1993
DOI: 10.1016/0034-4257(93)90053-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimating surface soil moisture and leaf area index of a wheat canopy using a dual-frequency (C and X bands) scatterometer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
121
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 202 publications
(125 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
4
121
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, despite the average development of the vegetation, it will not be accounted for in this study, as the effect of the vegetation was minimised given the low incidence angles (swath modes S1 and S2) and the HH polarisation of the RADARSAT acquisitions (Biftu and Gan, 1999). This negligible effect could be verified through application of a water cloud model (Attema and Ulaby, 1978;Prévot et al, 1993), using leaf area index (LAI) and vegetation water content (VWC) as bulk canopy parameters. For LAI and VWC respectively ranging from 2.149 to 3.711 and 0.661 to 1.317 kgm −2 , the attenuation of the backscatter through the canopy was compensated to a large extent by a direct vegetation contribution, leading to insignificant vegetation corrections within the relative radiometric accuracy of the RADARSAT observations, i.e.…”
Section: Study Sites and Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, despite the average development of the vegetation, it will not be accounted for in this study, as the effect of the vegetation was minimised given the low incidence angles (swath modes S1 and S2) and the HH polarisation of the RADARSAT acquisitions (Biftu and Gan, 1999). This negligible effect could be verified through application of a water cloud model (Attema and Ulaby, 1978;Prévot et al, 1993), using leaf area index (LAI) and vegetation water content (VWC) as bulk canopy parameters. For LAI and VWC respectively ranging from 2.149 to 3.711 and 0.661 to 1.317 kgm −2 , the attenuation of the backscatter through the canopy was compensated to a large extent by a direct vegetation contribution, leading to insignificant vegetation corrections within the relative radiometric accuracy of the RADARSAT observations, i.e.…”
Section: Study Sites and Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the model, the total backscatter at a co-polarised channel qq (σ°q q ), is the incoherent sum of the contribution from the vegetation (σ°v eg ) and the soil (σ°s oil ), and the two way attenuation of the vegetation layer (τ 2 ). For a given incidence angle, the co-polarised backscatter can be given by: The water cloud model has been modified and implemented differently by various authors [108][109][110][111] and despite its inconsistency during model implementation, it has found widespread use among the radar modelling community [112] with varying results. Dabrowska-Zielinska et al [113] found the soil moisture contribution to the backscattering coefficient to be predominant over that from the vegetation for C-band, θ = 23 o , while for L-band θ = 35 o , the backscattering coefficient was more sensitive to the vegetation contribution.…”
Section: Soil Moisture Retrieval Using Semi-empirical Scattering Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In copolarized power scattered, the internal soil-vegetation interactions is not a dominating factor and thus can be neglected [Dobson et al, 1986] [Prevot et al, 1993a]. Many modifications to the model have been reported [Ulaby et al, 1982] [Bindlish et al, 2001].…”
Section: The Water Cloud Model For Vegetationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…V 1 is a description of the canopy, and V 2 is a second description of the canopy. These two parameters describe the effect of canopy geometry and water content on the backscatter coefficient, and because an important part of the scattering and attenuation is controlled by the leaves, many studies [Lievens et al, 2011] [Moran et al, 1998] [Prevot et al, 1993a] propose using the LAI (kg m−2) as the canopy descriptor.…”
Section: The Water Cloud Model For Vegetationmentioning
confidence: 99%