Soil moisture estimates at 1 km resolution making a synergistic use of Sentinel data

oleh: R. Madelon, N. J. Rodríguez-Fernández, H. Bazzi, N. Baghdadi, C. Albergel, W. Dorigo, M. Zribi

Format: Article
Diterbitkan: Copernicus Publications 2023-03-01

Deskripsi

<p>Very high-resolution (<span class="inline-formula">∼10</span>–100 m) surface soil moisture (SM) observations are important for applications in agriculture, among other purposes. This is the original goal of the S<span class="inline-formula"><sup>2</sup>MP</span> (Sentinel-1/Sentinel-2-Derived Soil Moisture Product) algorithm, which was designed to retrieve surface SM at the agricultural plot scale by simultaneously using Sentinel-1 (S1) backscatter coefficients and Sentinel-2 (S2) NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) as inputs to a neural network trained with Water Cloud Model simulations. However, for many applications, including hydrology and climate impact assessment at regional level, large maps with a high resolution (HR) of around 1 km are already a significant improvement with respect to most of the publicly available SM datasets, which have resolutions of about 25 km.</p> <p>In this study, the S<span class="inline-formula"><sup>2</sup>MP</span> algorithm was adapted to work at 1 km resolution and extended from croplands to herbaceous vegetation types. A target resolution of 1 km also allows the evaluation of the interest in using NDVI derived from Sentinel-3 (S3) instead of S2. Two sets of SM maps at 1 km resolution were produced with S<span class="inline-formula"><sup>2</sup>MP</span> over six regions of <span class="inline-formula">∼10<sup>4</sup></span> km<span class="inline-formula"><sup>2</sup></span> in Spain, Tunisia, North America, Australia, and the southwest and southeast regions of France for the whole year of 2019. The first set was derived from the combination of S1 and S2 data (S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S2 maps), while the second one was derived from the combination of S1 and S3 (S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S3 maps). S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S2 and S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S3 SM maps were compared to each other, to those of the 1 km resolution Copernicus Global Land Service (CGLS) SM and Soil Water Index (SWI) datasets, and to those of the Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S1 product.</p> <p>The S<span class="inline-formula"><sup>2</sup>MP</span> S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S2 and S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S3 SM maps are in very good agreement in terms of correlation (<span class="inline-formula"><i>R</i>≥0.9</span>), bias (<span class="inline-formula">≤0.04</span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>3</sup></span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−3</sup></span>), and standard deviation of the difference (<span class="inline-formula">SDD≤0.03</span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>3</sup></span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−3</sup></span>) over the six domains investigated in this study. In a second step, the S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S3 S<span class="inline-formula"><sup>2</sup>MP</span> maps were compared to the other HR maps. S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S3 SM maps are well correlated to the CGLS SM maps (<span class="inline-formula"><i>R</i>∼0.7</span>–0.8), but the correlations with respect to the other HR maps (CGLS SWI and SMAP <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S1) drop significantly over many areas of the six domains investigated in this study. The highest correlations between the HR maps were found over croplands and when the 1 km pixels have a very homogeneous land cover. The bias among the different maps was found to be significant over some areas of the six domains, reaching values of <span class="inline-formula">±0.1</span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>3</sup></span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−3</sup></span>. The S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S3 maps show a lower SDD with respect to CGLS maps (<span class="inline-formula">≤0.06</span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>3</sup></span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−3</sup></span>) than with respect to the SMAP <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S1 maps (<span class="inline-formula">≤0.1</span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>3</sup></span> m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−3</sup></span>) for all the six domains.</p> <p>Finally, all the HR datasets (S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S2, S1 <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S3, CGLS, and SMAP <span class="inline-formula">+</span> S1) were also compared to in situ measurements from five networks across five countries, along with coarse-resolution (CR) SM products from SMAP, SMOS, and the European Space Agency Climate Change Initiative (CCI). While all the CR and HR products show different bias and SDD, the HR products show lower correlations than the CR ones with respect to in situ measurements. The discrepancies in between the different HR datasets, except for the<span id="page1222"/> more simple land cover conditions (homogeneous pixels with croplands) and the lower performances with respect to in situ measurement than coarse-resolution datasets, show the remaining challenges for large-scale HR SM mapping.</p>