Comparison and validation of sea ice concentration from FY-3B/MWRI and Aqua/AMSR-E observations

  • role: First author第一作者
  • Affiliation:

    Department of Marine Technology, College of Information Science & Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China

    Laboratory for Regional Oceanography and Numerical Modeling, Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, Qingdao 266071, China

  • Email:wxy_ouc@qq.com
  • Introduction:王晓雨,1993年生,女,硕士研究生,研究方向为卫星遥感海冰研究。E-mail:wxy_ouc@qq.com
Xiaoyu WANG12,  
  • role: Corresponding author通信作者
  • Affiliation:

    Department of Marine Technology, College of Information Science & Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China

    Laboratory for Regional Oceanography and Numerical Modeling, Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, Qingdao 266071, China

  • Email:leiguan@ouc.edu.cn
  • Introduction:管磊,1969年生,女,教授,研究方向为海洋遥感。E-mail:leiguan@ouc.edu.cn
Lei GUAN12*,  
  • Affiliation:

    Department of Marine Technology, College of Information Science & Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China

Lele LI1

Resümee

Sea ice concentration, which refers to the percentage of sea ice in an area, is one of the important parameters describing the characteristics of sea ice. Remote sensing monitoring of Arctic sea ice is crucial for understanding the role of the Arctic in the global climate system and in global warming. Therefore, comparing and evaluating the products of sea ice data retrieved from different satellite observations are necessary. In addition, assessing the accuracy of sea ice distribution from satellite observations is significant in studies on climate change and global warming because the extrapolation of global surface energy flows is very sensitive to the estimation of Arctic sea ice cover. To evaluate sea ice concentration from the Microwave Radiometer Imager (MWRI) onboard the FY-3B satellite, we compare the data products with the sea ice concentration from the advanced microwave scanning radiometer for earth observing system (AMSR-E) onboard the Aqua satellite. High-resolution moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) data are used to validate MWRI and AMSR-E sea ice concentration. The comparison of MWRI and AMSR-E incudes daily and monthly data. MODIS L1B band 2 channel reflectance is chosen to validate the sea ice concentration of MWRI and AMSR-E. The processing procedure of MODIS mainly consists of solar zenith correction, radiometric calibration, removing bow-tie phenomenon, and map projection. The map projection is the polar stereographic projection, which is the same as the MWRI and AMSR-E products. To avoid the misjudgment of ice and water because of the cloud influence, we choose cloudfree MODIS channel 2 sub-region for ice and water recognition. Different thresholds according to the histogram of the reflectance are used to segment the ice and water pixels. The MODIS sea ice concentration in each MWRI and AMSR-E grid is calculated. The comparison results of MWRI and AMSR-E are as follows. First, MWRI and AMSR-E daily mean sea ice concentrations show a consistent change from July to September, and MWRI sea ice concentration is higher than AMSR-E each day. The monthly mean values of daily biases for July, August, and September are 8.55%, 7.67%, and 2.58%, and the monthly mean of daily standard deviations are 12.16%, 12.08%, and 10.43%, respectively. Second, from July to September, the monthly sea ice concentration difference between MWRI and AMSR-E (MWRI minus AMSR-E) shows a decreasing trend. The monthly biases for July, August, and September are 7.37%, 6.53%, and 1.51%, and the monthly standard deviations are 4.61%, 4.36%, and 3.64%, respectively. The validation results of MWRI and AMSR-E sea ice concentration with MODIS are as follows. First, in the region of MODIS sea ice concentration less than 95%, the sea ice concentration difference between MWRI and MODIS (MWRI minus MODIS) is 9.78%±16.90%, and the difference between AMSR-E and MODIS (AMSR-E minus MODIS) is 0.90%±13.09%. MWRI and AMSR-E tend to overestimate sea ice concentration compared with MODIS, the result of AMSR-E is closer to MODIS, and MWRI has a larger error. Second, when MODIS sea ice concentration is greater than or equal to 95%, the sea ice concentration difference between MWRI and MODIS is –5.45%±7.05%, and the difference between AMSR-E and MODIS is –7.97%±6.46%. MWRI and AMSR-E tend to underestimate sea ice concentration compared with MODIS, and the result of MWRI is slightly better.

Schlüsselwort

sea ice concentration;FY-3B/MWRI;Aqua/AMSR-E;comparison;validation;MODIS;ice and water recognition

References

  1. 1.
    Barry R G, Serreze M C, Maslanik J A and Preller R H. 1993. The Arctic sea ice-climate system: observations and modeling. Reviews of Geophysics, 31(4): 397–422
  2. 2.
    Belchansky G I and Douglas D C. 2002. Seasonal comparisons of sea ice concentration estimates derived from SSM/I, OKEAN, and RADARSAT data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 81(1): 67–81
  3. 3.
    Cavalieri D J, Markus T, Hall D K, Gasiewski A J, Klein M and Ivanoff A. 2006. Assessment of EOS Aqua AMSR-E Arctic sea ice concentrations using Landsat-7 and airborne microwave imagery. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 44(11): 3057–3069
  4. 4.
    Cavalieri D J, Markus T, Hall D K, Ivanoff A and Glick E. 2010. Assessment of AMSR-E Antarctic winter sea-ice concentrations using Aqua MODIS. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 48(9): 3331–3339
  5. 5.
    Comiso J C, Cavalieri D J and Markus T. 2003. Sea ice concentration, ice temperature, and snow depth using AMSR-E data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41(2): 243–252
  6. 6.
    Hao G H and Su J. 2015. A study on the dynamic tie points ASI algorithm in the Arctic ocean. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 34(11): 126–135
  7. 7.
    Heinrichs J F, Cavalieri D J and Markus T. 2006. Assessment of the AMSR-E sea ice-concentration product at the ice edge using RADARSAT-1 and MODIS imagery. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 44(11): 3070–3080
  8. 8.
    Karvonen J. 2017. Baltic sea ice concentration estimation using SENTINEL-1 SAR and AMSR2 microwave radiometer data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 55(5): 2871–2883
  9. 9.
    Maaß N, Kaleschke L, Tian-Kunze X and Drusch M. 2013. Snow thickness retrieval over thick Arctic sea ice using SMOS satellite data. Cryosphere, 7(6): 1971–1989
  10. 10.
    Meier W N, Hovelsrud G K, van Oort B E H, Key J R, Kovacs K M, Michel C, Haas C, Granskog M A, Gerland S, Perovich D K, Makshtas A and Reist J D. 2014. Arctic sea ice in transformation: a review of recent observed changes and impacts on biology and human activity. Reviews of Geophysics, 52(3): 185–217
  11. 11.
    Peng G and Meier W N. 2017. Temporal and regional variability of Arctic sea-ice coverage from satellite data. Annals of Glaciology: 1–10
  12. 12.
    Rind D, Healy R, Parkinson C and Martinson D. 1995. The role of seaice in 2×CO2 climate model sensitivity. Part I: the total influence of sea ice thickness and extent. Journal of Climate, 8(3): 449–463
  13. 13.
    Spreen G, Kaleschke L and Heygster G. 2008. Sea ice remote sensing using AMSR-E 89-GHz channels. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 113(C2): C02S03
  14. 14.
    Su J, Hao G H, Ye X X and Wang W B. 2013. The experiment and validation of sea ice concentration AMSR-E retrieval algorithm in polar region. Journal of Remote Sensing, 17(3): 495–513 (
  15. 15.
    Xi Y, Sun B and Li X. 2013. Assessment of AMSR-E ASI sea ice concentration using ship observations and Landsat-7 ETM+ imagery. Journal of Remote Sensing, 17(3): 514–526 (
  16. 16.
    Zhao J C, Zhou X, Sun X Y, Cheng J J, Hu B and Li C H. 2017. The inter comparison and assessment of satellite sea-ice concentration datasets from the arctic. Journal of Remote Sensing, 21(3): 351–364 (

Lesen Sie die ganze Passage

The above content is generated by Large Model Translation. The translated content is for reference only. We do not assume any commercial or legal responsibilty for any consequences arising from the use of our website