Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 307

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Remote sensing of phytoplankton pigments: A comparison of empirical and theoretical approaches

Sathyendranath, S., Cota, G., Stuart, V., Maass, H., Platt, T.·2001·International Journal of Remote Sensing

Abstract

Algorithms that have been used on a routine basis for remote sensing of the phytoplankton pigment, chlorophyll- a, from ocean colour data from satellite sensors such as the CZCS (Coastal Zone Color Scanner), SeaWiFS (Sea Viewing Wide Field-of-View Sensor) and OCTS (Ocean Colour and Temperature Scanner) are all of an empirical nature. However, there exist theoretical models that allow ocean colour to be expressed as a function of the inherent optical properties of seawater, such as the absorption coefficient and the backscattering coefficient. These properties can in turn be expressed as functions of chlorophyll- a, at least for the so-called Case 1 waters in which phytoplankton may be considered to be the single, independent variable responsible for most of the variations in the marine optical properties. Here, we use such a theoretical approach to model variations in ocean colour as a function of chlorophyll- a concentration, and compare the results with some empirical models in routine use. The parameters of phytoplankton absorption necessary for the implementation of the ocean colour model are derived from our database of over 700 observations of phytoplankton absorption spectra and concurrent measurements of phytoplankton pigments by HPLC (High Performance Liquid Chromatography) techniques. Since there are reports in the literature that significant differences exist in the performance of the algorithms in polar regions compared with lower latitudes, the model is first implemented using observations made at latitudes less than 50. It is then applied to the Labrador Sea, a high-latitude environment. Our results show that there are indeed differences in the performance of the algorithm at high latitudes, and that these differences may be attributed to changes in the optical characteristics of phytoplankton that accompany changes in the taxonomic composition of their assemblages. The sensitivities of the model to assumptions made regarding absorption by coloured dissolved organic matter (or yellow substances) and backscattering by particles are examined. The importance of Raman scattering on ocean colour and its influence on the algorithms are also investigated.

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 · 10.1080/014311601449925

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.

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

Cited by

See all 307

Metadata

Authors
Sathyendranath, S., Cota, G., Stuart, V., Maass, H., & Platt, T.
Venue
International Journal of Remote Sensing
Published
2001-01
Volume
22
Issue
2-3
Pages
249-273
ISSN
  • 0143-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-5901
OpenAlex
W2055841721
Cited by
307
References
0
FWCI
8.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Remote sensing of phytoplankton pigments: A comparison of empirical and theoretical approaches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/014311601449925
The paper
Sathyendranath, S., Cota, G., Stuart, V., Maass, H., & Platt, T. (2001). Remote sensing of phytoplankton pigments: A comparison of empirical and theoretical approaches. International Journal of Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1080/014311601449925

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.