Using SAR-based products to calculate potato carbon uptake in a tropical Andean region

Gross primary productivity (GPP) is an essential parameter to estimate the efficiency of carbon transfer in terrestrial ecosystems. The daily GPP has been monitored in the past using mainly optical satellite imagery. However, GPP has never been monitored using satellite Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of remote sensing 2024-12, Vol.57 (1)
Hauptverfasser: Araujo-Carrillo, Gustavo Alfonso, Duarte-Carvajalino, Julio Martín, Sánchez-Vivas, Diego Fernando, Góez-Vinasco, Gerardo Antonio, Castaño-Marín, Ángela María
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Gross primary productivity (GPP) is an essential parameter to estimate the efficiency of carbon transfer in terrestrial ecosystems. The daily GPP has been monitored in the past using mainly optical satellite imagery. However, GPP has never been monitored using satellite Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery. We evaluate the possibility of using Sentinel-1 SAR data to estimate GPP and compare with field GPP measurements using eddy covariance (EC) systems in three commercial potato fields, located in the Andean region of Colombia, using three different water irrigation levels. Raw and processed radar data from Sentinel-1 were compared with the daily and accumulated GPP from the EC. Results indicate that SAR data has a high correlation with the accumulated GPP measured by the EC in the field. The normalized radar backscatter and radar brilliance coefficients with VH polarization show a good correlation with the EC accumulated GPP in irrigated potato fields (R2: 0.77–0.81), while radar vegetation indices show a good correlation with the EC accumulated GPP in potato fields with no irrigation (R2≈0.82). In particular, the accumulated GPP during the whole potato crop cycle was estimated with good accuracy (~5% error with irrigation and ~10% error with no irrigation).
ISSN:2279-7254
2279-7254
DOI:10.1080/22797254.2024.2339272