Uncertainty of Vegetation Green-Up Date Estimated from Vegetation Indices Due to Snowmelt at Northern Middle and High Latitudes

Author:

Cao RuyinORCID,Feng Yan,Liu Xilong,Shen Miaogen,Zhou JiORCID

Abstract

Vegetation green-up date (GUD), an important phenological characteristic, is usually estimated from time-series of satellite-based normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) data at regional and global scales. However, GUD estimates in seasonally snow-covered areas suffer from the effect of spring snowmelt on the NDVI signal, hampering our realistic understanding of phenological responses to climate change. Recently, two snow-free vegetation indices were developed for GUD detection: the normalized difference phenology index (NDPI) and normalized difference greenness index (NDGI). Both were found to improve GUD detection in the presence of spring snowmelt. However, these indices were tested at several field phenological camera sites and carbon flux sites, and a detailed evaluation on their performances at the large spatial scale is still lacking, which limits their applications globally. In this study, we employed NDVI, NDPI, and NDGI to estimate GUD at northern middle and high latitudes (north of 40° N) and quantified the snowmelt-induced uncertainty of GUD estimations from the three vegetation indices (VIs) by considering the changes in VI values caused by snowmelt. Results showed that compared with NDVI, both NDPI and NDGI improve the accuracy of GUD estimation with smaller GUD uncertainty in the areas below 55° N, but at higher latitudes (55°N-70° N), all three indices exhibit substantially larger GUD uncertainty. Furthermore, selecting which vegetation index to use for GUD estimation depends on vegetation types. All three indices performed much better for deciduous forests, and NDPI performed especially well (5.1 days for GUD uncertainty). In the arid and semi-arid grasslands, GUD estimations from NDGI are more reliable (i.e., smaller uncertainty) than NDP-based GUD (e.g., GUD uncertainty values for NDGI vs. NDPI are 4.3 d vs. 7.2 d in Mongolia grassland and 6.7 d vs. 9.8 d in Central Asia grassland), whereas in American prairie, NDPI performs slightly better than NDGI (GUD uncertainty for NDPI vs. NDGI is 3.8 d vs. 4.7 d). In central and western Europe, reliable GUD estimations from NDPI and NDGI were acquired only in those years without snowfall before green-up. This study provides important insights into the application of, and uncertainty in, snow-free vegetation indices for GUD estimation at large spatial scales, particularly in areas with seasonal snow cover.

Funder

National Natural Science Foundation of China

the Fundamental Research Fund for the Central Universities

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

General Earth and Planetary Sciences

Cited by 15 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3