Engineering topics
Suyker, Andrew
Publications and source records attributed to Suyker, Andrew.
Combining Remotely Sensed Evapotranspiration and an Agroecosystem Model to Estimate Center‐Pivot Irrigation Water Use at High Spatio‐Temporal Resolution
Abstract Estimating irrigation water use accurately is critical for sustainable irrigation and studying terrestrial water cycle in irrigated croplands. However, irrigation is not monitored in most places, and current estimations of irrigation water use has coarse spatial and/or temporal resolutions. This study aims to estimate irrigation water use at the daily and field scale through the proposed model‐data fusion framework, which is achieved by particle filtering with two configurations (concurrent, CON, and sequential, SEQ) by assimilating satellite‐based evapotranspiration (ET) observations into an advanced agroecosystem model, ecosys . Two types of experiments using synthetic and real ET observations were conducted to study the efficacy of the proposed framework for estimating irrigation water use at the irrigated fields in eastern and western Nebraska, United States. The experiments using synthetic ET observations indicated that, for two major sources of uncertainties of ET difference between observations and model simulations, which are bias and noise, noise had larger impacts on degrading the estimation performance of irrigation water use than bias. For the experiments using real ET observations, monthly and annual estimations of irrigation water use matched well with farmer irrigation records, with Pearson correlation coefficient ( r ) around 0.80 and 0.50, respectively. Although detecting daily irrigation records was very challenging, our method still gave a good performance with RMSE, BIAS, and r around 2.90, 0.03, and 0.4 mm/d, respectively. Our proposed model‐data fusion framework for estimating irrigation water use at high spatio‐temporal resolution could contribute to regional water management, sustainable irrigation, and better tracking terrestrial water cycle.
Harmonizing solar induced fluorescence across spatial scales, instruments, and extraction methods using proximal and airborne remote sensing: A multi-scale study in a soybean field
Solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF) has been widely used to track vegetation photosynthesis at different scales ranging from in-situ measurements to satellite products. Airborne platforms sample SIF data at a spatial scale intermediate between in-situ and satellite, matching that of ground measurement (e.g. flux tower footprints and other field sampling), enabling us to explore causes of SIF variation and validate satellite-based SIF products. However, harmonizing SIF across sensors and platforms (correcting for systematic errors to yield a consistent, comparable SIF product) is challenging because SIF can be retrieved in different absorption windows, with different instruments and methods complicating the comparison between different observational levels (i.e., ground, airborne, satellites) and between sites equipped with different instruments with varying optical properties (spectral resolution and sampling intervals, spatial resolution). Additionally, the spatial and temporal variability of atmospheric properties can influence the retrieval of the weak SIF signal. Because of these complications, direct comparisons of airborne and ground SIF across scales are rarely attempted. Here, in this study, we combined airborne SIF data with simultaneous ‘ground truth’ data collected by stationary and mobile platforms in a soybean field in Nebraska, USA. In this effort, we tested several SIF extraction methods, including Fraunhofer Line Discrimination (FLD), improved Fraunhofer Line Discrimination (iFLD), Spectral Fitting Method (SFM), SpecFit, and a Singular Vector Decomposition (SVD) method. The SpecFit method was sensitive to the 715–740 nm water bands and removing the water bands in the fitting process yielded better agreement between the airborne and ground SIF spectra. Accurate estimation of the ground level downwelling irradiance obtained by ground measurements over a calibration target improved agreement between airborne and ground SIF retrievals at the O 2 A band, and allowed us to derive a SIF dataset with improved agreement across platforms and sampling scales. This experimental approach provided a method for generating comparable SIF signals across instruments, methods and platforms, which is critical to understanding the SIF-GPP relationship at different scales and to cross-validate the diversity of platforms used for satellite products calibration and validation.
Monitoring agroecosystem productivity and phenology at a national scale: A metric assessment framework
Effective measurement of seasonal variations in the timing and amount of production is critical to managing spatially heterogeneous agroecosystems in a changing climate. Although numerous technologies for such measurements are available, their relationships to one another at a continental extent are unknown. Using data collected from across the Long-Term Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) network and other networks, we investigated correlations among key metrics representing primary production, phenology, and carbon fluxes in croplands, grazing lands, and crop-grazing integrated systems across the continental U.S. Metrics we examined included gross primary productivity (GPP) estimated from eddy covariance (EC) towers and modelled from the Landsat satellite, Landsat NDVI, and vegetation greenness (Green Chromatic Coordinate, GCC) from tower-mounted PhenoCams for 2017 and 2018. Overall, our analysis compared production dynamics estimated from three independent ground and remote platforms using data for 34 agricultural sites constituting 51 site-years of co-located time series. Pairwise sensor comparisons across all four metrics revealed stronger correlation and lower root mean square error (RMSE) between end of season (EOS) dates (Pearson R ranged from 0.6 to 0.7 and RMSE from 32.5 to 67.8) than start of season (SOS) dates (0.46 to 0.69 and 40.4 to 66.2). Overall, moderate to high correlations between SOS and EOS metrics complemented one another except at some lower productivity grazing land sites where estimating SOS can be challenging. Growing season length estimates derived from 16-day satellite GPP (179.1 days) were significantly longer than those from PhenoCam G CC (70.4 days, p adj < 0.0001) and EC GPP (79.6 days, p adj < 0.0001). Landscape heterogeneity did not explain differences in SOS and EOS estimates. Annual integrated estimates of productivity from EC GPP and PhenoCam G CC diverged from those estimated by Landsat GPP and NDVI at sites where annual production exceeds 1000 gC/m –2 yr –1 . Based on our results, we developed a “metric assessment framework” that articulates where and how metrics from satellite, eddy covariance and PhenoCams complement, diverge from, or are redundant with one another. The framework was designed to optimize instrumentation selection for monitoring, modeling, and forecasting ecosystem functioning with the ultimate goal of informing decision-making by land managers, policy-makers, and industry leaders working at multiple scales.
Estimation of Crop Gross Primary Production (GPP): Do Scaled (MODIS) Vegetation Indices Improve Performance? - 2
Satellite remote sensing estimates of Gross Primary Production (GPP) have routinely been made using spectral Vegetation Indices (VIs) over the past two decades. The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), the Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI), the green band Wide Dynamic Range Vegetation Index (WDRVIgreen), and the green band Chlorophyll Index (CIgreen) have been employed to estimate GPP under the assumption that GPP is proportional to the product of VI and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) (where VI is one of four VIs: NDVI, EVI, WDRVIgreen, or CIgreen). However, the empirical regressions between VI*PAR and GPP measured locally at flux towers do not pass through the origin (i.e., the zero X-Y value for regressions). Therefore they are somewhat difficult to interpret and apply. This study investigates (1) what are the scaling factors and offsets (i.e., regression slopes and intercepts) between the fraction of PAR absorbed by chlorophyll of a canopy (fAPARchl) and the VIs, and (2) whether the scaled VIs developed in (1) can eliminate the deficiency and improve the accuracy of GPP estimates. Three AmeriFlux maize and soybean fields were selected for this study, two of which are irrigated and one is rainfed. The four VIs and fAPARchl of the fields were computed with the MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite images. The GPP estimation performance for the scaled VIs was compared to results obtained with the original VIs and evaluated with standard statistics: the coefficient of determination (R2), the root mean square error (RMSE), and the coefficient of variation (CV). Overall, the scaled EVI obtained the best performance. The performance of the scaled NDVI, EVI and WDRVIgreen was improved across sites, crop types and soil/background wetness conditions. The scaled CIgreen did not improve results, compared to the original CIgreen. The scaled green band indices (WDRVIgreen, CIgreen) did not exhibit superior performance to either the scaled EVI or NDVI in estimating crop daily GPP at these agricultural fields. The scaled VIs are more physiologically meaningful than original un-scaled VIs, but scaling factors and offsets may vary across crop types and surface conditions.
Estimation of Crop Gross Primary Production (GPP): I. Impact of MODIS Observation Footprint and Impact of Vegetation BRDF Characteristics
Accurate estimation of gross primary production (GPP) is essential for carbon cycle and climate change studies. Three AmeriFlux crop sites of maize and soybean were selected for this study. Two of the sites were irrigated and the other one was rainfed. The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), the enhanced vegetation index (EVI), the green band chlorophyll index (CIgreen), and the green band wide dynamic range vegetation index (WDRVIgreen) were computed from the moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) surface reflectance data. We examined the impacts of the MODIS observation footprint and the vegetation bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) on crop daily GPP estimation with the four spectral vegetation indices (VIs - NDVI, EVI, WDRVIgreen and CIgreen) where GPP was predicted with two linear models, with and without offset: GPP = a × VI × PAR and GPP = a × VI × PAR + b. Model performance was evaluated with coefficient of determination (R2), root mean square error (RMSE), and coefficient of variation (CV). The MODIS data were filtered into four categories and four experiments were conducted to assess the impacts. The first experiment included all observations. The second experiment only included observations with view zenith angle (VZA) ≤ 35◦ to constrain growth of the footprint size,which achieved a better grid cell match with the agricultural fields. The third experiment included only forward scatter observations with VZA ≤ 35◦. The fourth experiment included only backscatter observations with VZA ≤ 35◦. Overall, the EVI yielded the most consistently strong relationships to daily GPP under all examined conditions. The model GPP = a × VI × PAR + b had better performance than the model GPP = a × VI × PAR, and the offset was significant for most cases. Better performance was obtained for the irrigated field than its counterpart rainfed field. Comparison of experiment 2 vs. experiment 1 was used to examine the observation footprint impact whereas comparison of experiment 4 vs. experiment 3 was used to examine the BRDF impact. Changes in R2, RMSE,CV and changes in model coefficients "a" and "b" (experiment 2 vs. experiment 1; and experiment 4 vs. experiment 3) were indicators of the impacts. The second experiment produced better performance than the first experiment, increasing R2 (↑0.13) and reducing RMSE (↓0.68 g C m−2 d−1) and CV (↓9%). For each VI, the slope of GPP = a × VI × PAR in the second experiment for each crop type changed little while the slope and intercept of GPP = a × VI × PAR + b varied field by field. The CIgreen was least affected by the MODIS observation footprint in estimating crop daily GPP (R2, ↑0.08; RMSE, ↓0.42 g C m−2 d−1; and CV, ↓7%). Footprint most affected the NDVI (R2, ↑0.15; CV, ↓10%) and the EVI (RMSE, ↓0.84 g C m−2 d−1). The vegetation BRDF impact also caused variation of model performance and change of model coefficients. Significantly different slopes were obtained for forward vs. backscatter observations, especially for the CIgreen and the NDVI. Both the footprint impact and the BRDF impact varied with crop types, irrigation options, model options and VI options.