2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2015.01.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating leaf chlorophyll content prediction from multispectral remote sensing data within a physically-based modelling framework

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
41
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 91 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
2
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The changes in Chl leaf may impact the amount of APAR distributed between leaves but the total APAR for the canopy is likely not sensitive to the changes in Chl leaf . It explains why most studies incorporating Chl leaf in TBMs only consider the impact of Chl leaf on Vnormalcmax25 (Alton, ; Houborg et al, ; Luo, Croft, et al, ) and light use efficiency (Croft, Chen, Froelich, Chen, & Staebler, ; Croft, Chen, Zhang, et al, ; Houborg, Anderson, Daughtry, Kustas, & Rodell, ) and neglect the impact of Chl leaf on APAR. However, we acknowledge that the impact of Chl leaf on canopy fAPAR, though usually small, needs to be addressed in some special cases (i.e.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The changes in Chl leaf may impact the amount of APAR distributed between leaves but the total APAR for the canopy is likely not sensitive to the changes in Chl leaf . It explains why most studies incorporating Chl leaf in TBMs only consider the impact of Chl leaf on Vnormalcmax25 (Alton, ; Houborg et al, ; Luo, Croft, et al, ) and light use efficiency (Croft, Chen, Froelich, Chen, & Staebler, ; Croft, Chen, Zhang, et al, ; Houborg, Anderson, Daughtry, Kustas, & Rodell, ) and neglect the impact of Chl leaf on APAR. However, we acknowledge that the impact of Chl leaf on canopy fAPAR, though usually small, needs to be addressed in some special cases (i.e.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lack of progress at the global scale has largely been due to the lack of spectral bands sampled by existing satellite sensors that are sensitive to chlorophyll content, along the red‐edge portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. However, recent work has indicated that physically based radiative transfer models can accurately model leaf chlorophyll content using a reduced number of spectral bands [ Croft et al ., ]. Furthermore, an increasing number of sensors are beginning to contain the “red‐edge” bands that are highly sensitive to chlorophyll content, including Envisat MERIS (from 2002 to 2012), the forthcoming European Space Agency Sentinel‐2 mission, and the Vegetation and Environment monitoring New MicroSatellite (Venus) platform.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The absorption coefficients were recalculated to the corresponding Landsat bands using their respective spectral response functions. PROSPECT has previously been successfully used to model chlorophyll from multispectral data (Croft et al ., ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%