@article{MayrKleinRutzingeretal.2021, author = {Mayr, Stefan and Klein, Igor and Rutzinger, Martin and Kuenzer, Claudia}, title = {Systematic water fraction estimation for a global and daily surface water time-series}, series = {Remote Sensing}, volume = {13}, journal = {Remote Sensing}, number = {14}, issn = {2072-4292}, doi = {10.3390/rs13142675}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-242586}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Fresh water is a vital natural resource. Earth observation time-series are well suited to monitor corresponding surface dynamics. The DLR-DFD Global WaterPack (GWP) provides daily information on globally distributed inland surface water based on MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) images at 250 m spatial resolution. Operating on this spatiotemporal level comes with the drawback of moderate spatial resolution; only coarse pixel-based surface water quantification is possible. To enhance the quantitative capabilities of this dataset, we systematically access subpixel information on fractional water coverage. For this, a linear mixture model is employed, using classification probability and pure pixel reference information. Classification probability is derived from relative datapoint (pixel) locations in feature space. Pure water and non-water reference pixels are located by combining spatial and temporal information inherent to the time-series. Subsequently, the model is evaluated for different input sets to determine the optimal configuration for global processing and pixel coverage types. The performance of resulting water fraction estimates is evaluated on the pixel level in 32 regions of interest across the globe, by comparison to higher resolution reference data (Sentinel-2, Landsat 8). Results show that water fraction information is able to improve the product's performance regarding mixed water/non-water pixels by an average of 11.6\% (RMSE). With a Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency of 0.61, the model shows good overall performance. The approach enables the systematic provision of water fraction estimates on a global and daily scale, using only the reflectance and temporal information contained in the input time-series.}, language = {en} } @article{MayrKleinRutzingeretal.2021, author = {Mayr, Stefan and Klein, Igor and Rutzinger, Martin and Kuenzer, Claudia}, title = {Determining temporal uncertainty of a global inland surface water time series}, series = {Remote Sensing}, volume = {13}, journal = {Remote Sensing}, number = {17}, issn = {2072-4292}, doi = {10.3390/rs13173454}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-245234}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Earth observation time series are well suited to monitor global surface dynamics. However, data products that are aimed at assessing large-area dynamics with a high temporal resolution often face various error sources (e.g., retrieval errors, sampling errors) in their acquisition chain. Addressing uncertainties in a spatiotemporal consistent manner is challenging, as extensive high-quality validation data is typically scarce. Here we propose a new method that utilizes time series inherent information to assess the temporal interpolation uncertainty of time series datasets. For this, we utilized data from the DLR-DFD Global WaterPack (GWP), which provides daily information on global inland surface water. As the time series is primarily based on optical MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) images, the requirement of data gap interpolation due to clouds constitutes the main uncertainty source of the product. With a focus on different temporal and spatial characteristics of surface water dynamics, seven auxiliary layers were derived. Each layer provides probability and reliability estimates regarding water observations at pixel-level. This enables the quantification of uncertainty corresponding to the full spatiotemporal range of the product. Furthermore, the ability of temporal layers to approximate unknown pixel states was evaluated for stratified artificial gaps, which were introduced into the original time series of four climatologic diverse test regions. Results show that uncertainty is quantified accurately (>90\%), consequently enhancing the product's quality with respect to its use for modeling and the geoscientific community.}, language = {en} } @article{ReinersAsamFreyetal.2021, author = {Reiners, Philipp and Asam, Sarah and Frey, Corinne and Holzwarth, Stefanie and Bachmann, Martin and Sobrino, Jose and G{\"o}ttsche, Frank-M. and Bendix, J{\"o}rg and Kuenzer, Claudia}, title = {Validation of AVHRR Land Surface Temperature with MODIS and in situ LST — a TIMELINE thematic processor}, series = {Remote Sensing}, volume = {13}, journal = {Remote Sensing}, number = {17}, issn = {2072-4292}, doi = {10.3390/rs13173473}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-246051}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Land Surface Temperature (LST) is an important parameter for tracing the impact of changing climatic conditions on our environment. Describing the interface between long- and shortwave radiation fluxes, as well as between turbulent heat fluxes and the ground heat flux, LST plays a crucial role in the global heat balance. Satellite-derived LST is an indispensable tool for monitoring these changes consistently over large areas and for long time periods. Data from the AVHRR (Advanced Very High-Resolution Radiometer) sensors have been available since the early 1980s. In the TIMELINE project, LST is derived for the entire operating period of AVHRR sensors over Europe at a 1 km spatial resolution. In this study, we present the validation results for the TIMELINE AVHRR daytime LST. The validation approach consists of an assessment of the temporal consistency of the AVHRR LST time series, an inter-comparison between AVHRR LST and in situ LST, and a comparison of the AVHRR LST product with concurrent MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) LST. The results indicate the successful derivation of stable LST time series from multi-decadal AVHRR data. The validation results were investigated regarding different LST, TCWV and VA, as well as land cover classes. The comparisons between the TIMELINE LST product and the reference datasets show seasonal and land cover-related patterns. The LST level was found to be the most determinative factor of the error. On average, an absolute deviation of the AVHRR LST by 1.83 K from in situ LST, as well as a difference of 2.34 K from the MODIS product, was observed.}, language = {en} } @article{RoesslerWittIkonenetal.2021, author = {R{\"o}ßler, Sebastian and Witt, Marius S. and Ikonen, Jaakko and Brown, Ian A. and Dietz, Andreas J.}, title = {Remote sensing of snow cover variability and its influence on the runoff of S{\´a}pmi's rivers}, series = {Geosciences}, volume = {11}, journal = {Geosciences}, number = {3}, issn = {2076-3263}, doi = {10.3390/geosciences11030130}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-234261}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The boreal winter 2019/2020 was very irregular in Europe. While there was very little snow in Central Europe, the opposite was the case in northern Fenno-Scandia, particularly in the Arctic. The snow cover was more persistent here and its rapid melting led to flooding in many places. Since the last severe spring floods occurred in the region in 2018, this raises the question of whether more frequent occurrences can be expected in the future. To assess the variability of snowmelt related flooding we used snow cover maps (derived from the DLR's Global SnowPack MODIS snow product) and freely available data on runoff, precipitation, and air temperature in eight unregulated river catchment areas. A trend analysis (Mann-Kendall test) was carried out to assess the development of the parameters, and the interdependencies of the parameters were examined with a correlation analysis. Finally, a simple snowmelt runoff model was tested for its applicability to this region. We noticed an extraordinary variability in the duration of snow cover. If this extends well into spring, rapid air temperature increases leads to enhanced thawing. According to the last flood years 2005, 2010, 2018, and 2020, we were able to differentiate between four synoptic flood types based on their special hydrometeorological and snow situation and simulate them with the snowmelt runoff model (SRM).}, language = {en} }