-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a>b.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) PR (674 nm), (<b>b</b>) PR (869 nm), (<b>c</b>) R (674 nm), and (<b>d</b>) R (869 nm) observed by the SGLI; (<b>e</b>) wind behavior at 500 hPa and (<b>f</b>) wind behavior at 10 m above the ground simulated by numerical regional model SCALE over the same scene as <a href="#atmosphere-13-01913-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a>a on 12 September 2020. The magnitude of the wind speed is presented below the figure. The small black square and orange dots represent the AERONET/PNNL site and MODIS/hot spots on 11 and 12 September, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Numerical results of the reflectance from the finite atmosphere consist of the basic BBA model in terms of the vector radiative transfer method. The polarized radiance (PR) in (<b>a</b>) and the radiance (R) in (<b>b</b>) at a wavelength of 674 nm and 869 nm are represented by a dashed curve and dotted one, respectively, against AOT (500 nm). The solid curve in (<b>a</b>) denotes the PRI defined in Equation (2).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Sample data measured at NASA/AERONET/PNNL station on 12 September 2020 [<a href="#B31-atmosphere-13-01913" class="html-bibr">31</a>]. (<b>a</b>) Directional information from SGLI and observed data. (<b>b</b>) Spectral AOT by AERONET.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Acquisition of multidirectional observation data from SGLI [<a href="#B52-atmosphere-13-01913" class="html-bibr">52</a>].</p>
Full article ">
26 pages, 23434 KiB  
Article
Accuracy Assessment of Photochemical Reflectance Index (PRI) and Chlorophyll Carotenoid Index (CCI) Derived from GCOM-C/SGLI with In Situ Data
by Taiga Sasagawa, Tomoko Kawaguchi Akitsu, Reiko Ide, Kentaro Takagi, Satoru Takanashi, Tatsuro Nakaji and Kenlo Nishida Nasahara
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(21), 5352; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14215352 - 26 Oct 2022
Viewed by 3711
Abstract
The photochemical reflectance index (PRI) and the chlorophyll carotenoid index (CCI) are carotenoid-sensitive vegetation indices, which can monitor vegetation’s photosynthetic activities. One unique satellite named “Global Change Observation Mission-Climate (GCOM-C)” is equipped with a sensor, “Second Generation Global Imager (SGLI)”, which has the [...] Read more.
The photochemical reflectance index (PRI) and the chlorophyll carotenoid index (CCI) are carotenoid-sensitive vegetation indices, which can monitor vegetation’s photosynthetic activities. One unique satellite named “Global Change Observation Mission-Climate (GCOM-C)” is equipped with a sensor, “Second Generation Global Imager (SGLI)”, which has the potential to frequently and simultaneously observe PRI and CCI over a wide swath. However, the observation accuracy of PRI and CCI derived from GCOM-C/SGLI remains unclear in forests. Thus, we demonstrated their accuracy assessment by comparing them with in situ data. We collected in situ spectral irradiance data at four forest sites in Japan for three years. We statistically compared satellite PRI with in situ PRI, and satellite CCI with in situ CCI. From the obtained results, the satellite PRI showed poor agreement (the best: r=0.294 (p<0.05)) and the satellite CCI showed good agreement (the best: r=0.911 (p<0.001)). The greater agreement of satellite CCI is possibly because satellite CCI contained fewer outliers and satellite CCI was more resistant to small noise, compared to satellite PRI. Our results suggest that the satellite CCI is more suitable for practical use than the satellite PRI with the latest version (version 3) of GCOM-C/SGLI’s products. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers for Section Biogeosciences Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Locations of the four study sites where in situ data were collected.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Overviews of the four study sites. The silvery artificial structure in each photo is the observation tower. The date next to the site name indicates when we took each photo.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Examples of the instruments: MS-700, masking device, and Automatic-capturing Digital Fisheye Camera (ADFC) at (<b>a</b>) FHK and (<b>b</b>) TKY. At TSE and FJY, the instruments were installed basically in the same manner as (<b>a</b>) FHK, but FJY was not equipped with the masking device for MS-700. At TKY, an external motor rotates MS-700 to observe the incident and reflected light (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Examples of fisheye images taken by ADFC. These images were taken in 2019 at TKY. The bottom numbers represent day of year (DOY).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The relative spectral response (RSR) in the visible and near-infrared (NIR) range of Global Change Observation Mission-Climate (GCOM-C)/Second Generation Global Imager (SGLI). The original data was obtained from [<a href="#B58-remotesensing-14-05352" class="html-bibr">58</a>]. The solid black lines represent the wavelength at 531<math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="normal">n</mi> </semantics></math><math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="normal">m</mi> </semantics></math>, 570 <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="normal">n</mi> </semantics></math><math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="normal">m</mi> </semantics></math>, and 645 <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="normal">n</mi> </semantics></math><math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="normal">m</mi> </semantics></math>, originally used to derive the photochemical reflectance index (PRI) and the chlorophyll carotenoid index (CCI). The blue, green, and orange dotted lines are reflectance measured by MS-700 at FHK on 9 April 2020 (DOY <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>100</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>), 18 July 2020 (DOY <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>200</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>), and 26 October 2020 (DOY <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>300</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>), respectively. Each reflectance was observed at 10:31:00 (Japan standard time (JST)) on each day.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The location of each study site and the nearest pixel of GCOM-C/SGLI. The background true color image was created from Sentinel-2 level 2 products. The cyan circle indicates the location of the observation tower. The red square indicates a range of the nearest pixel of GCOM-C/SGLI.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Time series of <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>original</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>simulated</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, and <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> from 2018 to 2020 at the four study sites. The blue square is <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>original</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, the red plus is <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>simulated</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, the black circle is <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> not screened with the quality assessment (QA) flag, and the black cross is <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>original</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> screened with the QA flag. The gray bands are snow seasons, the orange bands are autumn colors seasons, the green dotted lines are leafing timings, and the red dotted lines are leaf falling timings.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Scatter plots between <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>simulated</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>. <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> was screened with the QA flag (QA <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mspace width="3.33333pt"/> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>). The dotted line represents the 1:1 line. The black solid line is the linear regression line. The shape of each point represents the year: the circle is 2018, the triangle is 2019, and the square is 2020. The color of each point corresponds to the DOY.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Time series of <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>original</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>simulated</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, and <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> from 2018 to 2020 at the four study sites. The blue square is <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>original</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, the red plus is <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>simulated</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, the black circle is <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> not screened with the QA flag, and the black cross is <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>original</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> screened with the QA flag. The gray bands are snow seasons, the orange bands are autumn colors seasons, the green dotted lines are leafing timings, and the red dotted lines are leaf falling timings.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Scatter plots between <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>simulated</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>. <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> was screened with the QA flag (QA <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>). The dotted line represents the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> <mo>:</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> line. The black solid line is the linear regression line. The shape of each point represents the year: the circle is 2018, the triangle is 2019, and the square is 2020. The color of each point corresponds to the DOY.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Scatter plots of snow-free PRI (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) and snow-free CCI (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>). Satellite data were screened with the QA flag (QA <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mspace width="3.33333pt"/> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>). Additionally, satellite data observed in snow seasons were manually removed. The dotted line represents the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> <mo>:</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> line. The black solid line is the linear regression line. The shape of each point represents the year. The color of each point corresponds to the DOY.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The spatial distribution of <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> on 9 October 2019 (DOY <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>282</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>) around FHK. The cyan circles in each figure indicate the location of FHK. The red rectangle in (<b>a</b>) represents the range of (<b>b</b>–<b>d</b>). (<b>a</b>) shows the true color image of GCOM-C/SGLI. (<b>b</b>) shows the true color image, (<b>c</b>) shows <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, and (<b>d</b>) shows <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>. (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) are not screened with the QA flag and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) are screened with the QA flag. The black area represents where the RSRF product was unavailable, and the white area represents the screened area with the QA flag.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>The sky images taken by upward ADFC around the observation time of GCOM-C/SGLI (10:46:44 (JST)) at FHK on 9 October 2019 (DOY = 282).</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>The spatial distribution of <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> on 2 August 2019 (DOY <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>214</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>) around TKY. The cyan circles in each figure indicate the location of TKY. The red rectangle in (<b>a</b>) represents the range of (<b>b</b>–<b>d</b>). (<b>a</b>) shows the true color image of GCOM-C/SGLI. (<b>b</b>) shows the true color image, (<b>c</b>) shows <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, and (<b>d</b>) shows <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>. (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) are not screened with the QA flag and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) are screened with the QA flag.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The spatial distribution of (<b>a</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="italic">VN</mi> <msub> <mn>05</mn> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, (<b>b</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="italic">VN</mi> <msub> <mn>06</mn> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and (<b>c</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="italic">VN</mi> <msub> <mn>08</mn> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> on 2 August 2019 (DOY <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>214</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>) around TKY. The range of each map is the same as that of <a href="#remotesensing-14-05352-f014" class="html-fig">Figure 14</a>b–d. All maps are screened with the QA flag. The cyan circles in each figure indicate the location of TKY.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>The spatial distribution of <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> on 8 August 2018 (DOY <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>220</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>) around TSE. The cyan circles in each figure indicate the location of TSE. The red rectangle in (<b>a</b>) represents the range of (<b>b</b>–<b>d</b>). (<b>a</b>) shows the true color image of GCOM-C/SGLI. (<b>b</b>) shows the true color image, (<b>c</b>) shows <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>, and (<b>d</b>) shows <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>. (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) are not screened with the QA flag and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) are screened with the QA flag.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>The spatial distribution of (<b>a</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="italic">VN</mi> <msub> <mn>05</mn> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, (<b>b</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="italic">VN</mi> <msub> <mn>06</mn> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and (<b>c</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="italic">VN</mi> <msub> <mn>08</mn> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> on 8 August 2018 (DOY <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>220</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>) around TSE. The range of each map is the same as that of <a href="#remotesensing-14-05352-f016" class="html-fig">Figure 16</a>b–d. All maps are screened with the QA flag. The cyan circles in each figure indicate the location of TSE.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Scatter plots of spatial mean of <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">PRI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) and <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi mathvariant="italic">CCI</mi> <mi>satellite</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>) calculated from four neighbor pixels. Satellite data were screened with the QA flag (QA <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>=</mo> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>). The error bar represents standard deviation for each point. The dotted line represents the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> <mo>:</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> line. The black solid line is the linear regression line. The shape of each point represents the year. The color of each point corresponds to the DOY.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>The downward fisheye images taken by ADFC in 2018 at (<b>a</b>) TSE, (<b>b</b>) TKY, (<b>c</b>) FJY, and (<b>d</b>) FHK. The numbers under the images are DOY when the images were taken. The images approximately display the approximately same observation area as downward MS-700 for each site.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>The scatter plots of simulated band value and satellite band value used for calculation of PRI and CCI. The shape of each point represents the year. The color of each point corresponds to the DOY. Note that the range of the x-axis and y-axis is limited from 0 to 0.1, so a few points out of the range are not displayed.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 7631 KiB  
Article
Analysis of Floating Macroalgae Distribution around Japan Using Global Change Observation Mission-Climate/Second-Generation Global Imager Data
by Naokazu Taniguchi, Yuji Sakuno, Haoran Sun, Shilin Song, Hiromori Shimabukuro and Masakazu Hori
Water 2022, 14(20), 3236; https://doi.org/10.3390/w14203236 - 14 Oct 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2744
Abstract
Floating macroalgae information is required to manage coastal environments and fishery resources effectively. In situ observations and analyses can result in under-sampling, thereby challenging the comprehension of the floating macroalgae abundance and spatiotemporal alterations. This study reports the spatiotemporal variation of floating macroalgae [...] Read more.
Floating macroalgae information is required to manage coastal environments and fishery resources effectively. In situ observations and analyses can result in under-sampling, thereby challenging the comprehension of the floating macroalgae abundance and spatiotemporal alterations. This study reports the spatiotemporal variation of floating macroalgae distribution around Japan from 2018 to 2021 using Global Change Observation Mission-Climate/second-generation Global Imager data. We employed the floating algae index (FAI) scaled from local ocean FAI to minimize the effect of spatial variation in ocean color. Fractional macroalgae coverage in a pixel was determined using a linear unmixing algorithm with lower and upper thresholds. The lower threshold was determined using the cumulative frequency of the scaled FAI, and the upper threshold was modified based on the more precise Sentinel-2 data. The results revealed that monthly macroalgae coverage varies spatially and seasonally, peaking in the spring and summer in the southwestern area. The macroalgae distribution particularly expanded from the East China Sea to west Japan during spring. In 2018–2021, the total biomass of the offshore floating macroalgae was estimated to be 8880–133,790, 8460–141,900, 3910–70,380, and 4620–61,870 tons. The findings of this study validated the empirical knowledge about specific locations and can serve as a reference to analyze temporal and spatial variations in future studies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Oceans and Coastal Zones)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) An RGB image (top of atmosphere radiance) acquired by GCOM-C/SGLI (Global Change Observation Mission-Climate/Second-Generation Global Imager) on 2 July 2019. The location is off the coast of Qingdao, China (shown as a red square on the map). (<b>b</b>) Floating algae index (FAI) calculated from GCOM-C/SGLI data collected on the same day and location as in (<b>a</b>). The red-colored area corresponds to the macroalgae patches.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>An area covered by GCOM-C/SGLI FAI around Japan(123<math display="inline"><semantics> <msup> <mrow/> <mo>∘</mo> </msup> </semantics></math> E–150<math display="inline"><semantics> <msup> <mrow/> <mo>∘</mo> </msup> </semantics></math> E and 23<math display="inline"><semantics> <msup> <mrow/> <mo>∘</mo> </msup> </semantics></math> N–50<math display="inline"><semantics> <msup> <mrow/> <mo>∘</mo> </msup> </semantics></math> N). The 200 m deep isobath is also depicted. The gray line divides the area into subareas, where the macroalgae area is summarized. The subarea is determined based on the subarea divisions by Fisheries Agency, Japan, to establish fishing zones.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>): An example of (<b>a</b>) FAI and (<b>b</b>) scaled FAI (sFAI) distribution. Subtracting the adjacent ocean’s FAI from the focal FAI yields sFAI, a scaled-down version of FAI. The main text contains a detailed definition and derivation of sFAI. The data collection took place on 7 May 2019. (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>): Normalized frequency of the (<b>c</b>) FAI and (<b>d</b>) sFAI distributions in the upper panels.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Examples of sFAI images captured on 7 May 2020, in the East China sea by (<b>a</b>) Sentinel-2/MSI and (<b>d</b>) GCOM-C/SGLI. The origin of the axis was located at <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>125</mn> <mo>.</mo> <msup> <mn>2491</mn> <mo>∘</mo> </msup> </mrow> </semantics></math> E in longitude and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>30</mn> <mo>.</mo> <msup> <mn>4338</mn> <mo>∘</mo> </msup> </mrow> </semantics></math> N in latitude. Panels (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>) display the macroalgae area (in m<math display="inline"><semantics> <msup> <mrow/> <mn>2</mn> </msup> </semantics></math>) in each pixel generated from the sFAI map of panel (<b>a</b>). Macroalgae area was computed using Equation (<a href="#FD6-water-14-03236" class="html-disp-formula">6</a>), which required upper and lower sFAI thresholds (sFAI<math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mrow/> <mi>max</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> and sFAI<math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mrow/> <mi>min</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>). In panels (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>), the identical sFAI<math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mrow/> <mi>max</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> (0.22), but different sFAI<math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mrow/> <mi>min</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> values were used; in (<b>b</b>), sFAI<math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mrow/> <mi>min</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> was the sFAI value at <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>99.7</mn> <mo>%</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the cumulative histogram of sFAI, while in (<b>c</b>), sFAI<math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mrow/> <mi>min</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> was at <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>99.9</mn> <mo>%</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the cumulative histogram of sFAI. (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) were identical to (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>), except for GCOM-C/SGLI sFAI with the same sFAI<math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mrow/> <mi>max</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> value of 0.0408.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Monthly variations in the floating macroalgae area around Japan from 2018 to 2021. The floating macroalgae in all the subareas in <a href="#water-14-03236-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a> were considered. However, macroalgae within four pixels from land (and thus invalid) pixels were excluded.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Monthly averaged fractional coverage of floating macroalgae (%; on <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> <mo>.</mo> <msup> <mn>5</mn> <mo>∘</mo> </msup> <mo>×</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo>.</mo> <msup> <mn>5</mn> <mo>∘</mo> </msup> </mrow> </semantics></math> grids) from GCOM-C/SGLI FAI Japan area product. The color was specified on 1024 levels, and the fractional coverage below <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> <mo>×</mo> <msup> <mn>10</mn> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>4</mn> </mrow> </msup> <mo>%</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (i.e., <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>0.1</mn> <mo>/</mo> <mn>1024</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>) remained white.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Monthly estimates of the floating macroalgae biomass detected outside continental shelves (deeper than 200 m) in each subarea shown in <a href="#water-14-03236-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a>. The colors and line style are identical to those in <a href="#water-14-03236-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a>.</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 7441 KiB  
Technical Note
A Simple Procedure to Preprocess and Ingest Level-2 Ocean Color Data into Google Earth Engine
by Elígio de Raús Maúre, Simon Ilyushchenko and Genki Terauchi
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(19), 4906; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14194906 - 30 Sep 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2496
Abstract
Data from ocean color (OC) remote sensing are considered a cost-effective tool for the study of biogeochemical processes globally. Satellite-derived chlorophyll, for instance, is considered an essential climate variable since it is helpful in detecting climate change impacts. Google Earth Engine (GEE) is [...] Read more.
Data from ocean color (OC) remote sensing are considered a cost-effective tool for the study of biogeochemical processes globally. Satellite-derived chlorophyll, for instance, is considered an essential climate variable since it is helpful in detecting climate change impacts. Google Earth Engine (GEE) is a planetary scale tool for remote sensing data analysis. Along with OC data, such tools allow an unprecedented spatial and temporal scale analysis of water quality monitoring in a way that has never been done before. Although OC data have been routinely collected at medium (~1 km) and more recently at higher (~250 m) spatial resolution, only coarse resolution (≥4 km) data are available in GEE, making them unattractive for applications in the coastal regions. Data reprojection is needed prior to making OC data readily available in the GEE. In this paper, we introduce a simple but practical procedure to reproject and ingest OC data into GEE at their native resolution. The procedure is applicable to OC swath (Level-2) data and is easily adaptable to higher-level products. The results showed consistent distributions between swath and reprojected data, building confidence in the introduced framework. The study aims to start a discussion on making OC data at native resolution readily available in GEE. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Ocean Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Schematic of the data reprojection and ingestion into GEE. The numbers in the steps correspond to the sub-sections with detailed explanation given in the text.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Reprojection of swath data for the MODIS/Aqua file (<a href="#remotesensing-14-04906-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>). (<b>a</b>) Swath image with the nadir track shown as red dotted line. (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>) Swath subset data from the red polygon at the swath edge (<b>b</b>) and at the nadir view (<b>c</b>). (<b>d</b>,<b>e</b>) Reprojected data with cutoff distance (radius of influence) equal to the spatial resolution (R) for swath edge (<b>d</b>) and nadir view (<b>e</b>). (<b>f</b>,<b>g</b>) Same as (<b>d</b>,<b>e</b>) but for the cutoff distance equal to 2R. The red dots at the start and end of the dotted line indicate the swath start and end center positions, respectively. The reprojection was done using the NN method. The impact of using R (<b>d</b>) versus 2R (<b>f</b>) was evident at the swath edge. A similar example is also given for SGLI/GCOM-C in <a href="#remotesensing-14-04906-f0A6" class="html-fig">Figure A6</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Density histogram of swath versus remapped image: (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) chlorophyll data and (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) the frequency distributions of associated quality flag information. (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) Diagrams were obtained from MODIS/Aqua data (<a href="#remotesensing-14-04906-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a>) and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) from SGLI/GCOM-C data (<a href="#remotesensing-14-04906-f0A6" class="html-fig">Figure A6</a>). These diagrams were created from the red polygons highlighted at the swath edge in the respective figures. The overlaid curves are the probability distribution functions (PDF) for the same samples. The inset compares the two PDFs (swath versus remapped). Note the increase in pixel number in the range of 2 to 10 mg m<sup>–3</sup> associated with the high chlorophyll at the swath edge in (<b>a</b>). Description of MODIS/Aqua flags can be obtained from <a href="https://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/atbd/ocl2flags/" target="_blank">https://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/atbd/ocl2flags/</a>, accessed on 29 July 2022. For more on SGLI/GCOM-C quality flags, see <a href="https://suzaku.eorc.jaxa.jp/GCOM_C/data/files/ATBD_ocean_ac_murakami_v2_en.pdf" target="_blank">https://suzaku.eorc.jaxa.jp/GCOM_C/data/files/ATBD_ocean_ac_murakami_v2_en.pdf</a>, accessed on 23 July 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Chlorophyll-a difference between PY (Python-based) and DCT (JAXA’s Earth Observation Data Conversion Tool based) remapped data. Note the logarithmic scale on the <span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Illustrations of pixel resolution of swath (red) and of map-projected grid (gray) for MODIS/Aqua (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) and SGLI/GCOM-C (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>). (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) Shows the pixel frame at the swath edge where the resolution degrades significantly. (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) Same as (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) but for the sub-satellite location with the resolution equal to the nominal value. The dots represent the pixel center for the swath (red) and map-projected (gray) grid. Note how far the pixels at the target grid projection are located from the swath center.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Python code snippet for projection initialization. The Lambert azimuthal equal-area projection (LAEA) is initialized with the center located at the swath scan line center longitude/latitude median point. The initialized projection was then used to translate the swath bounds in degrees into the target projection distances in meters. WGS84 stands for World Geodetic System (WGS) 1984, consisting of a reference ellipsoid, a standard coordinate system, altitude data, and a geoid.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>Python code snippet of transform_bounds used to convert the swath bounds to projected bounds while taking into account the nonlinearity of the transformations (<a href="https://pyproj4.github.io/pyproj/stable/api/transformer.html" target="_blank">https://pyproj4.github.io/pyproj/stable/api/transformer.html</a>, accessed on 14 July 2022). EPSG:4326 is the Spatial Reference ID for the WGS84, latitude/longitude coordinate system based on the Earth’s center of mass.</p>
Full article ">Figure A4
<p>Python code snippet of Pyresample area definition for the target projection. The area definition is used in step 1 of swath reprojection.</p>
Full article ">Figure A5
<p>Example of coordinate system and image structure output by “<span class="html-italic">gdalinfo</span>” for the MODIS/Aqua target map projection. Note that the corner coordinates are reported in metric distances along with corresponding latitude and longitude values.</p>
Full article ">Figure A6
<p>Same as in <a href="#remotesensing-14-04906-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a> but for SGLI/GCOM-C. Sample data used is indicated in <a href="#remotesensing-14-04906-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>. At the center box, a patch of isolated high chlorophyll can be seen swirling clockwise. The area is known to be an eddy rich with significant impacts on phytoplankton bloom timing [<a href="#B35-remotesensing-14-04906" class="html-bibr">35</a>,<a href="#B36-remotesensing-14-04906" class="html-bibr">36</a>].</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 3643 KiB  
Technical Note
Improving Remote Estimation of Vegetation Phenology Using GCOM-C/SGLI Land Surface Reflectance Data
by Mengyu Li, Wei Yang and Akihiko Kondoh
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(16), 4027; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14164027 - 18 Aug 2022
Viewed by 2078
Abstract
Vegetation phenology not only describes the life cycle events of periodic plants during the growing season but also acts as an indicator of biological responses to climate change. Satellite monitoring of vegetation phenology can capture the spatial patterns of vegetation dynamics at global [...] Read more.
Vegetation phenology not only describes the life cycle events of periodic plants during the growing season but also acts as an indicator of biological responses to climate change. Satellite monitoring of vegetation phenology can capture the spatial patterns of vegetation dynamics at global scales. However, the existing satellite products of global vegetation phenology still show uncertainties in estimating phenological metrices, especially for dormancy onset. The Second-Generation Global Imager (SGLI) onboard the satellite Global Change Observation Mission—Climate (GCOM-C) that launched in 2017 provides a new opportunity to improve the estimation of global vegetation phenology with a spatial resolution of 250 m. In this study, SGLI land surface reflectance data were employed to estimate the green-up and dormancy dates for different vegetation types based on a relative threshold method, in which a snow-free vegetation index (i.e., the normalized difference greenness index, NDGI) was adopted. The validation results show that there are significant agreements between the trajectories of the SGLI-based NDGI and the near-surface green color coordinate index (GCC) at the PhenoCam sites with different vegetation types. The SGLI-based estimation of the green-up dates slightly outperformed that of the existing MODIS and VIIRS phenology products, with an RMSE and R2 of 11.0 days and 0.71, respectively. In contrast, the estimation of the dormancy dates based on the SGLI data yielded much higher accuracies than the MODIS and VIIRS products, with an RMSE decreased from >23.8 days to 15.6 days, and R2 increased from <0.51 to 0.72. These results suggest that GCOM-C/SGLI data have the potential to generate improved monitoring of global vegetation phenology in the future. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Detecting and Understanding Land Surface Phenology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Spatial distribution of near-surface phenology observation sites from PhenoCam Network.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The time series of the NDGI (red), EVI2 (gray), and GCC (green) at five locations with different vegetation types. Dots are raw observations from the SGLI. Green dots indicate the GCC obtained from near-surface observation data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison of green-up and dormancy dates from SGLI and PCN observation by land cover types (DF: deciduous forest; GR: grassland, SH: shrub; TN: tundra; WL: wetland). (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) are comparisons at the 81 sites used to confirm the thresholds; (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) are comparisons at the 34 sites used to test the thresholds.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison of green-up and dormancy dates from satellite (SGLI (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>), VIIRS (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>), and MODIS (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>)) and PCN observations by land cover types (DF: deciduous forest; GR: grassland, SH: shrub; TN: tundra; WL: wetland).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Spatial distribution of green-up dates retrieved from SGLI (<b>a</b>) and VIIRS (<b>b</b>) and relative differences (<b>c</b>) in the northern hemisphere in 2018. Positive (negative) differences mean SGLI dates are later (earlier) than VIIRS dates.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Spatial distribution of dormancy dates retrieved from SGLI (<b>a</b>) and VIIRS (<b>b</b>) and relative difference (<b>c</b>) in the northern hemisphere in 2018. Positive (negative) differences mean SGLI dates are later (earlier) than VIIRS dates.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparison of greenness trajectories from SGLI in different vegetation indices, including NDGI (<b>a</b>), NDVI (<b>b</b>), and EVI2 (<b>c</b>) with near-surface GCC.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Bias and coefficient of determination between green-up dates derived from SGLI and near-surface observation. Results are separated according to vegetation type (DF: deciduous forest; GR: grassland, SH: shrub). Progressively darker shades of blue designate green-up dates corresponding to different thresholds (10% to 50% of a threshold by 5% step).</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 7560 KiB  
Article
Characterization of Wildfire Smoke over Complex Terrain Using Satellite Observations, Ground-Based Observations, and Meteorological Models
by Makiko Nakata, Itaru Sano, Sonoyo Mukai and Alexander Kokhanovsky
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(10), 2344; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14102344 - 12 May 2022
Cited by 12 | Viewed by 2399
Abstract
The severity of wildfires is increasing globally. In this study, we used data from the Global Change Observation Mission-Climate/Second-generation Global Imager (GCOM-C/SGLI) to characterize the biomass burning aerosols that are generated by large-scale wildfires. We used data from the September 2020 wildfires in [...] Read more.
The severity of wildfires is increasing globally. In this study, we used data from the Global Change Observation Mission-Climate/Second-generation Global Imager (GCOM-C/SGLI) to characterize the biomass burning aerosols that are generated by large-scale wildfires. We used data from the September 2020 wildfires in western North America. The target area had a complex topography, comprising a basin among high mountains along a coastal region. The SGLI was essential for dealing with the complex topographical changes in terrain that we encountered, as it contains 19 polarization channels ranging from near ultraviolet (380 nm and 412 nm) to thermal infrared (red at 674 nm and near-infrared at 869 nm) and has a fine spatial resolution (1 km). The SGLI also proved to be efficient in the radiative transfer simulations of severe wildfires through the mutual use of polarization and radiance. We used a regional numerical model SCALE (Scalable Computing for Advanced Library and Environment) to account for variations in meteorological conditions and/or topography. Ground-based aerosol measurements in the target area were sourced from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Aerosol Robotic Network; currently, official satellite products typically do not provide the aerosol properties for very optically thick cases of wildfires. This paper used satellite observations, ground-based observations, and a meteorological model to define an algorithm for retrieving the aerosol properties caused by severe wildfire events. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Remote Sensing of Terrestrial Atmosphere)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Process chart of radiation simulation for aerosol retrieval in the case of sever wildfires using GCOM-C/SGLI data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Color composite satellite images and hot spots (denoted by red dots) during the severe wildfires of western North America, 11–13 September 2020 (from Terra Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (TERRA/MODIS/MOD14)) [<a href="#B35-remotesensing-14-02344" class="html-bibr">35</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Meteorological data from the National Center for Environmental Prediction-Final Model (NCEP FNL) at 12:00 UTC on 11–13 September 2020 [<a href="#B39-remotesensing-14-02344" class="html-bibr">39</a>]. (<b>a</b>) Wind speed at 850 hPa (m/s), (<b>b</b>) temperature at 1000 hPa (°C), (<b>c</b>) relative humidity at 1000 hPa (%). The black box indicates Area-S. Chart resolution (1° × 1°).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>NASA/AERONET stations on the topographic map of the United States Pacific Northwest. Image is derived from the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) global digital elevation model (V003). Each AERONET station is denoted by a red box. The area of study where data were collected is identified in a white dotted box (Area-S).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Second-Generation Global Imager (SGLI) color composite satellite images showing hot spots on 12–13 September 2020 (data derived from Terra Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (TERRA/MODIS/MOD14)). Three levels of wildfire radiative power (Fire Rad Pwr) are illustrated and measured in megawatts (MW). The red squares denote the positions of the three AERONET sites in the focused study area of Area-S (see <a href="#remotesensing-14-02344-f004" class="html-fig">Figure 4</a>). The gray-colored wedge indicates imaging data that were outside the satellite observation area (<a href="#remotesensing-14-02344-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a>a). R:G:B = 443:412:380.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Daily averages for NASA/AERONET products within Area-S for September 2020. Area-S is comprised of three AERONET data collection sites: (<b>a</b>) Fresno_2; (<b>b</b>) NEON_SJER; and (<b>c</b>) NEON_TEAK. The charted gray vertical bands indicate a hazy atmosphere (H), and the blue vertical bands indicate a clear atmosphere (C). Aerosol optical thickness (AOT) is plotted on the upper graph; the dashed line denotes the highest average values (AOT = 3.0). Ångström Exponent (AE) values are plotted on the second graph; the dashed line denotes the smallest aerosol particles (AE = 1.2).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Absorbing aerosol index (AAI) distribution from satellite data on 12–13 September 2020. Red squares denote the position of NASA/AERONET sites. The gray color swath indicates a data range that was outside of the satellite observation area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparison of aerosol properties derived from two different data collection methods—ground-based observations (AERONET) and satellite observations (SGLI). (<b>a</b>) Properties of aerosol optical thickness (AOT). (<b>b</b>) Properties defined by the Ångström exponent (AE). Satellite observation data are plotted on the vertical axis. Ground-based observation data are plotted on the horizontal axis. The three AERONET observation sites are plotted as NEON_SJER, Fresno_2, and NEON_Teak. Time variations are represented by the standard deviation of both measurements, indicated by error bars. The dates are plotted as 12th (12 September 2020) and 13th (13 September 2020). All measurements were taken over Area-S (<a href="#remotesensing-14-02344-f004" class="html-fig">Figure 4</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Near-ground wind behavior in Area-S, simulated using a regional SCALE model (resolution of 5 km × 5 km). Images are given for each 6-hour period between 13:00 (UTC) on 12 September and 19:00 (UTC) on 13 September 2020 (<b>a</b>–<b>f</b>). The black dots denote the three AERONET observation sites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Near-ground wind behavior in Area-S with topographical effects removed, simulated using a regional SCALE model (resolution of 5 km × 5 km). Images are given for each 6-hour period between 13:00 (UTC) on 12 September and 19:00 (UTC) on 13 September 2020 (<b>a</b>–<b>f</b>). The black dots denote the three AERONET observation sites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Wind behavior at an altitude of 850 hPa with the correct topographical effects in Area-S, simulated using a regional SCALE model (resolution of 5 km × 5 km). Images are given for each 2-hour period between 13:00 and 19:00 (UTC) on 13 September 2020 (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>). The black dots denote the three AERONET observation sites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>(<b>a</b>) Wind behavior at an altitude of 850 hPa during the satellite passing time over Area-S, simulated using a regional SCALE model at 19:00 (UTC) on 13 September 2020 (resolution of 5 km × 5 km). Hot-spot data were derived from Terra/MODIS/MOD14. The orange hot spots represent continuing wildfires. The red hot spots represent new wildfires. The black dots denote the three AERONET observation sites. (<b>b</b>) Analysis of the airflow back trajectory of pollutants using an NOAA Hybrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT) model at 19:00 (UTC) on 13 September 2020. Airflows at heights of 100 m (green line), 400 m (blue line), and 2000 m (red line) correspond to the altitudes of the three AERONET sites in Area-S.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Block flow diagram of the process used to develop severe biomass burning aerosol (SBBA) retrieval algorithms from satellite observation data at wavelength <span class="html-italic">λ</span>. Optimal aerosol properties obtained in each process are indicated by superscript (*).</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 6702 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of Remote-Sensing Reflectance Products from Multiple Ocean Color Missions in Highly Turbid Water (Hangzhou Bay)
by Yuzhuang Xu, Xianqiang He, Yan Bai, Difeng Wang, Qiankun Zhu and Xiaosong Ding
Remote Sens. 2021, 13(21), 4267; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13214267 - 23 Oct 2021
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 2764
Abstract
Validation of remote-sensing reflectance (Rrs) products is necessary for the quantitative application of ocean color satellite data. While validation of Rrs products has been performed in low to moderate turbidity waters, their performance in highly turbid water remains poorly known. Here, we used [...] Read more.
Validation of remote-sensing reflectance (Rrs) products is necessary for the quantitative application of ocean color satellite data. While validation of Rrs products has been performed in low to moderate turbidity waters, their performance in highly turbid water remains poorly known. Here, we used in situ Rrs data from Hangzhou Bay (HZB), one of the world’s most turbid estuaries, to evaluate agency-distributed Rrs products for multiple ocean color sensors, including the Geostationary Ocean Color Imager (GOCI), Chinese Ocean Color and Temperature Scanner aboard HaiYang-1C (COCTS/HY1C), Ocean and Land Color Instrument aboard Sentinel-3A and Sentinel-3B, respectively (OLCI/S3A and OLCI/S3B), Second-Generation Global Imager aboard Global Change Observation Mission-Climate (SGLI/GCOM-C), and Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite aboard the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership satellite (VIIRS/SNPP). Results showed that GOCI and SGLI/GCOM-C had almost no effective Rrs products in the HZB. Among the others four sensors (COCTS/HY1C, OLCI/S3A, OLCI/S3B, and VIIRS/SNPP), VIIRS/SNPP obtained the largest correlation coefficient (R) with a value of 0.7, while OLCI/S3A obtained the best mean percentage differences (PD) with a value of −13.30%. The average absolute percentage difference (APD) values of the four remote sensors are close, all around 45%. In situ Rrs data from the AERONET-OC ARIAKE site were also used to evaluate the satellite-derived Rrs products in moderately turbid coastal water for comparison. Compared with the validation results at HZB, the performances of Rrs from GOCI, OLCI/S3A, OLCI/S3B, and VIIRS/SNPP were much better at the ARIAKE site with the smallest R (0.77) and largest APD (35.38%) for GOCI, and the worst PD for these four sensors was only −13.15%, indicating that the satellite-retrieved Rrs exhibited better performance. In contrast, Rrs from COCTS/HY1C and SGLI/GCOM-C at ARIAKE site was still significantly underestimated, and the R values of the two satellites were not greater than 0.7, and the APD values were greater than 50%. Therefore, the performance of satellite Rrs products degrades significantly in highly turbid waters and needs to be improved for further retrieval of ocean color components. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Atmospheric Correction for Remotely Sensed Ocean Color Data)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>The location of HTYZ and ARIAKE TOWER sites and the tower based spectral observation system at HTYZ site.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spectra of Rrs(λ) for in situ, GOCI, COCTS/HY1C, OLCI/S3A, OLCI/S3B, SGLI/GCOM-C, and VIIRS/SNPP. Gray lines represent individual spectra; N is effective spectral number. Thick black solid lines indicate mean (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">μ</mi> </semantics></math>) and thin dashed lines indicate ±1 standard deviation (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">σ</mi> </semantics></math> ) of all effective spectra.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison of Rrs spectrum of satellite-derived and in situ (at HTYZ) data. Green represents in situ results; blue represents satellite-derived results. In addition, thick solid/dashed lines indicate mean (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">μ</mi> </semantics></math>) and thin solid/dashed lines indicate ±1 standard deviation (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">σ</mi> </semantics></math> ) of all effective spectra. (<b>a</b>) GOCI; (<b>b</b>) COCTS/HY1C; (<b>c</b>) OLCI/S3A; (<b>d</b>) OLCI/S3B; (<b>e</b>) SGLI/GCOM-C; (<b>f</b>) VIIRS/SNPP.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Time-series of Rrs values (with unit of sr<sup>–1</sup>) retrieved from in situ data (gray ‘x’ marker) and multi-source sensors (GOCI, COCTS/HY1C, OLCI/S3A, OLCI/S3B, SGLI/GCOM-C, and VIIRS/SNPP are rows 1 to 6, respectively, all marked in blue) at bands close to 412, 560, and 670 nm for HTYZ.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparisons of satellite-derived and in situ Rrs at HTYZ site for each sensor. N is total scatter points of all bands and all matched spectra.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparison of changes in APD values from COCTS/HY1C (blue star lines), OLCI/S3A (brown triangle lines), OLCI/S3B (pink square lines), and VIIRS/SNPP (green plus lines) at 412 nm (1st row left), 443 nm (1st row right), 490 nm (2nd row left), and 670 nm (2nd row right) with in situ red band Rrs for HTYZ site.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparisons of satellite-derived and in situ Rrs at HTYZ site when the in situ Rrs (670 nm) less than 0.055 <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msup> <mrow> <mi>sr</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msup> </mrow> </semantics></math>. N is total scatter points of 4 bands of all matched spectra.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparisons of satellite-derived and in situ Rrs at HTYZ site when the in situ Rrs (670 nm) is greater than 0.055 <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msup> <mrow> <mi>sr</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msup> </mrow> </semantics></math>. N is total scatter points of 4 bands of all matched spectra.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Comparison of values and trends of ARIAKE in situ and remote-sensing data. N is effective spectral number; green represents ARIAKE; blue represents remote sensors; thick solid/dashed lines indicate mean (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">μ</mi> </semantics></math>); thin solid/dashed lines indicate ±1 standard deviation (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">σ</mi> </semantics></math>) of all effective spectra.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Comparisons among satellite-derived and in situ Rrs values at ARIAKE site for each sensor. N is total scatter points of all bands and all matched spectra.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Comparisons among similar satellite-derived bands and in situ Rrs values at ARIAKE site. N is total scatter points of all bands of all matched spectra.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 8309 KiB  
Article
Enhanced Simulation of an Asian Dust Storm by Assimilating GCOM-C Observations
by Yueming Cheng, Tie Dai, Daisuke Goto, Hiroshi Murakami, Mayumi Yoshida, Guangyu Shi and Teruyuki Nakajima
Remote Sens. 2021, 13(15), 3020; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13153020 - 1 Aug 2021
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2836
Abstract
Dust aerosols have great effects on global and regional climate systems. The Global Change Observation Mission-Climate (GCOM-C), also known as SHIKISAI, which was launched on 23 December 2017 by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), is a next-generation Earth observation satellite that is [...] Read more.
Dust aerosols have great effects on global and regional climate systems. The Global Change Observation Mission-Climate (GCOM-C), also known as SHIKISAI, which was launched on 23 December 2017 by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), is a next-generation Earth observation satellite that is used for climate studies. The Second-Generation Global Imager (SGLI) aboard GCOM-C enables the retrieval of more precious global aerosols. Here, the first assimilation study of the aerosol optical thicknesses (AOTs) at 500 nm observed by this new satellite is performed to investigate a severe dust storm in spring over East Asia during 28–31 March 2018. The aerosol observation assimilation system is an integration of the four-dimensional local ensemble transform Kalman filter (4D-LETKF) and the Spectral Radiation Transport Model for Aerosol Species (SPRINTARS) coupled with the Non-Hydrostatic Icosahedral Atmospheric Model (NICAM). Through verification with the independent observations from the Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) and the Asian Dust and Aerosol Lidar Observation Network (AD-Net), the results demonstrate that the assimilation of the GCOM-C aerosol observations can significantly enhance Asian dust storm simulations. The dust characteristics over the regions without GCOM-C observations are better revealed from assimilating the adjacent observations within the localization length, suggesting the importance of the technical advances in observation and assimilation, which are helpful in clarifying the temporal–spatial structure of Asian dust and which could also improve the forecasting of dust storms, climate prediction models, and aerosol reanalysis. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Number of hourly GCOM-C AOTs at 500 nm from 28 to 31 March 2018 for aerosol data assimilation over East Asia. Brown squares and pink triangles represent the locations of observation sites from the Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) and Asian Dust and Aerosol Lidar Observation Network (AD-Net), respectively, for independent validation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatial distributions of total AOTs and dust AOTs averaged from 28 to 31 March 2018 over East Asia for (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) FR and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) DA experiments. (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) Differences in AOTs between the two experiments. Rectangle in green shown in lower-right panel represents the key areas of focus here.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Spatial distributions of the biases and root mean square errors (RMSEs) between simulated and Global Change Observation Mission-Climate (GCOM-C)-observed AOTs at 500 nm from 28 to 31 March 2018 for (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) FR and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) DA experiments. Scatter plots between GCOM-C-observed and simulated AOTs for (<b>e</b>) FR and (<b>f</b>) DA experiments. Solid line is the 1:1 line, dashed lines correspond to the 1:2 and 2:1 lines. (<b>g</b>) Frequency distributions of AOTs observed by GCOM-C and simulated in FR and DA experiments. (<b>h</b>) Frequency distributions of AOTs biases and percentages of biases within ±0.1, ±0.5, &lt;−1.0, and &gt;1.0.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Spatial distributions of the daily mean dust AOTs from 28 to 31 March 2018 for FR and DA experiments with differences in daily mean dust AOTs between the two experiments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Spatial distributions of the total AOTs from 28 to 31 March 2018 for FR and DA experiments with differences in total AOTs between the two experiments. The daily mean AOTs in “dusty” stations from AERONET are also shown in circles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Time series of simulated AOTs at 440 nm for two experiments (FR in blue and DA in red) and AERONET-observed AOTs (dots in black) at 440 nm over four sites. Biases and root mean square errors (RMSEs) between AOTs simulated by the two experiments and AERONET-observed AOTs are shown.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparisons of total observed aerosol extinction coefficients from AD-Net and simulated coefficients for FR and DA experiments from 28 to 31 March 2018 at three selected sites (ULN: Ulaanbaatar; FKE: Fukue; OSK: Osaka).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparisons of observed dust aerosol extinction coefficients from AD-Net and simulated ones for FR and DA experiments from 28 to 31 March 2018 at three selected sites (ULN: Ulaanbaatar; FKE: Fukue; OSK: Osaka).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Time series of simulated AOTs at 440 nm for two experiments (FR in blue and DA in red) and AERONET-observed AOTs (dots in black) at 440 nm over two sites. Root mean square errors (RMSEs) and correlations (CORRs) between AOTs simulated by the two experiments and the AERONET-observed AOTs are also shown.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Profiles of simulated aerosol extinction coefficients at 550 nm (km<sup>−1</sup>) in (<b>a</b>) FR and (<b>c</b>) DA experiments and CALIOP-observed ones at (<b>e</b>) 532 nm over the CALIPSO orbit path (indicated by red curve) at 20:44:02 (UTC) on 1 April 2018. Spatial distributions of (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) simulated total AOTs and (<b>f</b>,<b>h</b>) dust AOTs for the two experiments. (<b>g</b>) CALIPSO-detected vertical aerosol sub-types.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Profiles of simulated aerosol extinction coefficients at 550 nm (km<sup>−1</sup>) in (<b>a</b>) FR and (<b>c</b>) DA experiments and CALIOP-observed ones at (<b>e</b>) 532 nm over the CALIPSO orbit path (indicated by red curve) at 04:06:03 (UTC) on 2 April 2018. Spatial distributions of (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) simulated total AOTs and (<b>f</b>,<b>h</b>) dust AOTs for the two experiments. (<b>g</b>) CALIPSO-detected vertical aerosol sub-types.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 5898 KiB  
Article
Trial of Chemical Composition Estimation Related to Submarine Volcano Activity Using Discolored Seawater Color Data Obtained from GCOM-C SGLI. A Case Study of Nishinoshima Island, Japan, in 2020
by Yuji Sakuno
Water 2021, 13(8), 1100; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13081100 - 16 Apr 2021
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 5552
Abstract
This study aims to develop the relational equation between the color and chemical composition of discolored seawater around a submarine volcano, and to examine its relation to the volcanic activity at Nishinoshima Island, Japan, in 2020, using the model applied by atmospheric corrected [...] Read more.
This study aims to develop the relational equation between the color and chemical composition of discolored seawater around a submarine volcano, and to examine its relation to the volcanic activity at Nishinoshima Island, Japan, in 2020, using the model applied by atmospheric corrected reflectance 8 day composite of GCOM-C SGLI. To achieve these objectives, the relational equation between the RGB value of the discolored seawater in the submarine volcano and the chemical composition summarized in past studies was derived using the XYZ colorimetric system. Additionally, the relationship between the volcanic activity of the island in 2020 and the chemical composition was compared in chronological order using the GCOM-C SGLI data. The following findings were obtained. First, a significant correlation was observed between the seawater color (x) calculated by the XYZ colorimetric system and the chemical composition such as (Fe + Al)/Si. Second, the distribution of (Fe + Al)/Si in the island, estimated from GCOM-C SGLI data, fluctuated significantly just before the volcanic activity became active (approximately one month prior). These results suggest that the chemical composition estimation of discolored seawater using SGLI data may be a powerful tool in predicting submarine volcanic activity. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of Nishinoshima Island (<b>left</b>) and Landsat-8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) image of the island taken on 5 September 2020 (<b>right</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>An example of the atmospheric corrected reflectance 8 day composite data of SGLI around Nishinoshima Island, Japan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) Samples of GCOM-C atmospheric corrected spectral reflectance data, 12–20 August 2020, and (<b>b</b>) and weighting function of the CIE 1931.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Examples of the relationship between the parameters of discolored seawater color parameters (R, x, and y) and its chemical composition (Fe, (Fe + Al)/Si, and Si). (<b>a</b>) R vs. Fe%, (<b>b</b>) x vs. (Fe+al)/Si, (<b>c</b>) y vs. Si%, (<b>d</b>) y vs. (Fe+Al)/Si, (<b>e</b>) y vs. Si%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Time series of the maximum temperature (Tmax) and the average temperature (Tave) obtained from the 3.9 μm band of the Himawari-8 data around Nishinoshima Island in 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Colorimetric data of discolored seawater at the four directions (north, east, south, and west) around Nishinoshima Island in 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Example of the (Fe + Al)/Si distribution as a volcanic activity index from May 16 to June 25 around Nishinoshima Island. (<b>a</b>) 16–23 May 2020, (<b>b</b>) 24–31 May 2020, (<b>c</b>) 1–8 June 2020, (<b>d</b>) 9–16 June 2020, (<b>e</b>) 17–24 June 2020, (<b>f</b>) 25 June–2 July 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparison of the time series between Tmax (as a volcanic activity from Himawari-8) and an area average (Fe + Al)/Si of the discolored seawater color around Nishinoshima Island (from GCOM-C) during 2020. (Both datasets involved an 8 day cycle).</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop