The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Satellite remote sensing of surface energy balance: Success, failures, and unresolved issues in FIFE
Open accessAbstract
The FIFE staff science group, consisting of the authors, developed and evaluated process models relating surface energy and mass flux, that is, surface rates, to boundary layer and surface biophysical characteristics, that is, surface states. In addition, we developed and evaluated remote sensing algorithms for inferring surface state characteristics. In this paper we report the results of our efforts. We also look in detail at the sensor and satellite platform requirements (spatial resolution and orbital requirements) as driven by surface energy balance dynamics and spatial variability. We examine also the scale invariance of the process models and remote sensing algorithms, that is, to what degree do the remotely sensed parameters and energy balance relations translate from the patch level where they were developed to the mesoscale level where they are required? Finally, we examine the atmospheric correction and calibration issues involved in extending the remotely sensed observations within a season and between years. From these investigations we conclude that (1) existing formulations for the radiation balance and latent heat components of the surface energy balance equation are valid at the patch level. (2) Many of the surface physiological characteristics that parameterize these formulations can be estimated using satellite remote sensing at both local and regional scales; a few important ones cannot. (3) The mathematical structures relating radiation and surface energy flux to remote sensing parameters are, for the most part, scale invariant over the First International Satellite Land Surface Climatology Project (ISLSCP) Field Experiment (FIFE) study area. The conditions for scale invariance are derived. (4) The precision of satellite remote sensing estimates of surface reflectance, calibrated and corrected for atmospheric effects, is no worse than about 1% absolute. The errors may actually be smaller, but an upper bound of 1% results from sampling variance caused by differences among the satellite and ground sensors in spatial resolution, atmospheric effects, and calibration. (5) Afternoon cumulus in the study area required both the Landsat and the SPOT satellites for monitoring of the vegetation dynamics. This result implies the need for multiple polar orbiters, or geosynchronous satellites in an operational implementation. We found that canopy Fpar, the fraction of incident photosynthetically active radiation absorbed by a canopy, can be estimated with an error of about 10% using remote sensing, provided that regional variability in the reflectance of the canopy substrate is dealt with properly. We also found that spectral vegetation indices (VIs) respond primarily to the photosynthetically active radiation absorbed by the live or green component of the canopy as opposed to its necrotic or dead vegetation. This is of critical importance since radiation absorption by the live part of the canopy is the rate‐limiting process for photosynthesis and other key process rates such as evaporation. We found for the FIFE study area the surface moisture content at O to 10 cm to be another key rate‐limiting variable in photosynthesis and evaporation. At gravimetric soil moisture levels below 20%, photosynthesis and evaporation were strongly attenuated. Only microwave sensors have shown potential for satellite remote sensing of soil moisture and only in the top few centimeters. Hydrological models may also play a critical role in monitoring root zone soil moisture levels, but additional research is needed. From our review of the research of others in FIFE we conclude that downwelling shortwave radiation and surface albedo are also amenable to remote sensing. Unfortunately, from our research we also found that the remote estimation of surface temperature to useful accuracies is problematical; consequently, the use of thermal infrared measurements to infer sensible heat flux is probably not feasible to acceptable accuracies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species
Farquhar, G. D., von Caemmerer, S., & Berry, J. A. (1980) · Planta · doi:10.1007/bf00386231 · Cited by 8,796
Plant Responses to Water Stress
Hsiao, T. C. (1973) · Annual Review of Plant Physiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.pp.24.060173.002511 · Cited by 3,403
Jarvis, P. G. (1976) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1976.0035 · Cited by 3,260
Canopy reflectance, photosynthesis and transpiration
SELLERS, P. J. (1985) · International Journal of Remote Sensing · doi:10.1080/01431168508948283 · Cited by 2,278
Self-citationCollatz, G. J., Ball, J. T., Grivet, C., & Berry, J. A. (1991) · Agricultural and Forest Meteorology · doi:10.1016/0168-1923(91)90002-8 · Cited by 2,270
Light scattering by leaf layers with application to canopy reflectance modeling: The SAIL model
Verhoef, W. (1984) · Remote Sensing of Environment · doi:10.1016/0034-4257(84)90057-9 · Cited by 2,028
Kauth, R. J., & Thomas, G. (1976) · Purdue e-Pubs (Purdue University System) · Cited by 1,417
Gates, D. M., Keegan, H. J., Schleter, J. C., & Weidner, V. R. (1965) · Applied Optics · doi:10.1364/ao.4.000011 · Cited by 1,417
Detection of changes in leaf water content using Near- and Middle-Infrared reflectances☆
HUNTJR, E., & ROCK, B. (1989) · Remote Sensing of Environment · doi:10.1016/0034-4257(89)90046-1 · Cited by 1,299
Estimating Absorbed Photosynthetic Radiation and Leaf Area Index from Spectral Reflectance in Wheat1
Asrar, G., Fuchs, M., Kanemasu, E. T., & Hatfield, J. L. (1984) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.2134/agronj1984.00021962007600020029x · Cited by 1,224
Cited by
Norman, J. M., Kustas, W. P., & Humes, K. S. (1995) · Agricultural and Forest Meteorology · doi:10.1016/0168-1923(95)02265-y · Cited by 1,724
Modeling the Exchanges of Energy, Water, and Carbon Between Continents and the Atmosphere
Sellers, P. J., Dickinson, R. E., Randall, D. A., Betts, A. K., Hall, F. G., Berry, J. A., Collatz, G. J., Denning, A. S., Mooney, H. A., Nobre, C. A., et al. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.275.5299.502 · Cited by 1,524
Self-citationWang, K., & Dickinson, R. E. (2012) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1029/2011rg000373 · Cited by 1,504
Anderson, M. (1997) · Remote Sensing of Environment · doi:10.1016/s0034-4257(96)00215-5 · Cited by 834
Glenn, E. P., Huete, A. R., Nagler, P. L., & Nelson, S. G. (2008) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s8042136 · Cited by 754
Metadata
- Authors
- Hall, F. G., Huemmrich, K. F., Goetz, S. J., Sellers, P. J., & Nickeson, J. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1992-11-30
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- D17
- Pages
- 19061-19089
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2014698467
- Cited by
- 425
- References
- 27
- FWCI
- 28.47
- 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: Satellite remote sensing of surface energy balance: Success, failures, and unresolved issues in FIFE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/92jd02189
- The paper
- Hall, F. G., Huemmrich, K. F., Goetz, S. J., Sellers, P. J., & Nickeson, J. E. (1992). Satellite remote sensing of surface energy balance: Success, failures, and unresolved issues in FIFE. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/92jd02189
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.