首页> 外文会议>International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium >Analysis on difference of phenology extracted from EVI and LAI
【24h】

Analysis on difference of phenology extracted from EVI and LAI

机译:从EVI和LAI中提取物候学差异的分析

获取原文

摘要

While EVI and LAI are the most widely used vegetation parameters which can be used for remote sensing phenology extraction, this paper aims at assessing the differences of phenology information extracted from EVI and LAI time series and exploring either EVI or LAI time series performs well for all vegetation types over a large scale. To achieve this, GLASS-LAI phenology product(GLP) was generated by the same algorithm with MODIS-EVI phenology product(MLCD) over China from 2001 to 2012. The two phenology products were compared in different climate regions and vegetation types over a large scale and evaluated by ground observations. Results show that the missing rate of GLP(11.90%) is less than that of MLCD(22.84%). The difference between GPL and MLCD varies in different climate regions and vegetation types. GLP performs better than MLCD in croplands and forests, while MLCD performs better than GLP in grasslands.
机译:虽然EVI和LAI是可用于遥感物候提取的最广泛使用的植被参数,但本文旨在评估从EVI和LAI时间序列中提取的物候信息的差异,并探索EVI或LAI时间序列对所有对象的效果都很好。大规模的植被类型。为实现这一目标,2001年至2012年,采用与MODIS-EVI物候产品(MLCD)相同的算法,生成了GLASS-LAI物候产品(GLP)。在较大的气候区域和不同植被类型下比较了这两种物候产品。规模并通过地面观测进行评估。结果表明,GLP的缺失率(11.90 \%)小于MLCD的缺失率(22.84 \%)。 GPL和MLCD之间的差异随气候区域和植被类型的不同而不同。在耕地和森林中,GLP的性能优于MLCD,而在草地上,MLCD的性能优于GLP。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号