Jane Liu


DOI bib
Crop Biomass Mapping Based on Ecosystem Modeling at Regional Scale Using High Resolution Sentinel-2 Data
Li He, Rong Wang, G. Mostovoy, Jane Liu, Jing M. Chen, Jiali Shang, Jiangui Liu, Heather McNairn, Jarrett Powers
Remote Sensing, Volume 13, Issue 4

We evaluate the potential of using a process-based ecosystem model (BEPS) for crop biomass mapping at 20 m resolution over the research site in Manitoba, western Canada driven by spatially explicit leaf area index (LAI) retrieved from Sentinel-2 spectral reflectance throughout the entire growing season. We find that overall, the BEPS-simulated crop gross primary production (GPP), net primary production (NPP), and LAI time-series can explain 82%, 83%, and 85%, respectively, of the variation in the above-ground biomass (AGB) for six selected annual crops, while an application of individual crop LAI explains only 50% of the variation in AGB. The linear relationships between the AGB and these three indicators (GPP, NPP and LAI time-series) are rather high for the six crops, while the slopes of the regression models vary for individual crop type, indicating the need for calibration of key photosynthetic parameters and carbon allocation coefficients. This study demonstrates that accumulated GPP and NPP derived from an ecosystem model, driven by Sentinel-2 LAI data and abiotic data, can be effectively used for crop AGB mapping; the temporal information from LAI is also effective in AGB mapping for some crop types.


DOI bib
Evolution of evapotranspiration models using thermal and shortwave remote sensing data
Jing M. Chen, Jane Liu
Remote Sensing of Environment, Volume 237

Evapotranspiration (ET) from the land surface is an important component of the terrestrial hydrological cycle. Since the advent of Earth observation by satellites, various models have been developed to use thermal and shortwave remote sensing data for ET estimation. In this review, we provide a brief account of the key milestones in the history of remote sensing ET model development in two categories: temperature-based and conductance-based models. Temperature-based ET models utilize land surface temperature (LST) observed through thermal remote sensing to calculate the sensible heat flux from which ET is estimated as a residual of the surface energy balance or to estimate the evaporative fraction from which ET is derived from the available energy. Models of various complexities have been developed to estimate ET from surfaces of different vegetation fractions. One-source models combine soil and vegetation into a composite surface for ET estimation, while two-source models estimate ET of soil and vegetation components separately. Image contexture-based triangular and trapezoid models are simple and effective temperature-based ET models based on spatial and/or temporal variation patterns of LST. Several effective temporal scaling schemes are available for extending instantaneous temperature-based ET estimation to daily or longer time periods. Conductance-based ET models usually use the Penman-Monteith (P-M) equation to estimate ET with shortwave remote sensing data. A key put to these models is canopy conductance to water vapor, which depends on canopy structure and leaf stomatal conductance. Shortwave remote sensing data are used to determine canopy structural parameters, and stomatal conductance can be estimated in different ways. Based on the principle of the coupling between carbon and water cycles, stomatal conductance can be reliably derived from the plant photosynthesis rate. Three types of photosynthesis models are available for deriving stomatal or canopy conductance: (1) big-leaf models for the total canopy conductance, (2) two-big-leaf models for canopy conductances for sunlit and shaded leaf groups, and (3) two-leaf models for stomatal conductances for the average sunlit and shaded leaves separately. Correspondingly, there are also big-leaf, two-big-leaf and two-leaf ET models based on these conductances. The main difference among them is the level of aggregation of conductances before the P-M equation is used for ET estimation, with big-leaf models having the highest aggregation. Since the relationship between ET and conductance is nonlinear, this aggregation causes negative bias errors, with the big-leaf models having the largest bias. It is apparent from the existing literature that two-leaf conductance-based ET models have the least bias in comparison with flux measurements. Based on this review, we make the following recommendations for future work: (1) improving key remote sensing products needed for ET mapping purposes, including soil moisture, foliage clumping index, and leaf carboxylation rate, (2) combining temperature-based and conductance-based models for regional ET estimation, (3) refining methodologies for tight coupling between carbon and water cycles, (4) fully utilizing vegetation structural and biochemical parameters that can now be reliably retrieved from shortwave remote sensing, and (5) to improve regional and global ET monitoring capacity.


DOI bib
Comparison of Big‐Leaf, Two‐Big‐Leaf, and Two‐Leaf Upscaling Schemes for Evapotranspiration Estimation Using Coupled Carbon‐Water Modeling
Xiangzhong Luo, Jing M. Chen, Jane Liu, T. Andrew Black, Holly Croft, R. M. Staebler, Li He, M. Altaf Arain, Bin Chen, Gang Mo, Alemu Gonsamo, Harry McCaughey
Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, Volume 123, Issue 1

Author(s): Luo, X; Chen, JM; Liu, J; Black, TA; Croft, H; Staebler, R; He, L; Arain, MA; Chen, B; Mo, G; Gonsamo, A; McCaughey, H | Abstract: Evapotranspiration (ET) is commonly estimated using the Penman-Monteith equation, which assumes that the plant canopy is a big leaf (BL) and the water flux from vegetation is regulated by canopy stomatal conductance (Gs). However, BL has been found to be unsuitable for terrestrial biosphere models built on the carbon-water coupling principle because it fails to capture daily variations of gross primary productivity (GPP). A two-big-leaf scheme (TBL) and a two-leaf scheme (TL) that stratify a canopy into sunlit and shaded leaves have been developed to address this issue. However, there is a lack of comparison of these upscaling schemes for ET estimation, especially on the difference between TBL and TL. We find that TL shows strong performance (r2n=n0.71, root-mean-square errorn=n0.05nmm/h) in estimating ET at nine eddy covariance towers in Canada. BL simulates lower annual ET and GPP than TL and TBL. The biases of estimated ET and GPP increase with leaf area index (LAI) in BL and TBL, and the biases of TL show no trends with LAI. BL miscalculates the portions of light-saturated and light-unsaturated leaves in the canopy, incurring negative biases in its flux estimation. TBL and TL showed improved yet different GPP and ET estimations. This difference is attributed to the lower Gs and intercellular CO2 concentration simulated in TBL compared to their counterparts in TL. We suggest to use TL for ET modeling to avoid the uncertainty propagated from the artificial upscaling of leaf-level processes to the canopy scale in BL and TBL.