Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 423

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Extraction of vegetation biophysical parameters by inversion of the PROSPECT + SAIL models on sugar beet canopy reflectance data. Application to TM and AVIRIS sensors

Open access
Jacquemoud, S., Baret, F., Andrieu, B., Danson, F.M., Jaggard, K.·1995·Remote Sensing of Environment

Abstract

The PROSPECT leaf optical properties and SAIL canopy reflectance models were coupled and inverted using a set of 96 AVIRIS (Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer) equivalent spectra gathered in afield experiment on sugar beet plots expressing a large range in leaf area index, chlorophyll concentration, and soil color. In a first attempt, the model accurately reproduced the spectral reflectance of vegetation, using six variables: chlorophyll a + b concentration (Cab), water depth (Cw), leaf mesophyll structure parameter (N), leaf area index (LAI), mean leaf inclination angle (θl), and hot-spot size parameter (s). The four structural parameters (N, LAI, τl, and s) were poorly estimated, indicating instability in the inversion process; however, the two biochemical parameters (Cab and Cw) were evaluated reasonably well, except over very bright soils. In a second attempt, three of the four structure variables were assigned a fixed value corresponding to the average observed in the experiment. Inversions performed to retrieve the remaining structure variable, leaf area index, and the two biochemical variables showed large improvements in the accuracy of LAI, but slightly poorer performance for Cab and Cw. Here again, poor results were obtained with very bright soils. The compensations observed between the LAI and Cab or Cw led us to evaluate the performance of two more-synthetic variables, canopy chlorophyll content or canopy water content, for these the inversions produced reasonable estimates. The application of this approach to Landsat TM (Thematic Mapper) data provided similar results, both for the spectrum reconstruction capability and for the retrieval of canopy biophysical characteristics.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0034-4257(95)00018-v

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 423

Metadata

Authors
Jacquemoud, S., Baret, F., Andrieu, B., Danson, F. M., & Jaggard, K.
Venue
Remote Sensing of Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1995-06
Volume
52
Issue
3
Pages
163-172
ISSN
0034-4257 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2055842947
Cited by
423
References
2
FWCI
6.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Extraction of vegetation biophysical parameters by inversion of the PROSPECT + SAIL models on sugar beet canopy reflectance data. Application to TM and AVIRIS sensors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0034-4257(95)00018-v
The paper
Jacquemoud, S., Baret, F., Andrieu, B., Danson, F. M., & Jaggard, K. (1995). Extraction of vegetation biophysical parameters by inversion of the PROSPECT + SAIL models on sugar beet canopy reflectance data. Application to TM and AVIRIS sensors. Remote Sensing of Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4257(95)00018-v

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.