Different spatial and temporal arrangements for validating the latent heat flux obtained using the MOD16 product in a forest in the Western Amazon
The Amazon rainforest is an important source of evapotranspiration and is essential in the global atmospheric circulation and hydrological cycle. However, measurements on vegetated surfaces are difficult, and methods such as remote sensing are promising in the micrometeorological data area. We aimed...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2023 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA) |
| Repositorio: | Repositório Institucional da UFLA |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.ufla.br:1/57044 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://repositorio.ufla.br/handle/1/57044 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Energy flux Evapotranspiration Tropical forest Sensor MODIS Eddy covariance |
| Sumario: | The Amazon rainforest is an important source of evapotranspiration and is essential in the global atmospheric circulation and hydrological cycle. However, measurements on vegetated surfaces are difficult, and methods such as remote sensing are promising in the micrometeorological data area. We aimed to assess the applicability of the MOD16 product to estimate evapotranspiration in a vegetated area. MOD16 data (LEMOD) derive from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer sensor. For comparison, we used data from the eddy covariance system (LEEC) of the tower of the Large-scale Biosphere-Atmosphere Program in the Amazon of the Jaru Biological Reserve. To measure the linearity among variables, the Pearson correlation test (α=0.05) was used, and the T test was applied to assess the statistical significance between LEMOD and LEEC means (α=0.05); the root mean square error was also calculated. Regarding LEMOD, a similarity was found between the annual means of model and data, in which the best LEMOD estimates were obtained for annual averaging, when mean values were 96.51 W m–2 (0.7% lower than LEEC). LEMOD overestimates ranged from 1.05 W m–2 (1%) in 2007 to 15.78 W m–2 (18%) in 2005. Variations in short periods were not represented by the LEMOD product. |
|---|