1 - ornl daac | terra data products review, jan 7-8, 2002 data support for validation of eos land...

1 - ORNL DAAC | Terra Data Products Review, Jan 7-8, 2002

Data Support for Validation of

EOS Land Products

Data Support for Validation of

EOS Land Products

Larry Voorhees, Dick Olson, Bob Cook, ORNL* DAAC

Jeff Morisette, NASA GSFCJohn Dwyer, EDC DAAC

Terra Data Products ReviewNASA HQ

January 7-8, 2002

Larry Voorhees, Dick Olson, Bob Cook, ORNL* DAAC

Jeff Morisette, NASA GSFCJohn Dwyer, EDC DAAC

Terra Data Products ReviewNASA HQ

January 7-8, 2002 * Oak Ridge National Laboratory is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the U.S. Dept. of Energy under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725.


Contributors and ParticipantsContributors and Participants• Jeff Privette, Jeff Morisette, Nazmi El Saleous,

and Robert Wolfe, NASA GSFC

• John Dwyer, EDC DAAC

• Steve Running, U Montana

• Ranga Myneni, Boston U

• Alfredo Huete, U Arizona

• Dennis Baldocchi, UCLA

• Tom Boden, AmeriFlux ORNL

• Many other Science Team and EOS Validation Investigators


SummarySummary• Approach for supporting validation has been

designed, reviewed, and tested• Distribution systems in place and working• Data for validation are available and more data

are being added• MODIS Science Team, EOS Validation PIs, and

others are using the systems• Plans are in place to communicate validation

results via special journal issues and workshops• Need to extend correlative analysis to global

network of sites


OutlineOutline1. Validation Approach2. Data Available for Validation

– high resolution imagery– in situ data

3. Intercomparison Activities4. Data Use5. Communication6. Path Forward7. What works & what needs to be improved?


LAI/fPARNPP

In-situ ObservationsIn-situ Observations

??Remote SensingRemote Sensing

LAI/fPAR NPP

MODIS Land Validation: Level 2 to 4 data products primarily ecosystem variables

- Successful validation depends on determining measurement uncertainties for specific uses

- Validation of remote sensing land products at a global scale is an unprecedented scientific challenge

ValidationValidation

“Assessing by independent means the uncertainties of data products”


ApproachApproachTo compare MODIS products with parameters derived from higher-resolution airborne or satellite sensors and data from ground-based studies at validation ‘core sites’, flux towers, data from literature, etc.


ProductScience Team

EOS Validation Investigator

Additional Validation Data

Surface Reflectance Vermote Liang, Meyer AERONET

Land Temperature Wan Hook

Snow & Ice Hall Li, Nolin, Shi

BRDF / Albedo Strahler and Muller Liang, Privette (SAVE) AERONET, BSRN, SAFARI

Veg Index Huete Schowengerdt Chiba U / land cover helicopter

LAI / fPAR Myneni Gower, Meyer BigFoot, Krasnoyarsk

PSN / NPP Running Baldocchi, Olson BigFoot, FLUXNET, AmeriFlux

Fire / burn scars Justice Hao SAFARI 2000

Land Cover Strahler BigFoot, International Groups

VCC / VCF Townshend RESAC

MODIS Atmospheric King Multiple SAFARI 2000, others

MOPITT Drummond Multiple SAFARI 2000, others

MISR Diner Multiple SAFARI 2000, others

Land Products ValidationLand Products Validation

Based on MODIS Land Team Validation Update for Terra and Aqua, December 2000

Primary Products SupportedPrimary Products Supported


EOS Land Validation Core SitesEOS Land Validation Core Sites• Based on existing stations, resources, experts

• FLUXNET, AERONET, BigFoot, LTER, etc.

• Long-term monitoring

• Jointly nominated by Instrument and Validation PIs

• 26 sites stratified by six biomes

• Promote resource sharing and synergies in validating multiple sensors and products

• Imagery and in situ data available for many uses, not just validation


• Remote Sensing Data LandSat 5, ETM+, IKONOS, ASTER, airborne sensors, subsetted over the core sites

• in situ Site Data Collected by various groups at core sites

• Networks AERONET, FLUXNET, etc.

• Ancillary Site Data / GIS Layers - site variables - elevation - land cover - reference layers (e.g., political boundaries, airports, water bodies)

• Remote Sensing Data LandSat 5, ETM+, IKONOS, ASTER, airborne sensors, subsetted over the core sites

• in situ Site Data Collected by various groups at core sites

• Networks AERONET, FLUXNET, etc.

• Ancillary Site Data / GIS Layers - site variables - elevation - land cover - reference layers (e.g., political boundaries, airports, water bodies)

Data for EOS Land Validation Core SitesData for EOS Land

Validation Core Sites


Remote Sensing Data for Core SitesRemote Sensing Data for Core Sites

EOS Core Site Imagery DataMODISSeaWiFSETM+ 2 1 7 3 1 1 7 1 1 5 5 2 1 8 1 2 9 5 1 10 2 1 1 2 5IKONOS 1 3 1 5 5 1 2 4 4 1 1 1 2 3 5 2 2 1 3 1 1 3 5ASTER 1 7 4 4 3 12GLCTSTM 90's eraMQUALSAVIRISCRESSGLCFEO-1MISR planned


Validation Subsetting by MODAPSValidation Subsetting by MODAPS• EOS Core Sites

(200 x 200 km) to EDC

• EOS Core Sites and GT-NET sites (11 x 31 km) to UMt and ORNL

• LAI Inter-comp. Sites (200 x 200 km) to EDC

• SAFARI 2000 Sites (200 x 200 km) to UMd and South Africa Disaster Management Center Provided in hdf format,

integerized sinusoidal projection

Provided in hdf format,integerized sinusoidal projection


Posting MODIS Productsat ORNL DAAC

Posting MODIS Productsat ORNL DAAC

• Subset to 7x7 km, re-projected to UTM to relate to field work – ORNL worked with EDC to refine

MODIS Reprojection Tool

• Reformat into ASCII• Provide a single expanding

table for each site-product– rows representing dates– columns values for the 49 pixels– includes QA flags

MODIS Products: – Veg Index– fPAR / LAI– PSN / NPP– BRDF / Albedo– Surface Reflectance– Surface Temperature– LC/LCC

MODIS Products: – Veg Index– fPAR / LAI– PSN / NPP– BRDF / Albedo– Surface Reflectance– Surface Temperature– LC/LCC

UTM

MODIS sinusoidalMODIS sinusoidal


Data notavailable

MODIS 8-day LAI ProductMODIS 8-day LAI Product

All pixels in5x5 km cutoutGreen = rejectedBlue = accepted

Acceptedpixels basedon QA flags

Park Fallsforest site08NOV2000 – 16OCT2001

Park Fallsforest site08NOV2000 – 16OCT2001

The scatter of blue (3x3 km) and green (5x5 km) dots shows variability in LAI around the flux tower.

The scatter of blue (3x3 km) and green (5x5 km) dots shows variability in LAI around the flux tower.

LAI of center pixel


ORNL DAAC in situ Data ORNL DAAC in situ Data

• Data needs and schedules defined by working with MODLAND Validation scientists

• Investigators have responsibility to process, document, QA, and provide access to their data

• Provide Mercury system for search and retrieval, for both in situ and remote sensing data

• Eventually move Land Validation data to long-term archive (ORNL DAAC)

• Also provide Regional and Global data sets for modeling as part of ORNL DAAC mission


in situ Data for Core Sitesin situ Data for Core Sites


Site Characteristics DataSite Characteristics Data Most core validation sites belong to several

networks that provide ancillary information

• ORNL is compiling and providing site characteristics data for the Core Sites– NPP, LAI, fPAR, phenology, micrometeorology, climatology,

soils, vegetation cover, etc.– Data can be used for validating other sensors or

for global change research

• Assemble metadata– documenting methods, processing, uncertainty, data source– examining relationships between parameters for QA checks

FLUXNET157 Towers


ORNL DAACValidation Data

ORNL DAACValidation Data

• Historical data from literature– Net Primary Productivity

(point and grid)– Leaf Area Index (LAI)

• Regional and Global data sets– ORNL DAAC archive

• Climate (7) • Vegetation (~100)• Soils (9)• Hydrology (3)

– 119 data sets registered in Mercury re veg, land use, soil, climate, hydrology, etc.

LAI – 1,000 estimatesLAI – 1,000 estimates

NPP – 7,000 0.5º grid cellsNPP – 7,000 0.5º grid cells

NPP – 1,000 site estimates


BigFoot: Linking in situ Measurements,

Remote Sensing, and Models

BigFoot: Linking in situ Measurements,

Remote Sensing, and Models

BigFootBigFoot

• Using ground measurements, remote sensing, and ecosystem models

• Measuring land cover, LAI, fPAR, and NPP

• Scaling from field measurements to 5 x 5 km grid


SAFARI 2000SAFARI 2000• Coordinated field campaign in southern Africa

with links to MODIS Land and MODIS Atmosphere validation• Intensive campaigns in 1999 - 2001 to examine

land-atmosphere interactions

• ORNL DAAC provides Mercury for access to:– in situ data collected at field sites

– airborne sensors (MAS, AirMISR)

– air chemistry measurements


GT-Net NPP ProjectGT-Net NPP Project• Coordinated by GTOS with

assistance from ILTER

• Use hierarchical modeling approach that combines satellite data and in situ observations

• Sites agreeing to measure NPP in exchange for MODIS products for their site – 25 sites in demo phase


LAI/FPAR Network LAI/FPAR Network • Joint activity of CEOS LPV and

MODLAND

• 31 sites participating worldwide

• MODLAND coordinating Landsat ETM+ acquisitions and MODIS LAI subsets– 12-18 month pathfinder

– leverage existing field campaigns

• Workshops:1998 to 2001– Proposed MODIS LAI to field LAI

inter-comparisonMajura ValleyMajura Valley KioloaKioloa

Moreton BayMoreton Bay

Lake GeorgeLake George

Batt ReefBatt ReefCooper CreekCooper Creek

MossmanMossmanDaintreeDaintree

Cape TribulationCape Tribulation

Townsville ReefTownsville Reef

Lake ArgyleLake Argyle

GoldsworthyGoldsworthy

Lake Eyre Lake Eyre

Mt FittonMt Fitton

UardryUardry

Tinga tinganaTinga tingana

Tanjil BrenTanjil Bren

AmburlaAmburla

Port HedlandPort Hedland

KakaduKakadu

PanoramaPanorama

Hyperion SitesHyperion Sites

Other CSIRO SitesOther CSIRO Sites

KeyKeyToolabinToolabin

KunothKunoth

X band sitesX band sites

ThangooThangoo

Lake FromeLake Frome

CIGSN SitesCIGSN Sites

Endevour ReefEndevour Reef

Ray MertonRay Merton

Earth Observation Earth Observation CentreCentre

http://www.eoc.csiro.au


MODIS - Model - Data Intercomparison

MODIS - Model - Data Intercomparison

• To validate Level 4 Land Products, daily photosynthesis and annual NPP

• Validating results of models embedded in NPP algorithm against other models

• Activities:– Real-time Validation– Ecosystem Model Data Intercomparison (EMDI)– LAI-Net– GT-NET activities

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300

Measured NPP (g C m-2/yr)

Mo

de

l NP

P (

g C

m-2

/yr)

1 - Boreal Evergreen2 - Boreal Deciduous3 - Larch4 - Temperate forest5 - Dry Tropical Forest (ppt < 1500 mm/yr)6 - Semi-Wet Tropical Forest (ppt 1500-3000)7 - Wet Tropical Forest (> 3000)8 - C3 Grassland (Tave < 9 C)9 - C4 Grassland (Tave < 18)10 - C4 Grassland (Tave > 18)

Flux-Model-MODIS

Comparison

Flux-Model-MODIS

Comparison

ComparisonWorkshop?April 2002

CDIAC/AmeriFlux•Model initialization parameters•Weekly micromet data• Initial 0.5 hr flux data

DAAC/FLUXNET•MODIS products – 7x7 cutouts•FLUXNET gapfilled data•Links to field data via Mercury

MODAPS• 52 sites• 8 products• 11 km x 31 km• ISIN, .hdf

Modeling Groups

•5 groups, more coming

•Results posted on AmeriFlux

Individual Site Data

Additional validation data

17 sites


User Statistics for Validation Data

User Statistics for Validation Data

• Use of Mercury

• Referrals to registered data and documentation

• Data downloads of remote sensing images of core sites


Validation Investigators Whose Data are Registered in MercuryValidation Investigators Whose Data are Registered in Mercury

Aber, JohnAhl, DouglasAugustine, John A.Baldocchi, DennisBruegge, Dr. Carol J.Burrows, Mr. Sean (5)Cohen, Warren B. (4)Conel, Dr. James E.Feldkirchner, Drew C.

(3)Gaitley, Barbara J.Gower, Dr. Stith T. (8)Gregory, Matthew J.

Honda, Dr. YoshiakiHuete, Dr. Alfredo R. (6)Jenkins, JulianKajiwara, Dr. KojiKirschbaum, Alan A. (3)Knjazihhin, YuriLiang, Dr. ShunlinMackay, Dr. David Scott Maiersperger, Thomas K.

(4)Meyer, Dave (4)Moran, SusanMorisette, Dr. Jeffrey T.

(11)Myers, Daryl R.

Myneni, Ranga B.Olson, Richard J. (2)Privette, Dr. Jeffrey L. (4)

Qin, WenhanRobbins, Cullen (4)Thome, Dr. Kurtis J.Townshend, Dr. John

R.G.Turner, David P.Walter-Shea, Elizabeth

A. Wylie, Bruce (3)al-Abbadi, Dr. Naif

(number of data sets indicated if >1)


Validation Data through MercuryValidation Data through Mercury

• 57 validation data sets registered in Mercury– Land Validation – 49 data sets– SAFARI 2000 – 5 data sets from NRA selectees– ORNL DAAC Regional and Global Data – 3

• User statistics– July – December, 2001– 1,386 searches– 333 users

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

UsersSearches

Mercury SearchesMercury

Searches


Types of ReferralsTypes of Referrals

285

97

6Data Access

Documentation

Home Page

July 1 – November 30, 2001 (388 referrals, 49 unique users)


Most Referred Data SetsMost Referred Data SetsJuly 1 - December 31, 2001

(388 referrals, 49 unique users)

Rank Data Set Title Referrals

1. Leaf Area Index (LAI) Data for BigFoot Sites, 1999-2001 47

2. Compiled Meteorological Data for BigFoot Sites 35

3. FPAR Data for BigFoot Sites, 2000-2001 33

4. Biomass Data for BigFoot Sites, 1999-2000 28

5. MQUALS Exotech Radiometer Data for Jornada LTER, New Mexico 22

6. Aboveground Net Primary Production (ANPP) for BigFoot Sites, 1999-2001

16

7. Aboveground Net Primary Production (ANPP) for BigFoot Sites, 1999-2000

13

8. HARV ANPP data for 2000 13

T9. Global Land Cover Test Sites (GLCTS) Data Products (AVHRR, MSS, TM, DEM, and Land Cover Maps) for EOS Land Validation Core Sites

11

T9. MODIS Land Data Products (MODLAND) for EOS Land Validation Core Sites

11


Total Volume MODIS Files

Products downloaded from EDC by Core Site since Oct 99Products downloaded from EDC by Core Site since Oct 99

Source: MODIS Science Team Meeting, Dec 01Source: MODIS Science Team Meeting, Dec 01

ETM+ Scenes

30 GB30 GB

385385

9595


CommunicationsCommunications

• Guidance for data providers

• Publishing validation results

• ‘Popular articles’ for the general user community


Guidance for Data ProvidersGuidance for Data Providers• Archiving Ecological Data and Information. Olson

and McCord. Chapter VII. In Michener and Brundt (ed.) 2000 “Ecological Data”. Blackwell Science.

• Managing Data from Multiple Disciplines, Scales, and Sites to Support Synthesis and Modeling. Olson et al. 1999. RSE.

• BigFoot Field Manual. Campbell et al.

1999. ORNL TM

• Guidelines for Submitting Tabular

Data. Cook et al. 2001. ESA Bulletin

• Mercury help and tutorial Web pages

Best Practices for Preparing Ecological

and Ground-Based Data Sets

to Share and Archive

Robert B. Cook, Richard J. Olson,

Paul Kanciruk, and Leslie A. Hook

Environmental Sciences Division

Oak Ridge National Laboratory


Publishing Future Validation ResultsPublishing Future Validation Results

• Special section in IEEE TGARS• Spring/Summer 2002

• requirement that all related data be registered and

available via Mercury

• EMDI Workshop, April 2002

• SAFARI 2000 Meeting, October 2002

• Flux/Model/Data Intercomparison Workshop ?

• Other venues?


Earth Observatory and NASA News articles feature:Earth Observatory and NASA News articles feature:

by Rachel Hauser, September 19, 2001http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/MODISCalibration

• MODLAND validation• FLUXNET database

August 2, 2001New NASA Field Campaign Sees the Forest for the Satellite New NASA Field Campaign Sees the Forest for the Satellite

by Rachel Hauser, September 24, 2001http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/Fluxnet/


Path Forward


Data resources for on-going validation (Terra, Aqua, NPP, etc.)

Data resources for on-going validation (Terra, Aqua, NPP, etc.)

• Make use of extant data• EOS Land Validation Core Sites should be

maintained, although EOS Investigations have either expired or will in early 2002

• Without formal “validation investigators” we need stronger connections with users who can provide feedback

• FLUXNET and BigFoot have continued funding• More collaboration with CEOS Land Product

Validation Subgroup

• Increase the quality and economy of global satellite product validation

– develop and promote international standards and protocols for field sampling, scaling, error budgeting, data exchange, and product evaluation

• Advocate mission-long validation programs for current and future earth observing satellites

Pilot projects• LAI• Fire / burn scars• Land cover

Pilot projects• LAI• Fire / burn scars• Land cover

Using EOS Land Validation Core Sites as an example to establish the ‘CEOS Land Validation Core sites’

Using EOS Land Validation Core Sites as an example to establish the ‘CEOS Land Validation Core sites’


Validation . . . what worksValidation . . . what works• Growing buy-in to the ‘core sites’ concept

• Exploitation of in situ networks (e.g. flux towers, AERONET) and field investigations (e.g., LBA, SAFARI 2000)

• International partnerships and coordination

• Simplified data access with dedicated archives

• Frequent communication between Product PIs, Validation PIs, and data facilitators


Validation . . . on-going concernsValidation . . . on-going concerns• 26 core and ~150 towers sites is a relatively small

number of sites, but it still takes a lot of effort

• Spatial differences / scaling - points vs. cells, and the need for a wide variety of ecosystem sites

• Temporal differences - satellite vs. field data

• Data inconsistencies - methods, variables, formats

• More data / better knowledge = greater cost– How much is enough?– Global representation – how many points in time, space,

and biome?


Validation . . . on-going concerns (con’t)

Validation . . . on-going concerns (con’t)

• Control expectations– It takes a couple of years to validate a 1-yr Level 4 product– What’s the end point for validation? . . . will continually refine?

• Stronger interface to the user community and on-going collaboration with the international community

• Improve formal documentation and availability of results

• Consider establishing a ‘permanent’ NASA Office on Calibration and Validation


Comments . . . . Questions?Comments . . . . Questions?

1 - ornl daac | terra data products review, jan 7-8, 2002 data support for validation of eos land...

Documents

modis land validation

validation results

validation pis26 sites

eos validation pis

land products validationbased

data support

situ site data

situ data available