Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Retrieving Coastal Optical Properties from MERIS S. Ladner 1, P. Lyon 2, R. Arnone 2, R. Gould 2, T. Lawson 1, P. Martinolich 1 1) QinetiQ North America,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Retrieving Coastal Optical Properties from MERIS S. Ladner 1, P. Lyon 2, R. Arnone 2, R. Gould 2, T. Lawson 1, P. Martinolich 1 1) QinetiQ North America,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Retrieving Coastal Optical Properties from MERIS S. Ladner 1, P. Lyon 2, R. Arnone 2, R. Gould 2, T. Lawson 1, P. Martinolich 1 1) QinetiQ North America, Stennis Space Center, MS 2) Naval Research Laboratory, Stennis Space Center, MS

2 Objectives Compare MERIS Remote Sensing Reflectance and Optical Properties in a variety of clear and turbid water types under varying atmospheric conditions using two different atmospheric correction approaches. Compare MERIS and MODIS-Aqua optical properties. Validate MERIS and MODIS-Aqua Remote Sensing Reflectances using insitu measurements.

3 MERIS sensor on ESA ENVISAT Band set similar to MODIS / SeaWiFS 1000m & 300m resolution ENVISAT MERIS Sensor Operational MERIS Processing in NRL’s Automated Processing System (APS): - Input ESA Level-1 / Level-2 Data Level 1 = Calibrated and Geo-Located Level 2 = Atmospherically Corrected Radiances and Derived In-Water Products - Output Bio-Optical Properties (Chlorophyll, Absorption, Scattering, Navy Products, Etc.) Modifications to APS for MERIS Level-1 Processing to use the same Atmospheric Correction used for SeaWiFS and MODIS processing (Gordon/Wang with NIR Iteration) Created the Relative Spectral Response (RSR) Tables Created the software to read in MERIS N1 (Level-1) data from ESA Modified L2GEN / N2GEN to handle MERIS data. Obtained MERIS Rayleigh Tables from Goddard Obtained MERIS Aerosol Tables from Goddard Created scripts, area/info programs to handle MERIS N1 data from ESA *** Provided Software for Level-2 Processing (L2GEN) to NASA Goddard NRL hosted a Navy/NOAA /NASA and University Study Group working to assess MERIS data.

4 Monterey Bay, CA June 19, 2008 18:23 GMT -.03 -.018 -.006.006.018.03 Rrs (1/sr) -.01 -.006 -.002.002.006.01 Rrs Difference (1/sr).0005.002.008.032.13.5 Bb (1/m) True Color Rrs 490nm Bb 560nm (QAA) Difference (ESA-NRL) Rrs 490 Bb 560 (QAA) ESA NRL ESA NRL Inputs to APS: ESA = Level2 NRL = Level1 Less Atmospheric Failures

5 Monterey Bay – Scatter Plots 1:1 Inputs to APS: ESA = Level2 NRL = Level1

6 Yellow Sea October 10, 2008 02:24 GMT -.03 -.018 -.006.006.018.03 Rrs (1/sr) -.01 -.006 -.002.002.006.01 Rrs Difference (1/sr).0005.002.008.032.13.5 Bb (1/m) True Color Rrs 510nm Bb 560nm (QAA) Difference (ESA – NRL) Rrs 510 Bb 560 (QAA) ESA NRL ESA NRL Inputs to APS: ESA = Level2 NRL = Level1 Less Atmospheric Failures

7 Yellow Sea – Scatter Plots 1:1 Inputs to APS: ESA = Level2 NRL = Level1

8 Gulf of California, CA July 22, 2008 17:47 GMT -.03 -.018 -.006.006.018.03 Rrs (1/sr) -.01 -.006 -.002.002.006.01 Rrs Difference (1/sr).0005.002.008.032.13.5 Bb (1/m) True Color Rrs 443nm Bb 560nm (QAA) Difference (ESA-NRL) Rrs 443 Bb 560 (QAA) ESA NRL ESA NRL Inputs to APS: ESA = Level2 NRL = Level1 Less Atmospheric Failures

9 Gulf of California – Scatter Plots 1:1 Inputs to APS: ESA = Level2 NRL = Level1

10 Martha’s Vineyard (MVCO) October 04, 2008 15:37 GMT -.03 -.018 -.006.006.018.03 Rrs (1/sr) -.01 -.006 -.002.002.006.01 Rrs Difference (1/sr).0005.002.008.032.13.5 Bb (1/m) True Color Rrs 560nm Bb 560nm (QAA) Difference (ESA-NRL) Rrs 560 Bb 560 (QAA) ESA NRL ESA NRL Inputs to APS: ESA = Level2 NRL = Level1 Less Atmospheric Failures

11 Martha’s Vineyard – Scatter Plots 1:1 Inputs to APS: ESA = Level2 NRL = Level1

12 MERIS vs. MODIS (NRL) March 20, 2008 16:04 GMT MERIS Bb 560nm (QAA)MODIS Aqua Bb 555nm (QAA) Difference (MERIS – MODIS) -.01 -.006 -.002.002.006.01 Bb Difference (1/sr).0005.002.008.032.13.5 Bb (1/m) Which One Is More Accurate?

13 MERIS vs. MODIS (NRL) March 20, 2008 16:04 GMT MERIS Bb 560nm (QAA)MODIS Aqua Bb 555nm (QAA)Difference (MERIS – MODIS) -.01 -.006 -.002.002.006.01 Bb Difference (1/sr).0005.002.008.032.13.5 Bb (1/m) Which One Is More Accurate?

14 MERIS vs. Insitu Rrs @ 490nm (Scatter Plots) MERIS ESA = 20 Match-upsMERIS NRL = 32 Match-ups Station Locations Northern Gulf of Mexico Monterey Bay, CA MODIS NRL = 42 Match-ups More Retrievals Better Rrs Better IOP’s R2 = 0.01 Ratio = 2.47 N = 20 Y=0.05x+0.004 R2 = 0.42 Ratio = 2.44 N = 32 Y=0.49x+0.001 R2 = 0.10 Ratio = 2.27 N = 42 Y=0.24x+0.002

15 MERIS vs. Insitu Rrs @ 560nm (Scatter Plots) MERIS ESA = 19 Match-upsMERIS NRL = 32 Match-ups Station Locations Northern Gulf of Mexico Monterey Bay, CA MODIS NRL = 42 Match-ups R2 = 0.36 Ratio = 2.45 N = 19 Y=0.29x+0.001 R2 = 0.70 Ratio = 1.71 N = 32 Y=0.78x-0.001 R2 = 0.44 Ratio = 1.95 N = 42 Y=0.47x+0.001 More Retrievals Better Rrs Better IOP’s

16 Summary Atmospheric Correction Failures are more significant in MERIS ESA processing (Coastal and Offshore). Remote Sensing Reflectances and Backscattering estimates from MERIS ESA vs. NRL processing schemes produce similar results. Backscattering estimates from NRL MERIS processing are lower in coastal regions. MERIS Satellite and In-situ Match-ups for Remote Sensing Reflectance are better using NRL processing scheme compared to MERIS from ESA processing and MODIS-Aqua.

17 Questions?


Download ppt "Retrieving Coastal Optical Properties from MERIS S. Ladner 1, P. Lyon 2, R. Arnone 2, R. Gould 2, T. Lawson 1, P. Martinolich 1 1) QinetiQ North America,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google