| Literature DB >> 30704120 |
Shuai Huang1,2, Jianli Ding3,4, Jie Zou5,6, Bohua Liu7,8, Junyong Zhang9,10, Wenqian Chen11,12.
Abstract
Soil moisture is an important aspect of heat transfer process and energy exchange between land-atmosphere systems, and it is a key link to the surface and groundwater circulation and land carbon cycles. In this study, according to the characteristics of the study area, an advanced integral equation model was used for numerical simulation analysis to establish a database of surface microwave scattering characteristics under sparse vegetation cover. Thus, a soil moisture retrieval model suitable for arid area was constructed. The results were as follows: (1) The response of the backscattering coefficient to soil moisture and associated surface roughness is significantly and logarithmically correlated under different incidence angles and polarization modes, and, a database of microwave scattering characteristics of arid soil surface under sparse vegetation cover was established. (2) According to the Sentinel-1 radar system parameters, a model for retrieving spatial distribution information of soil moisture was constructed; the soil moisture content information was extracted, and the results were consistent with the spatial distribution characteristics of soil moisture in the same period in the research area. (3) For the 0⁻10 cm surface soil moisture, the correlation coefficient between the simulated value and the measured value reached 0.8488, which means that the developed retrieval model has applicability to derive surface soil moisture in the oasis region of arid regions. This study can provide method for real-time and large-scale detection of soil moisture content in arid areas.Entities:
Keywords: AIEM model; Sentinel-1; microwave remote sensing; soil moisture
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30704120 PMCID: PMC6387433 DOI: 10.3390/s19030589
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Geographical location of the study area and the field monitoring sites.
Features of the land cover classes selected for classification.
| Class | Sites | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Farm | 26 | Planting crops |
| Wetland | 5 | Almost all vegetation is shrubs with a high vegetation coverage |
| Bare soil | 24 | No vegetation cover |
| Grass | 11 | Saline vegetation, shrub |
| Salinated land | 28 | No vegetation cover, but there are salt shells on the surface |
Figure 2Flowchart for the soil moisture retrieval.
Vegetation parameters in a semi empirical model.
| Parameter | All Vegetation | Grazing Land | Crop | Grass |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 0.0012 | 0.0009 | 0.0018 | 0.0014 |
| B | 0.091 | 0.032 | 0.138 | 0.084 |
Figure 3Effect of soil moisture change on the backscattering coefficient. = 39 °, = 15 cm. (a) VV polarization; (b) VH polarization.
Figure 4Effect of soil moisture change on the backscattering coefficient. = 39°; = 0.5 cm. (a) VV polarization; (b) VH polarization.
Figure 5Regression functions between soil moisture and the backscattering coefficient. (a) VV polarization; (b) VH polarization.
Figure 6Effect of different incidence angle on the RMS height changes response of the backscattering coefficient. (a) VV polarization; (b) VH polarization.
Figure 7Reletionship between the backscattering coefficient and Z. (a) 0.3–0.9 cm; (b) : 0.9–2.5 cm.
The coefficients of different incidence angles of VV polarization.
|
| Standard Deviation |
|
| Standard Deviation |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | 2.402 | 2.455 | 12.766 | 0.610 | 0.832 | 37 | 3.054 | 3.196 | 4.526 | 0.523 | 0.920 |
| 13 | 2.479 | 2.497 | 11.789 | 0.656 | 0.828 | 39 | 3.096 | 3.235 | 4.432 | 0.537 | 0.911 |
| 15 | 2.513 | 2.601 | 10.652 | 0.662 | 0.821 | 41 | 3.143 | 3.289 | 4.315 | 0.458 | 0.929 |
| 17 | 2.564 | 2.689 | 9..632 | 0.601 | 0.839 | 43 | 3.187 | 3.355 | 4.223 | 0.465 | 0.931 |
| 19 | 2.603 | 2.742 | 8.698 | 0.678 | 0.825 | 45 | 3.232 | 3.416 | 4.136 | 0.399 | 0.936 |
| 21 | 2.678 | 2.795 | 7.923 | 0.598 | 0.898 | 47 | 3.297 | 3.496 | 4.045 | 0.425 | 0.929 |
| 23 | 2.741 | 2.846 | 7.212 | 0.621 | 0.830 | 49 | 3.347 | 3.562 | 4.212 | 0.371 | 0.938 |
| 25 | 2.796 | 2.899 | 6.625 | 0.635 | 0.828 | 51 | 3.395 | 3.628 | 4.287 | 0.457 | 0.929 |
| 27 | 2.846 | 2.932 | 5.945 | 0.641 | 0.824 | 53 | 3.438 | 3.701 | 4.378 | 0.565 | 0.901 |
| 29 | 2.898 | 2.998 | 5.321 | 0.580 | 0.902 | 55 | 3.486 | 3.789 | 4.567 | 0.498 | 0.916 |
| 31 | 2.938 | 3.021 | 4.852 | 0.601 | 0.839 | 57 | 3.531 | 3.869 | 4.579 | 0.465 | 0.923 |
| 33 | 2.996 | 3.079 | 4.765 | 0.633 | 0.829 | 59 | 3.597 | 3.945 | 4.583 | 0.441 | 0.925 |
| 35 | 3.012 | 3.148 | 4.679 | 0.574 | 0.900 | 61 | 3.621 | 4.012 | 4.635 | 0.432 | 0.931 |
The coefficients of different incidence angles of VH polarization.
|
| Standard Deviation |
|
| Standard Deviation |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | 2.474 | 2.405 | 12.380 | 0.607 | 0.831 | 37 | 2.954 | 3.387 | 1.103 | 0.526 | 0.919 |
| 13 | 2.492 | 2.604 | 11.565 | 0.678 | 0.825 | 39 | 2.982 | 3.416 | 0.568 | 0.539 | 0.912 |
| 15 | 2.512 | 2.796 | 10.638 | 0.659 | 0.827 | 41 | 3.012 | 3.469 | -0.053 | 0.465 | 0.926 |
| 17 | 2.537 | 2.832 | 9.658 | 0.600 | 0.852 | 43 | 3.073 | 3.506 | -0.465 | 0.403 | 0.932 |
| 19 | 2.578 | 2.901 | 8.065 | 0.687 | 0.815 | 45 | 3.146 | 3.559 | -1.011 | 0.398 | 0.936 |
| 21 | 2.602 | 2.985 | 7.049 | 0.596 | 0.895 | 47 | 3.201 | 3.625 | -1.368 | 0.423 | 0.930 |
| 23 | 2.691 | 3.024 | 6.123 | 0.632 | 0.829 | 49 | 3.267 | 3.687 | -1.769 | 0.369 | 0.942 |
| 25 | 2.725 | 3.068 | 5.326 | 0.645 | 0.823 | 51 | 3.301 | 3.712 | -2.145 | 0.354 | 0.951 |
| 27 | 2.767 | 3.102 | 4.505 | 0.651 | 0.825 | 53 | 3.364 | 3.765 | -2.687 | 0.312 | 0.962 |
| 29 | 2.802 | 3.159 | 3.724 | 0.598 | 0.898 | 55 | 3.412 | 3.829 | -3.269 | 0.201 | 0.989 |
| 31 | 2.842 | 3.211 | 3.012 | 0.603 | 0.836 | 57 | 3.478 | 3.897 | -3.755 | 0.102 | 0.995 |
| 33 | 2.897 | 3.275 | 2.225 | 0.643 | 0.823 | 59 | 3.521 | 3.946 | -4.052 | 0.326 | 0.960 |
| 35 | 2.921 | 3.326 | 1.687 | 0.586 | 0.901 | 61 | 3.586 | 4.012 | -4.368 | 0.128 | 0.992 |
Figure 8Spatial distribution of the vegetation water content.
Figure 9Remove vegetation effect. (a) VV Polarization; (b) VH Polarization.
Figure 10The spatial distribution information of soil moisture.
Statistical metrics between in situ and simulation soil moisture.
| Model | Bias | RMSE | Slope |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIEM | 0.039 | 0.97 | 0.8894 |
Figure 11The correlation of the soil moisture data between simulation and measured values.