Advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance

Photosynthesis is essential for life on earth as it, inter alia, influences the composition of the atmosphere and is the driving mechanism of primary production. Photosynthesis is particularly controlled by leaf pigments such as chlorophyll, carotenoids or anthocyanins. Incoming solar radiation is mainly captured by chlorophyll, whereas plant organs are also protected from excess radiation by carotenoids and anthocyanins. Current and upcoming optical earth observation sensors are sensitive to these radiative processes and thus feature a high potential for mapping the spatial and temporal variation of these photosynthetic pigments. In the context of remote sensing, leaf pigments are either quantified as leaf area-based content [μg/cm2] or as leaf mass-based concentration [g/g or %]. However, these two metrics are fundamentally different, and until now there has been neither an in-depth discussion nor a consensus on which metric to choose. This is notable considering the amount of studies that do not explicitly differentiate between pigment content and concentration. We therefore seek to outline the differences between both metrics and thus show that the remote sensing of leaf pigment concentration [%] is unsubstantial. This is due to the fact that, firstly, pigment concentration is likely to primarily reflect variation in leaf mass per area and not pigments itself. Second, the radiative transfer in plant leaves is especially determined by the absolute content of pigments in a leaf and not its relative concentration to other leaf constituents. And third, as a ratio, pigment concentration is an ambiguous metric, which further complicates the quantification of leaf pigments at the canopy scale. Given these issues related to the use of chlorophyll concentration, we thus conclude that remote sensing of leaf pigments should be primarily performed on an area basis [μg/cm2].

Enregistré dans:
Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs principaux: Kattenborn, Teja, Schiefer, Felix, Zarco-Tejada, Pablo J., Schmidtlein, Sebastian
Autres auteurs: German Centre for Air and Space Travel
Format: artículo biblioteca
Langue:English
Publié: Elsevier 2019-09-01
Sujets:Pigments, Chlorophylls, Carotenoids, Anthocyanins, Radiative transfer, Plant functioning, Plant health, Content, Concentration, Remote sensing,
Accès en ligne:http://hdl.handle.net/10261/205806
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002946
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002765
Tags: Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
id dig-ias-es-10261-205806
record_format koha
spelling dig-ias-es-10261-2058062021-09-01T04:30:39Z Advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance Kattenborn, Teja Schiefer, Felix Zarco-Tejada, Pablo J. Schmidtlein, Sebastian German Centre for Air and Space Travel Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (Germany) Pigments Chlorophylls Carotenoids Anthocyanins Radiative transfer Plant functioning Plant health Content Concentration Remote sensing Photosynthesis is essential for life on earth as it, inter alia, influences the composition of the atmosphere and is the driving mechanism of primary production. Photosynthesis is particularly controlled by leaf pigments such as chlorophyll, carotenoids or anthocyanins. Incoming solar radiation is mainly captured by chlorophyll, whereas plant organs are also protected from excess radiation by carotenoids and anthocyanins. Current and upcoming optical earth observation sensors are sensitive to these radiative processes and thus feature a high potential for mapping the spatial and temporal variation of these photosynthetic pigments. In the context of remote sensing, leaf pigments are either quantified as leaf area-based content [μg/cm2] or as leaf mass-based concentration [g/g or %]. However, these two metrics are fundamentally different, and until now there has been neither an in-depth discussion nor a consensus on which metric to choose. This is notable considering the amount of studies that do not explicitly differentiate between pigment content and concentration. We therefore seek to outline the differences between both metrics and thus show that the remote sensing of leaf pigment concentration [%] is unsubstantial. This is due to the fact that, firstly, pigment concentration is likely to primarily reflect variation in leaf mass per area and not pigments itself. Second, the radiative transfer in plant leaves is especially determined by the absolute content of pigments in a leaf and not its relative concentration to other leaf constituents. And third, as a ratio, pigment concentration is an ambiguous metric, which further complicates the quantification of leaf pigments at the canopy scale. Given these issues related to the use of chlorophyll concentration, we thus conclude that remote sensing of leaf pigments should be primarily performed on an area basis [μg/cm2]. The project was funded by the German Aerospace Center (DLR) on behalf of the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi), FKZ50EE 1347. Peer reviewed 2020-03-30T11:36:09Z 2020-03-30T11:36:09Z 2019-09-01 artículo http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 Remote Sensing of Environment 230: 111195 (2019) 0034-4257 http://hdl.handle.net/10261/205806 10.1016/j.rse.2019.05.014 http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002946 http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002765 en Postprint https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.05.014 Sí open Elsevier
institution IAS ES
collection DSpace
country España
countrycode ES
component Bibliográfico
access En linea
databasecode dig-ias-es
tag biblioteca
region Europa del Sur
libraryname Biblioteca del IAS España
language English
topic Pigments
Chlorophylls
Carotenoids
Anthocyanins
Radiative transfer
Plant functioning
Plant health
Content
Concentration
Remote sensing
Pigments
Chlorophylls
Carotenoids
Anthocyanins
Radiative transfer
Plant functioning
Plant health
Content
Concentration
Remote sensing
spellingShingle Pigments
Chlorophylls
Carotenoids
Anthocyanins
Radiative transfer
Plant functioning
Plant health
Content
Concentration
Remote sensing
Pigments
Chlorophylls
Carotenoids
Anthocyanins
Radiative transfer
Plant functioning
Plant health
Content
Concentration
Remote sensing
Kattenborn, Teja
Schiefer, Felix
Zarco-Tejada, Pablo J.
Schmidtlein, Sebastian
Advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance
description Photosynthesis is essential for life on earth as it, inter alia, influences the composition of the atmosphere and is the driving mechanism of primary production. Photosynthesis is particularly controlled by leaf pigments such as chlorophyll, carotenoids or anthocyanins. Incoming solar radiation is mainly captured by chlorophyll, whereas plant organs are also protected from excess radiation by carotenoids and anthocyanins. Current and upcoming optical earth observation sensors are sensitive to these radiative processes and thus feature a high potential for mapping the spatial and temporal variation of these photosynthetic pigments. In the context of remote sensing, leaf pigments are either quantified as leaf area-based content [μg/cm2] or as leaf mass-based concentration [g/g or %]. However, these two metrics are fundamentally different, and until now there has been neither an in-depth discussion nor a consensus on which metric to choose. This is notable considering the amount of studies that do not explicitly differentiate between pigment content and concentration. We therefore seek to outline the differences between both metrics and thus show that the remote sensing of leaf pigment concentration [%] is unsubstantial. This is due to the fact that, firstly, pigment concentration is likely to primarily reflect variation in leaf mass per area and not pigments itself. Second, the radiative transfer in plant leaves is especially determined by the absolute content of pigments in a leaf and not its relative concentration to other leaf constituents. And third, as a ratio, pigment concentration is an ambiguous metric, which further complicates the quantification of leaf pigments at the canopy scale. Given these issues related to the use of chlorophyll concentration, we thus conclude that remote sensing of leaf pigments should be primarily performed on an area basis [μg/cm2].
author2 German Centre for Air and Space Travel
author_facet German Centre for Air and Space Travel
Kattenborn, Teja
Schiefer, Felix
Zarco-Tejada, Pablo J.
Schmidtlein, Sebastian
format artículo
topic_facet Pigments
Chlorophylls
Carotenoids
Anthocyanins
Radiative transfer
Plant functioning
Plant health
Content
Concentration
Remote sensing
author Kattenborn, Teja
Schiefer, Felix
Zarco-Tejada, Pablo J.
Schmidtlein, Sebastian
author_sort Kattenborn, Teja
title Advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance
title_short Advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance
title_full Advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance
title_fullStr Advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance
title_full_unstemmed Advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance
title_sort advantages of retrieving pigment content [μg/cm2] versus concentration [%] from canopy reflectance
publisher Elsevier
publishDate 2019-09-01
url http://hdl.handle.net/10261/205806
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002946
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002765
work_keys_str_mv AT kattenbornteja advantagesofretrievingpigmentcontentmgcm2versusconcentrationfromcanopyreflectance
AT schieferfelix advantagesofretrievingpigmentcontentmgcm2versusconcentrationfromcanopyreflectance
AT zarcotejadapabloj advantagesofretrievingpigmentcontentmgcm2versusconcentrationfromcanopyreflectance
AT schmidtleinsebastian advantagesofretrievingpigmentcontentmgcm2versusconcentrationfromcanopyreflectance
_version_ 1777663251095486464