
- Journal of Geographical Sciences
- Vol. 30, Issue 1, 18 (2020)
Abstract
1 Introduction
Land surface temperature (LST) affects numerous climatological, meteorological, ecological, and geophysical phenomena, which in turn affect the LST. As one of the key parameters for land surface process studies at global and regional scales, LST plays a vital role in processes such as surface water and energy exchange (
Currently, the study of LST is limited by observation conditions: ground-based observation sites have sparse spatial distributions and low temporal frequencies; stationary meteorological satellites’ products have low spatial resolutions (generally 3 to 5 km); polar-orbit satellites’ products possess high spatial resolutions (generally 1 km), however, it is difficult to obtain temporal and spatial continually land surface process information by only using polar-orbit satellites’ observations. This limitation is mainly because the observation times at the same site are irregular. What’s more, the limitations in inversion algorithm cause an overall bias in the LST. Although the land surface model relies on its intrinsic physical processes and dynamic mechanisms, land surface variables of continuous evolution in time and space can be obtained; however, due to the uncertainties of physical and dynamic mechanisms and parametric schemes, the accuracies of existing global and regional climate models and land surface models have yet to be improved.
In view of coping with the shortcomings of LST observations and land surface model simulations, a land surface data assimilation technique that combines temporally discontinuous observation data with a land surface model that is continuous in space and time has become an effective method for obtaining high-quality LST data. Current domestic and foreign major land surface assimilation systems mostly include the assimilation of variables such as atmospheric driving data and soil moisture (
LST is directly affected by shortwave solar radiation and has strong temporal and spatial variations (specifically distinct diurnal variations). During the assimilation of LST data, the diurnal variations in LST observations undoubtedly affect the accuracy of the assimilation results. Properly using temporal information from satellite observations during the assimilation process and enabling the results of the LST assimilation to be more accurate are problems that must be solved during the process of data assimilation when using satellite observation data. Therefore, not considering diurnal variations in LST during assimilation may have a significant effect on the assimilation results of LST. However, few studies have focused on the effects of diurnal variations in LST during the assimilation process.
Based on the Beijing Climate Center Atmosphere-Vegetation Interaction Model (BCC_AVIM), this article uses the EnKF algorithm to assimilate the global MODIS LST product and focus on how diurnal variations in LST observations impact assimilation. The assimilation data of each experiment are observation data containing different diurnal variations for LST. The LST product of Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) was used to verify the simulation results of each experiment and analyse the impact of diurnal variations in LST on the assimilation results.
2 Model, algorithms, data and experimental design
2.1 Land surface model
The land surface model is a numerical model describing matter and energy exchange in land surface and soil and is a significant component of the climate system model. The BCC_ AVIM land surface model (
In the BCC_AVIM, the formula that calculates the LST at the n+1 time step using surface temperature at the n time step is shown in formula (1):
where Tg,
The above formula indicates that LST is calculated from the radiation flux, surface gas flux, and surface status variables in the BCC_AVIM land surface model, and LST is directly involved in the calculation of related parameters for soil temperature and soil moisture (
2.2 Assimilation algorithm
Evensen (1994) proposed the EnKF algorithm (
Suppose that xb represents the m-dimensional background field, xo represents the p-dimensional observation field, and H represents the observation operator, which is used to interpolate the model space in observation space. Pb Represents the m×m observation error covariance. In the matrix, R represents the observation error covariance matrix p×p. The minimum error covariance of the analytical field xa is estimated by the following formula:
where K represents the Kalman gain or Kalman weight, which represents the weights of the background and observation fields during the analysis field calculations. Interpolating the weights (K) for all grid points via the (xo-Hxb) term updates the model results. The output of the model depends on the calculation of the background error covariance Pb:
where N represents the number of samples in the ensemble and A′ represents the m×N set perturbation matrix, which is defined as:
where
Figure 1.
2.3 Atmospheric forcing data
Land surface models need atmospheric variables to drive the model when calculating sensible heat, latent heat, and other ground fluxes, and most of the atmospheric driving data used in land surface models are derived from reanalysis data (
2.4 Observation data
MODIS, which is mounted on the Terra/Aqua satellites, is an instrument used to observe global biological and physical processes in the Earth Observing System (EOS) programme (
MOD11C1 product data for two years (from January 2014 to December 2015) are used in this study, with a spatial resolution of 0.05°×0.05°. These data include variables such as LST (day/night per hemisphere) and observation time (day/night per hemisphere), as shown in
2.5 Verification data
The GLDAS was developed by the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) NCEP (
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
2.6 Experimental design
To study the implication of diurnal variation information in LST observation data to assimilation, satellite observation data were processed at different time intervals, and the processed observation data were subjected to the assimilation experiment using the EnKF algorithm. The BCC_AVIM model simulation result was used as the control experiment (CTL). The experimental design is shown in
No. | EXP name | EXP time | Assimilation | Time step | Time interval for the |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | CTL | 2014.01-2015.12 | No | 30 minutes | - |
2 | ASSI1 | 2014.01-2015.12 | Yes | 30 minutes | 3 hours |
3 | ASSI2 | 2014.01-2015.12 | Yes | 30 minutes | 6 hours |
4 | ASSI3 | 2014.01-2015.12 | Yes | 30 minutes | 12 hours |
5 | ASSI4 | 2014.01-2015.12 | Yes | 30 minutes | 24 hours |
Table 1.
LST assimilation experimental design
Since the GLDAS data are on a global grid, the time series is complete and, to some extent, the series can reflect the real changes in the LST; therefore, we use the GLDAS to quantitatively evaluate the results of each experiment. Using the bilinear interpolation method, the GLDAS is interpolated over the T106 grid, and the horizontal resolution is 1.125°×1.125°, which matches that of the observation data and model output. The bias, RMSE and correlation coefficient of the experimental results, combined with the GLDAS values of the individual grids, are calculated separately. Grids with missing values have not been included in the comparison. Three indicators (bias, RMSE, and correlation coefficient) were used to test the results. The calculation formulas of these three indicators are as follows:
where N represents the length of time, and Ai and Bi represent the experimental results and the GLDAS LST values at time i, respectively.
3 Results and analysis
3.1 Diurnal variations in LST
The surface temperature is directly affected by shortwave solar radiation and, thus, has obvious diurnal variations. Taking the global mean temperature in January and July 2014 as an example, the LST has been processed at different time intervals. The time series of the globally averaged LST is shown in
Figure 4.
3.2 Comparison of the LST simulation results with the GLDAS LST
Taking the GLDAS LST as a reference, the experimental results were analysed using the three indicators of absolute bias, RMSE, and correlation coefficient.
Next, using the three indicators of bias, RMSE, and correlation coefficient, the impacts of diurnal variations in LST on the assimilation results were analysed in time and space.
3.2.1 Bias
This chapter uses the bias index to compare the experimental results with GLDAS LSTs. It can be seen in
Figure 5.
Experiment name | CTL | ASSI1 | ASSI2 | ASSI3 | ASSI4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Absolute bias | 2.570 K | 2.252 K | 2.172 K | 2.245 K | 2.262 K |
RMSE | 4.239 K | 3.681 K | 3.648 K | 3.992 K | 4.423 K |
Correlation coefficient | 0.525 | 0.619 | 0.615 | 0.571 | 0.525 |
Table 2.
The comparison between the LST simulation results and the GLDAS LSTs using global mean absolute bias, RMSE and correlation coefficient
One of the characteristics of polar-orbit satellite observations is that each grid point corresponds to a different observation time. According to the temporal information for each grid point, daily observation data are divided into equal time period intervals. For observation data with different time intervals, when the observation time interval is shorter, the observation data entered into each assimilation window are more accurately related to the corresponding time period. The bias of the ASSI2 experiment is less than that of the ASSI1 experiment because the observation time interval of the ASSI2 experiment is longer; under the premise that diurnal variations are taken into consideration, the more observation information that is assimilated for each time step in the model, the better the assimilation results. When assimilating the 24-hour interval data, the amount of observation information is greater, but the assimilation effects are worse because the daily mean value ignores the diurnal variation information; therefore, related to this time period, the deviation in the observation time is large, and the overall error is large due to the accumulation in the assimilation window. Therefore, in the ASSI4 experiment, the observations of the global grid points can be assimilated via the model at each time, but the bias values of the results are greater than those of any other assimilation experiment.
Due to the differences among the assimilation effects in different regions, the land grids were divided into plates based on the distribution of continents, and the bias for each grid point was counted, as shown in
Figure 6.
According to
CTL | ASSI1 | ASSI2 | ASSI3 | ASSI4 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
January, 2014 | 2.88 | 2.44 | 2.36 | 2.35 | 2.41 |
April, 2014 | 2.4 | 2.12 | 2.01 | 1.93 | 1.93 |
July, 2014 | 2.24 | 2.08 | 1.97 | 2 | 1.94 |
October, 2014 | 2.46 | 2.08 | 2.02 | 2.28 | 2.37 |
January, 2015 | 2.85 | 2.35 | 2.3 | 2.37 | 2.41 |
April, 2015 | 2.49 | 2.22 | 2.09 | 2.04 | 1.99 |
July, 2015 | 2.2 | 2.21 | 2.11 | 2.18 | 2.11 |
October, 2015 | 2.58 | 2.15 | 2.1 | 2.26 | 2.42 |
Table 3.
Comparison of monthly average absolute bias values on representative months
According to
The Oceania continental plate (47°S-30°N, 110°E-130°E) results are similar to those of the African continental plate. The number of positive biases in the ASSI3 (1.20K) and ASSI4 (1.44K) experiments is greater than the number of negative bias grids, while the best results were derived from the ASSI1 (-0.02K) and ASSI2 (0.12K) experiments. The diurnal variation information of LSTs when assimilating can improve the results.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
3.2.2 RMSE
Biases can represent the positive and negative differences between simulated values and true values, while the RMSE is more sensitive to the extreme value in a group of numbers and can reflect the discrete degree of the simulated effect. This section uses the RMSE to analyse the experimental results from 2014 to 2015 from a time and space perspective.
From
Figure 9.
CTL | ASSI1 | ASSI2 | ASSI3 | ASSI4 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
January, 2014 | 5.02 | 4.43 | 4.41 | 4.67 | 5.00 |
April, 2014 | 4.05 | 3.54 | 3.49 | 3.77 | 4.31 |
July, 2014 | 3.69 | 3.17 | 3.13 | 3.44 | 3.91 |
October, 2014 | 4.03 | 3.44 | 3.44 | 3.94 | 4.40 |
January, 2015 | 5.02 | 4.39 | 4.38 | 4.67 | 4.97 |
April, 2015 | 4.04 | 3.55 | 3.47 | 3.76 | 4.22 |
July, 2015 | 3.61 | 3.25 | 3.21 | 3.54 | 3.99 |
October, 2015 | 4.15 | 3.52 | 3.52 | 3.99 | 4.48 |
Table 4.
Comparison of monthly average RMSE values on representative months
3.2.3 Correlation coefficient
The correlation coefficient is an indicator that studies the degree of linear correlation between two variables. By using the correlation coefficient to evaluate the experimental results, the degree of similarity between the simulation and true value results at each grid point
can be obtained. As shown in
Figure 10.
over central Africa and northern South America are relatively small. The correlation coefficients for the above areas during the four assimilation experiments all increased. The correlation coefficients at mid- to high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere and over the continent of Oceania in ASSI1 and ASSI2 all improved, while those in ASSI3 and ASSI4 did not improve much. Overall, the ASSI2 experimental results are more relevant to the GLDAS LST data.
Figure 11.
CTL | ASSI1 | ASSI2 | ASSI3 | ASSI4 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
January, 2014 | 0.55 | 0.6 | 0.59 | 0.55 | 0.52 |
April, 2014 | 0.56 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.59 | 0.53 |
July, 2014 | 0.42 | 0.51 | 0.5 | 0.46 | 0.4 |
October, 2014 | 0.57 | 0.68 | 0.68 | 0.62 | 0.58 |
January, 2015 | 0.55 | 0.6 | 0.61 | 0.57 | 0.54 |
April, 2015 | 0.59 | 0.65 | 0.66 | 0.62 | 0.57 |
July, 2015 | 0.47 | 0.55 | 0.54 | 0.49 | 0.43 |
October, 2015 | 0.55 | 0.67 | 0.66 | 0.62 | 0.57 |
Table 5.
Comparison of monthly average correlation coefficients values on representative months
4 Conclusions
Based on the BCC_AVIM land surface model, this paper uses the EnKF algorithm to assimilate the MODIS LST product. Different experiments have been designed to assimilate observation data with different time intervals, and the GLDAS LST product is used to verify the experimental results. The assessment was conducted to analyse the effects of diurnal variations in LSTs from satellite observations on LST assimilation results with a land surface model. The main conclusions are as follows.
(1) The LST is directly affected by shortwave solar radiation and, thus, has distinct diurnal variations. For polar-orbit satellite observations, the longer the time interval is, the weaker the diurnal variation in the LST contained in the sequence. When the observation time interval is 24 hours, no diurnal variation information is included in the sequence; when the observation time interval is 12 hours, the sequence contains significant cyclical changes in the LST. When the observation time interval is 6 hours, the diurnal variations in the LST oscillations are more intense; when the observation time interval is 3 hours, the number of observations contained in each time period is small, and there are regional differences. Therefore, it is easy to show large oscillations.
(2) The BCC_AVIM global LST simulation results are lower than those of the GLDAS LST, with large negative biases over North Africa, South America, and Oceania and large positive deviations at high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere. After assimilating the MODIS LST observations, the extremely positive and negative bias values were reduced, and the model's ability to simulate LST improved both globally and regionally.
(3) Polar-orbit satellite observations are divided into evenly spaced time periods according to the temporal information of the grid points. When the time interval is shorter, the observation information entering the same assimilation window is more accurate, and the longer time interval induces the opposite effect. The ASSI2 experiment shows less bias (2.17K) and RMSE (3.65K) than the bias (2.25K) and RMSE (3.68K) of ASSI1 experiment, since the observation time interval of the ASSI2 experiment is longer. Under the premise that diurnal variations are also considered, the more observations have for each time interval, the better the assimilation results. The largest amount of observations that can be assimilated at each assimilation time by ASSI4 experiment, but it has the largest bias (2.26K) and RMSE (4.42K) because the daily mean value ignores diurnal variation information, resulting in an error in each assimilate step; the overall error caused by accumulation in the assimilation window is large.
(4) The sensitivity to diurnal variations in LST is different in different regions; the observation time interval that can produce the best assimilation results is also different in different regions. For Eurasia, the bias for assimilation using observations with a time interval of 6 hours is small (0.20K), and the correlation coefficient is large. The experiment using observations with a time interval of 3 hours leads to smaller bias in Oceania (-0.02K) and Africa (0.14K).
(5) Different seasons have different sensitivities to diurnal variations in LST, and the observation time intervals that can produce the best assimilation results are different. In some months (e.g., March, April and July 2014 and March, April and July 2015), a larger observation interval can increase the number of observations entered into a single assimilation window to increase the assimilation effect.
(6) Diurnal change information for LSTs that is retained and observation data that are processed at smaller time intervals have a good effect on reducing the bias and RMSE of the simulation results and improving the correlation coefficient. Overall, when assimilation is performed using 6-hour interval observation data, a relatively good assimilation result can be obtained, because when the observations are processed at a 6-hour interval, they are under the premise that diurnal variations are taken into consideration, and there are a sufficient number of observations for each assimilation time.
References
[1] G Balsamo, F Mahfouf J, S Bélair et al. A land data assimilation system for soil moisture and temperature: An information content study. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 8, 1225-1242(2007).
[2] G Burgers, V Leeuwen P J, G Evensen. Analysis scheme in the Ensemble Kalman Filter. Monthly Weather Review, 126, 1719-1724(1998).
[3] Xiaohua Deng, Panmao Sui, Chunhong Yuan. Comparison and analysis of several sets of reanalysis data abroad. Meteorological Science and Technology, 38, 1-8(2010).
[4] G Evensen. Sequential data assimilation with a nonlinear quasi-geostrophic model using Monte Carlo methods to forecast error statistics. Journal of Geophysical Research Oceans, 99, 10143-10162(1994).
[5] G Evensen. Advanced data assimilation for strongly nonlinear dynamics. Monthly Weather Review, 125, 1342-1354(1997).
[6] L Fu X, B Wang. Reliability evaluation of soil moisture and land surface temperature simulated by Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) using AMSR-E data. Vol.9265). International Society for Optics and Photonics.(2014).
[7] Shuai Han, Chunxiang Shi, Lipeng Jiang et al. CLSAS soil moisture simulation results and evaluation. Chinese Journal of Applied Meteorology, 28, 369-379(2017).
[8] R Houser P. Land data assimilation systems. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 85, 28-30(2004).
[9] T Hu, Q Liu, Y Du et al. Analysis of land surface temperature spatial heterogeneity using variogram model. In: IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), IEEE International Symposium on Geoscience and Remote Sensing IGARSS., 132-135(2015).
[10] C Huang, L Xin, L Ling. Retrieving soil temperature profile by assimilating MODIS LST products with ensemble Kalman filter. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 1320-1336(2008).
[11] J Ji J, H Mei, R Li K. Prediction of carbon exchanges between China terrestrial ecosystem and atmosphere in 21st century. Science in China, 51, 885-898(2008).
[12] J Lawrence P, N Chase T. Representing a new MODIS consistent land surface in the community land model (CLM 3.0). Journal of Geophysical Research, 112, 252-257(2015).
[13] Weiqiang Ma, Yaoming Ma. Preliminary analysis of surface energy in arid area of Northwest China. Journal of Arid Land Research, 23, 76-82(2006).
[14] R Mechri, C Ottlé, O Pannekoucke et al. Downscaling meteosat land surface temperature over a heterogeneous landscape using a data assimilation approach. Remote Sensing, 8, 586-594(2016).
[15] Chunlei Meng. Study on surface temperature variational assimilation in CoLM model. Atmospheric Sciences, 36, 985-994(2012).
[16] E Mitchell K, D Lohmann, R Houser P et al. The multi-institution North American Land American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): Utilizing multiple GCIP products and partners in a continental distributed hydrological modeling system. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, 109, 585-587(2004).
[17] W Oleson K, Y Dai, G Bonan et al. Technical Description of Version 4. 0 of the Community Land Model, 195-198(2010).
[18] W Oleson K, Y Niu G, L Yang Z et al. Improvements to the community land model and their impact on the hydrological cycle. Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences, 113, G01021(2008).
[19] M Rodell, PR Houser, U Jambor et al. The global land data assimilation system. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 85, 381-394(2004).
[20] J Sellers P. The first ISLSCP Field Experiment (FIFE). Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 69, 22-27(1988).
[21] Chunxiang Shi, Zhenghui Xie, Hui Qian et al. China land soil moisture EnKF data assimilation based on satellite remote sensing data. Science China Earth Sciences, 54, 1430-1440(2011).
[22] C Shi, L Jiang, T Zhang et al. Status and Plans of CMA Land Data Assimilation System (CLDAS) Project. EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts.(2014).
[23] Y Xia, M Ek, H Wei et al. Comparative analysis of relationships between Nldas-2 forcings and model outputs. Hydrological Process, 26, 467-474(2012).
[24] Tongren Xu, Shaomin Liu, Ziwei Xu et al. A dual-pass data assimilation scheme for estimating surface fluxes with FY3A-VIRR land surface temperature. Science China Earth Sciences, 58, 211-230(2015).
[25] Yuquan Wang. Analysis of surface temperature series of LET-KF data assimilation in transient model. Science Bulletin, 32, 197-202(2016).
[26] Z Wan. MODIS Land Surface Temperature Algorithm Theoretical Basis Documentation(1999).
[27] Z Wan. New refinements and validation of the collection-6 MODIS land-surface temperature/emissivity product. Remote Sensing of Environment, 140, 36-45(2014).
[28] M Wan Z, L Li Z. A physics-based algorithm for retrieving land-surface emissivity and temperature from EOS/MODIS data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 35, 980-996(1997).
[29] Jinkui Wu, Yongjian Ding, Zhi Wei et al. Reference crop evapotranspiration in natural low-humid grassland in arid area: A case study in the middle reaches of Heihe River Basin. Journal of Arid Land Research, 22, 514-519(2005).
[30] T Wu, W Li, J Ji et al. Global carbon budgets simulated by the Beijing Climate Center Climate System Model for the last century. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 118, 4326-4347(2013).
[31] Tongwen Wu, Lianchun Song, Weiping Li et al. An overview of BCC Climate System Model development and application for climate change studies. Journal of Meteorology Research, 28, 34-56(2014).
[32] Lanjun Zou, Wei Gao, Tongwen Wu et al. A 3DVAR land data assimilation scheme Part 2: Test with ECMWF ERA-40, Conference on Remote Sensing and Modeling of Ecosystems for Sustainability III. In: Proceedings of the Society of Photo-optional Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE)., SPIE, M2981-M2981.

Set citation alerts for the article
Please enter your email address