The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Forest ecosystem processes at the watershed scale: sensitivity to remotely-sensed Leaf Area Index estimates
Abstract
Recent research has shown that general trends in forest leaf area index along regional climatic gradients can be adequately characterized by using ratios of near-infrared and red reflectances. However it has proven difficult to represent properly the spatial distribution of Leaf Area Index (LAI) at sub-regional scales such as small catchments. The key problem at Thematic Mapper scale is the variation in canopy closure and understorey contribution, which dramatically influences near-infrared reflectance from conifer forests, [n this paper, a new spectral index is presented to estimate LAI of conifer forests using a combination of Red, NIR and mid-IR reflectances from the Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM). A simulation system (RHESSys) was used first, to generate potential vegetation patterns around a watershed in order to test them against remotely-sensed vegetation patterns, and secondly, to test the sensitivity of forest ecosystem processes to LAT estimated from combinations of the Thematic Mapper data The relation between Normalised Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) and LAI is poorly defined at TM scale because of the outsized contribution of understorey vegetation and background materials to the NIR reflectance in open canopies. The mid-IR correction factor acting as a scalar for canopy closure scaled down the inflated NDVI in the open canopies, resulting in an improved relation between NDVI and LAT LAI, estimates from the MIR corrected NDVI better represented the vegetation patterns in Soup Creek watershed than those from uncorrected NDVI both in terms of magnitude and spatial patterns. Simulations using LAIs derived from corrected NDVI showed lower rates evapotranspiration and net photosynthesis. Differences in mean responses of evapotranspiration and photosynthesis were as large as 8cm and 2tonC ha-1 yr-1 respectively between simulation runs using LAIs from corrected and uncorrected NDVI.
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
BEVEN, K. J., & KIRKBY, M. J. (1979) · Hydrological Sciences Bulletin · doi:10.1080/02626667909491834 · Cited by 6,670
Cited by
Land-Use Change and Hydrologic Processes: A Major Focus for the Future
DeFries, R., & Eshleman, K. N. (2004) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.5584 · Cited by 516
CARNIVORES AS FOCAL SPECIES FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION
Carroll, C., Noss, R. F., & Paquet, P. C. (2001) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[0961:cafsfc]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 371
Metadata
- Authors
- NEMANI, R., PIERCE, L., RUNNING, S., & BAND, L.
- Venue
- International Journal of Remote Sensing
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1993-09
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 2519-2534
- ISSN
- 0143-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-5901
- OpenAlex
- W2155722785
- Cited by
- 319
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.87
- 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: Forest ecosystem processes at the watershed scale: sensitivity to remotely-sensed Leaf Area Index estimates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01431169308904290
- The paper
- NEMANI, R., PIERCE, L., RUNNING, S., & BAND, L. (1993). Forest ecosystem processes at the watershed scale: sensitivity to remotely-sensed Leaf Area Index estimates. International Journal of Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431169308904290
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.