Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 280

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of uncertainty in the ocean reflectance determined by three satellite ocean color sensors (MERIS, SeaWiFS and MODIS‐A) at an offshore site in the Mediterranean Sea (BOUSSOLE project)

Open access
Antoine, David, d'Ortenzio, Fabrizio, Hooker, Stanford B., Bécu, Guislain, Gentili, Bernard, Tailliez, Dominique, Scott, Alec J.·2008·Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans

Abstract

The match‐up of satellite‐derived reflectances with in situ observations is crucial to evaluate their quality and temporal stability. To contribute to this effort, a project has been set up to collect a data set of in situ radiometric and bio‐optical quantities, in support to satellite ocean color calibration and validation. The project has been named “BOUSSOLE”, and one of its key elements is a deep‐sea optics mooring collecting data on a near‐continuous basis since September 2003. This buoy is deployed in the deep clear waters of the northwestern Mediterranean Sea, and is visited on a monthly basis for servicing and acquisition of complementary data. The characteristics of the work area establish the site as a satisfactory location for validating satellite ocean color observations. A description of the data processing protocols is provided, followed by an analysis of the uncertainty of the buoy radiometry measurements. The results of a match‐up analysis of the marine reflectances, diffuse attenuation coefficients, and chlorophyll concentrations for three major missions, i.e., MERIS, SeaWiFS, and MODIS‐A, are then analyzed. They show poor performances for the bluest band (412 nm) of the three sensors, and performances within requirements at 443 and 490 nm for SeaWiFS and MODIS‐A. These results suggest that a vicarious calibration should be introduced for the MERIS sensor. This analysis also demonstrates that a major effort is still required to improve atmospheric correction procedures whatever the mission.

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 · 10.1029/2007jc004472

Cites

42 of 42 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 42 references

Cited by

See all 280

Metadata

Authors
Antoine, D., d'Ortenzio, F., Hooker, S. B., Bécu, G., Gentili, B., Tailliez, D., & Scott, A. J.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
Published
2008-07
Volume
113
Issue
C7
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1981870342
Cited by
280
References
42
FWCI
34.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Assessment of uncertainty in the ocean reflectance determined by three satellite ocean color sensors (MERIS, SeaWiFS and MODIS‐A) at an offshore site in the Mediterranean Sea (BOUSSOLE project). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2007jc004472
The paper
Antoine, D., d'Ortenzio, F., Hooker, S. B., Bécu, G., Gentili, B., Tailliez, D., & Scott, A. J. (2008). Assessment of uncertainty in the ocean reflectance determined by three satellite ocean color sensors (MERIS, SeaWiFS and MODIS‐A) at an offshore site in the Mediterranean Sea (BOUSSOLE project). Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jc004472

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.