| Literature DB >> 31906028 |
Manh Van Nguyen1,2, Chao-Hung Lin1, Hone-Jay Chu1, Lalu Muhamad Jaelani3, Muhammad Aldila Syariz1,3.
Abstract
The spatial heterogeneity and nonlinearity exhibited by bio-optical relationships in turbid inland waters complicate the retrieval of chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) concentration from multispectral satellite images. Most studies achieved satisfactory Chl-a estimation and focused solely on the spectral regions from near-infrared (NIR) to red spectral bands. However, the optical complexity of turbid waters may vary with locations and seasons, which renders the selection of spectral bands challenging. Accordingly, this study proposes an optimization process utilizing available spectral models to achieve optimal Chl-a retrieval. The method begins with the generation of a set of feature candidates, followed by candidate selection and optimization. Each candidate links to a Chl-a estimation model, including two-band, three-band, and normalized different chlorophyll index models. Moreover, a set of selected candidates using available spectral bands implies an optimal composition of estimation models, which results in an optimal Chl-a estimation. Remote sensing images and in situ Chl-a measurements in Lake Kasumigaura, Japan, are analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively to evaluate the proposed method. Results indicate that the model outperforms related Chl-a estimation models. The root-mean-squared errors of the Chl-a concentration obtained by the resulting model (OptiM-3) improve from 11.95 mg · m - 3 to 6.37 mg · m - 3 , and the Pearson's correlation coefficients between the predicted and in situ Chl- a improve from 0.56 to 0.89.Entities:
Keywords: Chl-a estimation model; chlorophyll-a; inland turbid water; multispectral satellite images; water quality mapping
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31906028 PMCID: PMC6981683 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17010272
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Study area and locations of in situ samples in 2008 and 2010.
Figure 2Box-plots of the summary statistics for chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) in 2008 and 2010.
Figure 3Procedures of the study, including feature candidate generation from three-band, two band, and the normalized difference chlorophyll index (NDCI), as well as feature optimization and Chl-a retrieval model determination.
Example of feature candidate generation from the selected bands.
| Selected Spectral Bands | Possible Feature Candidates | Models | Of Candidates | Notation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Three-band model | 30 |
|
|
| Two-band model | 10 |
| |
| NDCI | 10 |
|
Proposed and related Chl-a estimation models.
| Model Name | Model Feature |
|---|---|
| OptiM-1 |
|
| OptiM-2 |
|
| OptiM-3 |
|
| OptiM-4 |
|
| OptiM-5 |
|
| ThreeB-G [ | |
| TwoB-M [ | |
| NDCI [ |
|
Chl-a estimation models using regression fitness. The intercept and two slopes of the regression lines are denoted as , , and , respectively.
| Models |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OptiM-1 | 0.77 | 235.32 | – | 0.57 |
| OptiM-2 | 1.93 | 174.26 | – | 0.61 |
| OptiM-3 | −7.74 | 94.03 | 106.40 | 0.61 |
| OptiM-4 | −174.57 | 691.61 | −280.42 | 0.62 |
| OptiM-5 | 48.51 | −183.61 | – | 0.59 |
| ThreeB-G [ | 24.91 | 115.14 | – | 0.44 |
| TwoB-M [ | −87.93 | 103.95 | – | 0.55 |
| NDCI [ | 9.17 | 295.02 | – | 0.55 |
Comparison of performance of Chl-a estimation models using the RMSE, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and slope m.
| Models | RMSE | Pearson’s Coefficient |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| No. of testing samples ( | |||
| OptiM-1 | 11.91 | 0.58 | 0.40 |
| OptiM-2 | 9.14 | 0.77 | 0.57 |
| OptiM-3 | 6.37 | 0.89 | 0.75 |
| OptiM-4 | 13.65 | 0.52 | 0.56 |
| OptiM-5 | 9.56 | 0.71 | 0.54 |
| ThreeB-G [ | 11.95 | 0.63 | 0.37 |
| TwoB-M [ | 12.24 | 0.57 | 0.38 |
| NDCI [ | 12.30 | 0.56 | 0.38 |
OptiM-3: Optimal resulting model.
Figure 4Comparison between estimated and measured chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) concentration provided by compared models in OptiM-3, ThreeB-G, TwoB-M, and NDCI models.
Figure 5Maps of spatial distribution of Chl-a in 2010 generated by our proposed model (OptiM-3), ThreeB-G [13], TwoB-M [18], and NDCI [25] (unit: ).