Global sensitivity analysis of PROSAIL model parameters when simulating Moso bamboo forest canopy reflectance. Issue 22 (16th November 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gu, Chengyan; Du, Huaqiang; Mao, Fangjie; Han, Ning; Zhou, Guomo; Xu, Xiaojun; Sun, Shaobo; Gao, Guolong
• Is Part Of: International journal of remote sensing. Volume 37:Issue 22(2016)
• Page Start: 5270
• Page End: 5286
• Publication Date: 2016-11-16
• Subjects: Remote sensing -- Periodicals; Télédétection -- Périodiques; 621.3678
• DOI: 10.1080/01431161.2016.1239287
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0143-1161

Abstract

ABSTRACT: PROSAIL is a combination of the leaf optical properties spectra (PROSPECT) model and the scattering by arbitrarily inclined leaves (SAIL) canopy bidirectional reflectance model. When modelling forest canopy reflectance using the PROSAIL radiative transfer model, the sensitivities of parameters can affect the modelling accuracy. Traditionally, sensitivities have been assessed using local sensitivity analysis (LSA); however, drawbacks to this approach include a lack of consideration for coupled effects between different parameters. In this study, parameter sensitivities in the PROSAIL model were calculated using two global sensitivity analysis (GSA) methods (the Extended Fourier Amplitude Sensitivity Test (EFAST) method and the Morris method), field measurements, and Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM) data for a Moso bamboo forest. The results of GSA were compared with those of LSA in order to identify the key parameters impacting the Moso bamboo forest canopy reflectance, and to provide a reference for model optimization and vegetation canopy inversion improvement. The results showed that: (1) the sensitivities of six major input parameters of the PROSAIL model were generally consistent with the sorting orders of the two GSA methods, but were not in accordance with those from the LSA method, especially in the mid-infrared band; (2) coupled effects among parameters acting on reflectance simulation in visible light bands were greater than those in infrared bands; (3) the simulated canopy reflectance was evaluated using Landsat 5 TM data, and the results simulated based on LSA analysis showed higher error than those based on GSA analysis, because the LSA method ignored the influence of some parameters on canopy reflectance, e.g. leaf mesophyll structure ( N ), average leaf angle (ALA), leaf water content ( C w ), and leaf dry matter content ( C m ). However, GSA was able to fully consider the coupled effects among parameters, and thus identified the sensitive parameters impacting on reflectance more accurately.