基于不同光谱指数的植被物候期遥感监测差异

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.201802.019

应用生态学报 ›› 2018, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (2): 599-606.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201802.019

基于不同光谱指数的植被物候期遥感监测差异

左璐^1,2, 王焕炯¹, 刘荣高^1*, 刘洋¹, 商荣^1,2

¹中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所资源与环境信息系统国家重点实验室, 北京 100101;
²中国科学院大学, 北京 100049

收稿日期:2017-07-06 出版日期:2018-02-18 发布日期:2018-02-18
通讯作者: E-mail: liurg@igsnrr.ac.cn
作者简介:左璐, 女, 1991年生, 博士研究生. 主要从事植被物候遥感反演及农情监测研究. E-mail: zuol.14b@igsnrr.ac.cn
基金资助:
本文由国家重点研发计划项目(2016YFA0600201)和中国科学院特色研究所项目(TSYJS04)资助

Differences of vegetation phenology monitoring by remote sensing based on different spectral vegetation indices.

ZUO Lu^1,2, WANG Huan-jiong¹, LIU Rong-gao^1*, LIU Yang¹, SHANG Rong^1,2

¹State key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China;
²University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China

Received:2017-07-06 Online:2018-02-18 Published:2018-02-18
Contact: E-mail: liurg@igsnrr.ac.cn
Supported by:
This work was supported by the State Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFA0600201) and the Distinctive Institutes Development Program, Chinese Academy of Sciences (TSYJS04).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 植被物候是陆地生态系统响应气候和环境变化的一项综合性指标.遥感光谱已经被广泛用于提取植被物候期,但遥感提取的物候期与站点观测差别很大,其物理意义尚不明确.本文选取中国东北部的一景MODIS数据(2000—2014年),分析了基于红波段和近红外波段的归一化差值植被指数(NDVI)和简单比植被指数(SR)提取的植被生长季起始期(SOS)和结束期(EOS)的差异.结果表明: 两者的物候期存在显著差别,基于NDVI提取的SOS比SR提取的SOS平均早18.9 d,基于NDVI提取的EOS比SR提取的EOS平均晚19.0 d,NDVI得到的生长季长度更长.基于NDVI和SR提取的物候期的年际变化也存在显著差别,超过20%的像元SOS和EOS甚至表现出相反的年际变化趋势.上述差异与两种植被指数自身的季节曲线特征和抗噪性差异有关.NDVI与SR观测数据来源完全一致,仅数学表达形式不同,提取的物候期结果却存在显著差异.说明遥感监测的植被物候期高度依赖于植被指数的数学表达形式,如何建立可靠的植被物候期遥感提取方法仍需进一步研究.

关键词: 植被物候, 数学表达, 时间趋势, 植被指数, 遥感

Abstract: Vegetation phenology is a comprehensive indictor for the responses of terrestrial ecosystem to climatic and environmental changes. Remote sensing spectrum has been widely used in the extraction of vegetation phenology information. However, there are many differences between phenology extracted by remote sensing and site observations, with their physical meaning remaining unclear. We selected one tile of MODIS data in northeastern China (2000-2014) to examine the SOS and EOS differences derived from the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and the simple ratio vegetation index (SR) based on both the red and near-infrared bands. The results showed that there were significant differences between NDVI-phenology and SR-phenology. SOS derived from NDVI averaged 18.9 days earlier than that from SR. EOS derived from NDVI averaged 19.0 days later than from SR. NDVI-phenology had a longer growing season. There were significant differences in the inter-annual variation of phenology from NDVI and SR. More than 20% of the pixel SOS and EOS derived from NDVI and SR showed the opposite temporal trend. These results caused by the seasonal curve characteristics and noise resistance differences of NDVI and SR. The observed data source of NDVI and SR were completely consistent, only the mathematical expressions were different, but phenology results were significantly different. Our results indicated that vegetation phenology monitoring by remote sensing is highly dependent on the mathematical expression of vegetation index. How to establish a reliable method for extracting vegetation phenology by remote sensing needs further research.

Key words: vegetation index, vegetation phenology, mathematical expression, remote sensing, temporal trend.

左璐, 王焕炯, 刘荣高, 刘洋, 商荣. 基于不同光谱指数的植被物候期遥感监测差异[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(2): 599-606.

ZUO Lu, WANG Huan-jiong, LIU Rong-gao, LIU Yang, SHANG Rong. Differences of vegetation phenology monitoring by remote sensing based on different spectral vegetation indices.[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2018, 29(2): 599-606.

参考文献

[1] Zhu K-Z (竺可桢), Wan M-W (宛敏渭). Phenology. Beijing: Science Press, 1973 (in Chinese)
[2] Lieth HH. Contributions to phenology seasonality research. International Journal of Biometeorology, 1976, 20: 197-199
[3] Peñuelas J, Filella I. Phenology: Responses to a warming world. Science, 2001, 294: 793-795
[4] Ge QS, Wang HJ, Rutishauser T, et al. Phenological response to climate change in China: A meta-analysis. Global Change Biology, 2015, 21: 265-274
[5] Piao SL, Fang JY, Zhou LM, et al. Variations in satellite-derived phenology in China’s temperate vegetation. Global Change Biology, 2006, 12: 672-685
[6] Dragoni D, Schmid HP, Wayson CA, et al. Evidence of increased net ecosystem productivity associated with a longer vegetated season in a deciduous forest in south-central Indiana, USA. Global Change Biology, 2011, 17: 886-897
[7] Richardson AD, Anderson RS, Arain MA, et al. Terrestrial biosphere models need better representation of vegetation phenology: Results from the North American Carbon Program Site Synthesis. Global Change Biology, 2012, 18: 566-584
[8] Ge Q-S (葛全胜), Zheng J-Y (郑景云), Hao Z-X (郝志新), et al. State-of-the-arts in the study of climate changes over China for the past 2000 years. Acta Geographica Sinica (地理学报), 2014, 69(9): 1248-1258 (in Chinese)
[9] Linnaeus C. Philosophia Botanica. London: Lubrecht & Cramer, 1966
[10] Cleland EE, Chuine I, Menzel A, et al. Shifting plant phenology in response to global change. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2007, 22: 357-365
[11] Justice CO, Townshend JRG, Holben BN, et al. Analysis of the phenology of global vegetation using meteorological satellite data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 1985, 6: 1271-1318
[12] Xia C-F (夏传福), Li J (李静), Liu Q-H (柳钦火). Review of advances in vegetation phenology monitoring by remote sensing. Journal of Remote Sensing (遥感学报), 2013, 17(1): 1-16 (in Chinese)
[13] Liang L, Schwartz MD, Fei S. Validating satellite phenology through intensive ground observation and landscape scaling in a mixed seasonal forest. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2011, 115: 143-157
[14] White MA, de Beurs KM, Didan K, et al. Intercomparison, interpretation, and assessment of spring phenology in North America estimated from remote sensing for 1982-2006. Global Change Biology, 2009, 15: 2335-2359
[15] White MA, Thornton PE, Running SW. A continental phenology model for monitoring vegetation responses to interannual climatic variability. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 1997, 11: 217-234
[16] Garrity SR, Bohrer G, Maurer KD, et al. A comparison of multiple phenology data sources for estimating seaso-nal transitions in deciduous forest carbon exchange. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2011, 151: 1741-1752
[17] Zhang X, Friedl MA, Schaaf CB, et al. Monitoring vegetation phenology using MODIS. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2003, 84: 471-475
[18] Wu C, Peng D, Soudani K, et al. Land surface pheno-logy derived from normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) at global FLUXNET sites. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2017, 233: 171-182
[19] Fisher JI, Mustard JF, Vadeboncoeur MA. Green leaf phenology at Landsat resolution: Scaling from the field to the satellite. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2006, 100: 265-279
[20] Balzarolo M, Vicca S, Nguy-Robertson AL, et al. Matching the phenology of net ecosystem exchange and vegetation indices estimated with MODIS and FLUXNET in situ observations. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2016,174: 290-300
[21] D’Odorico P, Gonsamo A, Gough CM, et al. The match and mismatch between photosynthesis and land surface phenology of deciduous forests. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2015, 214-215: 25-38
[22] Wu C, Gonsamo A, Gough CM, et al. Modeling growing season phenology in North American forests using seasonal mean vegetation indices from MODIS. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2014, 147: 79-88
[23] Buitenwerf R, Rose L, Higgins SI. Three decades of multi-dimensional change in global leaf phenology. Nature Climate Change, 2015, 5: 364-368
[24] Hmimina G, Dufrêne E, Pontailler JY, et al. Evaluation of the potential of MODIS satellite data to predict vegetation phenology in different biomes: An investigation using ground-based NDVI measurements. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2013, 132: 145-158
[25] White K, Pontius J, Schaberg P. Remote sensing of spring phenology in northeastern forests: A comparison of methods, field metrics and sources of uncertainty. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2014, 148: 97-107
[26] Vermote EF, Kotchenova S. Atmospheric correction for the monitoring of land surfaces. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 2008, 113: D23
[27] Liu R, Liu Y. Generation of new cloud masks from MODIS land surface reflectance products. Remote Sen-sing of Environment, 2013, 133: 21-37
[28] Zhao H (赵虎), Yang Z-W (杨正伟), Li L (李霖), et al. Improvement and comparative analysis of indices of crop growth condition monitoring by remote sensing. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultu-ral Engineering (农业工程学报), 2011, 27(1): 243-249 (in Chinese)
[29] Wu C, Hou X, Peng D, et al. Land surface phenology of China’s temperate ecosystems over 1999-2013: Spatial-temporal patterns, interaction effects, covariation with climate and implications for productivity. Agricultu-ral and Forest Meteorology, 2016, 216: 177-187
[30] Chen X, Hu B, Yu R. Spatial and temporal variation of phenological growing season and climate change impacts in temperate eastern China. Global Change Biology, 2005, 11: 1118-1130
[31] Guo L, An N, Wang KC. Reconciling the discrepancy in ground- and satellite-observed trends in the spring phenology of winter wheat in China from 1993 to 2008. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2016, 121: 1027-1042
[32] Wan M-W (宛敏渭), Liu X-Z (刘秀珍). Chinese Phenology Observation Method. Beijing: Science Press, 1979 (in Chinese)
[33] Gonsamo A, Chen JM, Wu C, et al. Predicting deci-duous forest carbon uptake phenology by upscaling FLUXNET measurements using remote sensing data. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2012, 165: 127-135
[34] Zhao J-J (赵晶晶), Liu L-Y (刘良云). Extraction of temperate vegetation phenology thresholds in North America based on flux tower observation data. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 2013, 24(2): 311-318 (in Chinese)
[35] Ganguly S, Friedl MA, Tan B, et al. Land surface phenology from MODIS: Characterization of the Collection 5 global land cover dynamics product. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2010, 114: 1805-1816
[36] Balzarolo M, Anderson K, Nichol C, et al. Ground-based optical measurements at European Flux Sites: A review of methods, instruments and current controversies. Sensors, 2011, 11: 7954-7981
[37] Huete AR, Jackson RD. Soil and atmosphere influences on the spectra of partial canopies. Remote Sensing of Environment, 1988, 25: 89-105
[38] Huete AR, Liu HQ, Batchily K, et al. A comparison of vegetation indices global set of TM images for EOS-MODIS. Remote Sensing of Environment, 1997, 59: 440-451

基于不同光谱指数的植被物候期遥感监测差异

Differences of vegetation phenology monitoring by remote sensing based on different spectral vegetation indices.

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王进, 周广胜, 何奇瑾, 周莉. 内蒙古克氏针茅草原净生态系统碳交换的物候特征及遥感监测 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(3): 659-668.
[2]	黄俊杰, 冯秀丽, 董毓伊, 张驰, 谢立建, 程俊恺, 高天宇. 基于遥感生态指数和图论知识的宁波市生态安全格局构建 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(9): 2489-2497.
[3]	周文武, 舒清态, 王书伟, 杨正道, 罗绍龙, 胥丽, 肖劲楠. 基于多源遥感数据协同的滇西北森林郁闭度估测 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(7): 1806-1816.
[4]	瞿植, 罗漫雅, 赵永华, 杨舒媛, 韩磊, 穆琪. 黄河流域大型天然湖泊面积与岸线形态的时空动态 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(4): 1102-1108.
[5]	解晗, 李俊, 同小娟, 张静茹, 刘沛荣, 于裴洋, 胡海洋, 杨铭鑫. 2000—2018年黄河流域森林和草地物候的时空变化 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(3): 647-656.
[6]	冯平, 杨妮娟, 李建柱. 滦河流域遥感生态指数改进及生态环境质量评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(12): 3195-3202.
[7]	阮文洁, 何云玲, 黄丽华. 滇中城市群植被物候时空变化及其对城市化的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(12): 3263-3270.
[8]	唐吉喆, 徐梦冉, 莫宇, 吴伟赜, 张靖, 李政海, 鲍雅静. 生态地理分区视角下的辽宁省植被归一化植被指数的时空变化 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(12): 3271-3278.
[9]	陈悦, 赵庚星, 常春艳, 王卓然, 李因帅, 赵环三, 张术伟, 潘敬瑞. 基于Sentinel-2多光谱影像的小麦-玉米轮作耕地粮食产量估测——以曹县为例 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(12): 3347-3356.
[10]	刘冬冬, 潘萍, 付佳, 欧阳勋志. 2000—2020年赣南植被覆盖时空变化特征及驱动因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(11): 2919-2928.
[11]	王怡婧, 丁启东, 张俊华, 陈睿华, 贾科利, 李小林. 基于无人机高光谱遥感和机器学习的土壤水盐信息反演 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(11): 3045-3052.
[12]	王希尧, 魏登峰, 匡鸿海. 西南地区植被对陆地水储量的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(10): 2723-2729.
[13]	孟健, 孙灏, 滕超, 王思涵, 王雨昕, 王超群, 吴瑞翔. 基于遥感土壤湿度因子的防风固沙功能估算模型改进及应用 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(10): 2788-2796.
[14]	任堃, 罗漫雅, 赵永华, 韩玲, 张磊, 杨舒媛. 西安市生态环境及城市发展质量评估 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(9): 2485-2492.
[15]	王鑫, 王明田, 冯勇, 邹雨伽, 郭斌. 2001—2020年川西北高原归一化植被指数演变特征及其对极端气候的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(7): 1957-1965.