Field Intercomparison of Radiometer Measurements for Ocean Colour Validation

dc.contributor.authorTilstone, Gavin
dc.contributor.authorDall'Olmo, Giorgio
dc.contributor.authorHieronymi, Martin
dc.contributor.authorRuddick, Kevin
dc.contributor.authorBeck, Matthew
dc.contributor.authorLigi, Martin
dc.contributor.authorCosta, Maycira
dc.contributor.authorD'Alimonte, Davide
dc.contributor.authorVellucci, Vincenzo
dc.contributor.authorVansteenwegen, Dieter
dc.contributor.authorBracher, Astrid
dc.contributor.authorWiegmann, Sonja
dc.contributor.authorKuusk, Joel
dc.contributor.authorVabson, Viktor
dc.contributor.authorAnsko, Ilmar
dc.contributor.authorVendt, Riho
dc.contributor.authorDonion, Craig
dc.contributor.authorCasal, Tânia
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-08T17:33:14Z
dc.date.available2020-06-08T17:33:14Z
dc.date.copyright2020en_US
dc.date.issued2020
dc.description.abstractA field intercomparison was conducted at the Acqua Alta Oceanographic Tower (AAOT) in the northern Adriatic Sea, from 9 to 19 July 2018 to assess differences in the accuracy of in- and above-water radiometer measurements used for the validation of ocean colour products. Ten measurement systems were compared. Prior to the intercomparison, the absolute radiometric calibration of all sensors was carried out using the same standards and methods at the same reference laboratory. Measurements were performed under clear sky conditions, relatively low sun zenith angles, moderately low sea state and on the same deployment platform and frame (except in-water systems). The weighted average of five above-water measurements was used as baseline reference for comparisons. For downwelling irradiance ( Ed ), there was generally good agreement between sensors with differences of <6% for most of the sensors over the spectral range 400 nm–665 nm. One sensor exhibited a systematic bias, of up to 11%, due to poor cosine response. For sky radiance ( Lsky ) the spectrally averaged difference between optical systems was <2.5% with a root mean square error (RMS) <0.01 mWm−2 nm−1 sr−1. For total above-water upwelling radiance ( Lt ), the difference was <3.5% with an RMS <0.009 mWm−2 nm−1 sr−1. For remote-sensing reflectance ( Rrs ), the differences between above-water TriOS RAMSES were <3.5% and <2.5% at 443 and 560 nm, respectively, and were <7.5% for some systems at 665 nm. Seabird-Hyperspectral Surface Acquisition System (HyperSAS) sensors were on average within 3.5% at 443 nm, 1% at 560 nm, and 3% at 665 nm. The differences between the weighted mean of the above-water and in-water systems was <15.8% across visible bands. A sensitivity analysis showed that Ed accounted for the largest fraction of the variance in Rrs , which suggests that minimizing the errors arising from this measurement is the most important variable in reducing the inter-group differences in Rrs . The differences may also be due, in part, to using five of the above-water systems as a reference. To avoid this, in situ normalized water-leaving radiance ( Lwn ) was therefore compared to AERONET-OC SeaPRiSM Lwn as an alternative reference measurement. For the TriOS-RAMSES and Seabird-HyperSAS sensors the differences were similar across the visible spectra with 4.7% and 4.9%, respectively. The difference between SeaPRiSM Lwn and two in-water systems at blue, green and red bands was 11.8%. This was partly due to temporal and spatial differences in sampling between the in-water and above-water systems and possibly due to uncertainties in instrument self-shading for one of the in-water measurements.en_US
dc.description.reviewstatusRevieweden_US
dc.description.scholarlevelFacultyen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis research was funded by European Space Agency contract Fiducial Reference Measurements for Satellite Ocean Colour (FRM4SOC) Contract number; ESA/AO/1-8500/15/I-SBo. M.B. was also funded by the European Space Agency PRODEX/HYPERNET-OC project. D.V was also funded by BELSPO (Belgian Science Policy Office) in the framework of the STEREO III program project HYPERMAQ (SR/00/335). Acknowledgments We are grateful to Giuseppe Zibordi for his support in the concept of FRM4SOC, in facilitating the set-up at the AAOT and for use of AERONET-OC SeaPRiSM data. We are also grateful to the crew of RV Litus and to Maurio Bastianini and Angela Pomaro for logistics on the AAOT. I personally thank P. R. H. Tilstone who was a lifetime inspiration to my science, who passed away on the first day of the campaign.en_US
dc.identifier.citationTilstone, G.; Dall’Olmo, G.; Hieronymi, M.; Ruddick, K.; Beck, M.; Ligi, M.; … & Casal, T. (2020). Field intercomparison of radiometer measurements for ocean colour validation. Remote Sensing, 12(10), DOI: 10.3390/rs12101587en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3390/rs12101587
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1828/11800
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherRemote Sensingen_US
dc.subjectfiducial reference measurementsen_US
dc.subjectremote sensing reflectanceen_US
dc.subjectocean colour radiometersen_US
dc.subjectTriOS RAMSESen_US
dc.subjectSeabird HyperSASen_US
dc.subjectfield intercomparisonen_US
dc.subjectAERONET-OCen_US
dc.subjectAcqua Alta Oceanographic Toweren_US
dc.titleField Intercomparison of Radiometer Measurements for Ocean Colour Validationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Tilstone_G_remotesens_2020.pdf
Size:
15.44 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: