No abstract

No abstract

[1] Due to the influence of evaporation on land-surface temperature, thermal remote sensing data provide valuable information regarding the surface moisture status. The Atmosphere-Land Exchange Inverse (ALEXI) model uses the morning surface temperature rise, as measured from a geostationary satellite platform, to deduce surface energy and water fluxes at 5-10 km resolution over the continental United States. Recent improvements to the ALEXI model are described. Like most thermal remote sensing models, ALEXI is constrained to work under clear-sky conditions when the surface is visible to the satellite sensor, often leaving large gaps in the model output record. An algorithm for estimating fluxes during cloudy intervals is presented, defining a moisture stress function relating the fraction of potential evapotranspiration obtained from the model on clear days to estimates of the available water fraction in the soil surface layer and root zone. On cloudy days, this stress function is inverted to predict the soil and canopy fluxes. The method is evaluated using flux measurements representative at the watershed scale acquired in central Iowa with a dense flux tower network during the Soil Moisture Experiment of 2002 (SMEX02). The gap-filling algorithm reproduces observed fluxes with reasonable accuracy, yielding $20% errors in ET at the hourly timescale, and 15% errors at daily timesteps. In addition, modeled soil moisture shows reasonable response to major precipitation events. This algorithm is generic enough that it can easily be applied to other thermal energy balance models. With gap-filling, the ALEXI model can estimate hourly surface fluxes at every grid cell in the U.S. modeling domain in near real-time. A companion paper presents a climatological evaluation of ALEXI-derived evapotranspiration and moisture stress fields for the years 2002-2004.

A large number of water- and climate-related applications, such as drought monitoring, are based on spaceborne-derived relationships between land surface temperature (LST) and the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI). The majority of these applications rely on the existence of a negative slope between the two variables, as identified in site- and time-specific studies. The current paper investigates the generality of the LST–NDVI relationship over a wide range of moisture and climatic/radiation regimes encountered over the North American continent (up to 60°N) during the summer growing season (April–September). Information on LST and NDVI was obtained from long-term (21 years) datasets acquired with the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR). It was found that when water is the limiting factor for vegetation growth (the typical situation for low latitudes of the study area and during the midseason), the LST–NDVI correlation is negative. However, when energy is the limiting factor for vegetation growth (in higher latitudes and elevations, especially at the beginning of the growing season), a positive correlation exists between LST and NDVI. Multiple regression analysis revealed that during the beginning and the end of the growing season, solar radiation is the predominant factor driving the correlation between LST and NDVI, whereas other biophysical variables play a lesser role. Air temperature is the primary factor in midsummer. It is concluded that there is a need to use empirical LST–NDVI relationships with caution and to restrict their application to drought monitoring to areas and periods where negative correlations are observed, namely, to conditions when water—not energy—is the primary factor limiting vegetation growth.

The fate of the terrestrial biosphere is highly uncertain given recent and projected changes in climate. This is especially acute for impacts associated with changes in drought frequency and intensity on the distribution and timing of water availability. The development of effective adaptation strategies for these emerging threats to food and water security are compromised by limitations in our understanding of how natural and managed ecosystems are responding to changing hydrological and climatological regimes. This information gap is exacerbated by insufficient monitoring capabilities from local to global scales. Here, we describe how evapotranspiration (ET) represents the key variable in linking ecosystem functioning, carbon and climate feedbacks, agricultural management, and water resources, and highlight both the outstanding science and applications questions and the actions, especially from a space‐based perspective, necessary to advance them.

This review surveys current and emerging drought monitoring approaches using satellite remote sensing observations from climatological and ecosystem perspectives. We argue that satellite observations not currently used for operational drought monitoring, such as near-surface air relative humidity data from the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder mission, provide opportunities to improve early drought warning. Current and future satellite missions offer opportunities to develop composite and multi-indicator drought models. While there are immense opportunities, there are major challenges including data continuity, unquantified uncertainty, sensor changes, and community acceptability. One of the major limitations of many of the currently available satellite observations is their short length of record. A number of relevant satellite missions and sensors (e.g., the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) provide only a decade of data, which may not be sufficient to study droughts from a climate perspective. However, they still provide valuable information about relevant hydrologic and ecological processes linked to this natural hazard. Therefore, there is a need for models and algorithms that combine multiple data sets and/or assimilate satellite observations into model simulations to generate long-term climate data records. Finally, the study identifies a major gap in indicators for describing drought impacts on the carbon and nitrogen cycle, which are fundamental to assessing drought impacts on ecosystems.

No abstract

27Given the increasing use of the term "flash drought" by the media and scientific 28 community, it is prudent to develop a consistent definition that can be used to identify 29 these events and to understand their salient characteristics. It is generally accepted that 30 flash droughts occur more often during the summer due to increased evaporative demand; 31 however, two distinct approaches have been used to identify them. The first approach 32focuses on their rate of intensification, whereas the second approach implicitly focuses on 33 their duration. These conflicting notions for what constitutes a flash drought (i.e., 34 unusually fast intensification versus short duration) introduce ambiguity that affects our 35 ability to detect their onset, monitor their development, and understand the mechanisms 36 that control their evolution. Here, we propose that the definition for flash drought should 37 explicitly focus on its rate of intensification rather than its duration, with droughts that 38 develop much more rapidly than normal identified as flash droughts. There are two 39 primary reasons for favoring the intensification approach over the duration approach. 40