Analysis of MODIS–MISR calibration differences using surface albedo around AERONET sites and cloud reflectance

Lyapustin, A.; Wang, Y.; Kahn, Ralph A.; Xiong, Jack; Ignatov, Alexander; Wolfe, Robert E.; Wu, Aisheng; Holben, B. N.; Bruegge, Carol J.

doi:10.1016/j.rse.2006.09.028

Cited by 43 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We can see how the process of MODIS validation can help reveal hidden biases or uncertainties in the calibration algorithms. Certainly, calibration has been an important consideration in other data validation efforts (e.g., Lyapustin et al, 2007;Kahn et al, 2005;Lallart et al, 2008). Careful reevaluation of the Terra/MODIS 0.47 µm channel is ongoing, and refinements will be made, as appropriate.…”

Section: Validation Time Seriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global evaluation of the Collection 5 MODIS dark-target aerosol products over land

Levy¹,

Remer²,

Kleidman³

et al. 2010

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

Self Cite

1,116

895

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. NASA's MODIS sensors have been observing the Earth from polar orbit, from Terra since early 2000 and from Aqua since mid 2002. We have applied a consistent retrieval and processing algorithm to both sensors to derive the Collection 5 (C005) dark-target aerosol products over land. Here, we validate the MODIS along-orbit Level 2 products by comparing to quality assured Level 2 AERONET sunphotometer measurements at over 300 sites. From 85 463 collocations, representing mutually cloud-free conditions, we find that >66% (one standard deviation) of MODIS-retrieved aerosol optical depth (AOD) values compare to AERONETobserved values within an expected error (EE) envelope of ±(0.05 + 15%), with high correlation (R = 0.9). Thus, the MODIS AOD product is validated and quantitative. However, even though we can define EEs for MODIS-reported Angström exponent and fine AOD over land, these products do not have similar physical validity. Although validated globally, MODIS-retrieved AOD does not fall within the EE envelope everywhere. We characterize some of the residual biases that are related to specific aerosol conditions, observation geometry, and/or surface properties, and relate them to situations where particular MODIS algorithm assumptions are violated. Both Terra's and Aqua's-retrieved AOD are similarly comparable to AERONET, however, Terra's global AOD bias changes with time, overestimating (by ∼0.005) before 2004, and underestimating by similar magnitude after. This suggests how small calibration uncertainties of <2% can lead to spurious conclusions about long-term aerosol trends.

show abstract

Section: Validation Time Seriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global evaluation of the Collection 5 MODIS dark-target aerosol products over land

Levy¹,

Remer²,

Kleidman³

et al. 2010

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

Self Cite

1,116

895

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This preferentially diminishes the statistical contributions of outliers to the MODIS time series relative to MISR, disproportionately increasing the relative magnitude of the MISR spikes. Instrument radiometric calibration can also contribute to apparent trends, though this factor has been studied with a range of methods [33][34][35][36], and the uncertainties are too small to account for the ~0.05 AOD trend shown in [28, Figure 6]. For example, [14] reports a decrease of ~0.02 in MODIS-Terra AOD average absolute error over land relative to AERONET between 2000 and 2007, which might be explained by a known <2% drift in the MODIS blue-band calibration.…”

Section: Misr Outliers and Data Stratificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response to “Toward unified satellite climatology of aerosol properties. 3. MODIS versus MISR versus AERONET”

Kahn

Garay

Nelson

et al. 2011

Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent paper by Mishchenko et al. compares near-coincident MISR, MODIS, and AERONET aerosol optical depth (AOD) products, and reports much poorer agreement than that obtained by the instrument teams and others. We trace the reasons for the discrepancies primarily to differences in (1) the treatment of outliers, (2) the application of absolute vs. relative criteria for testing agreement, and (3) the ways in which seasonally varying spatial distributions of coincident retrievals are taken into account.

show abstract

“…Our understanding of bidirectional reflectance, radiative transfer modeling, and interactions between reflectance and forest stand structure has benefited greatly from multi-angle instruments, including the POLDER (Polarization and Directionality of Earth Reflectance) (Deschamps et al, 1994) and MISR (Multi-angle Imaging Spectrometer) (e.g. Lyapustin et al, 2007) sensors, specifically designed to address BRDF characteristics of the Earth surface from space (Leroy et al 1997;Gamon et al, 2006).…”

Section: Landscape Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of remote sensing in light use efficiency based models of gross primary production: A review of current status and future requirements

Hilker

Coops

Wulder

et al. 2008

Science of The Total Environment

248

187

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis of MODIS–MISR calibration differences using surface albedo around AERONET sites and cloud reflectance

Cited by 43 publications

References 40 publications

Global evaluation of the Collection 5 MODIS dark-target aerosol products over land

Global evaluation of the Collection 5 MODIS dark-target aerosol products over land

Response to “Toward unified satellite climatology of aerosol properties. 3. MODIS versus MISR versus AERONET”

The use of remote sensing in light use efficiency based models of gross primary production: A review of current status and future requirements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About