Evaluation of 18 satellite- And model-based soil moisture products using in situ measurements from 826 sensors
Evaluation of 18 satellite- And model-based soil moisture products using in situ measurements from 826 sensors
Information about the spatiotemporal variability of soil moisture is critical for many purposes, including monitoring of hydrologic extremes, irrigation scheduling, and prediction of agricultural yields. We evaluated the temporal dynamics of 18 state-of-the-art (quasi-)global near-surface soil moisture products, including six based on satellite retrievals, six based on models without satellite data assimilation (referred to hereafter as “open-loop” models), and six based on models that assimilate satellite soil moisture or brightness temperature data. Seven of the products are introduced for the first time in this study: one multi-sensor merged satellite product called MeMo (Merged soil Moisture) and six estimates from the HBV (Hydrologiska Byråns Vattenbalansavdelning) model with three precipitation inputs (ERA5, IMERG, and MSWEP) with and without assimilation of SMAPL3E satellite retrievals, respectively. As reference, we used in situ soil moisture measurements between 2015 and 2019 at 5 cm depth from 826 sensors, located primarily in the USA and Europe. The 3-hourly Pearson correlation (R) was chosen as the primary performance metric. We found that application of the Soil Wetness Index (SWI) smoothing filter resulted in improved performance for all satellite products. The best-to-worst performance ranking of the four single-sensor satellite products was SMAPL3ESWI, SMOSSWI, AMSR2SWI, and ASCATSWI, with the L-band-based SMAPL3ESWI (median R of 0.72) outperforming the others at 50 % of the sites. Among the two multi-sensor satellite products (MeMo and ESA-CCISWI), MeMo performed better on average (median R of 0.72 versus 0.67), probably due to the inclusion of SMAPL3ESWI. The best-to-worst performance ranking of the six open-loop models was HBV-MSWEP, HBV-ERA5, ERA5-Land, HBV-IMERG, VIC-PGF, and GLDAS-Noah. This ranking largely reflects the quality of the precipitation forcing. HBV-MSWEP (median R of 0.78) performed best not just among the open-loop models but among all products. The calibration of HBV improved the median R by +0.12 on average compared to random parameters, highlighting the importance of model calibration. The best-to-worst performance ranking of the six models with satellite data assimilation was HBV-MSWEP+SMAPL3E, HBV-ERA5+SMAPL3E, GLEAM, SMAPL4, HBV-IMERG+SMAPL3E, and ERA5. The assimilation of SMAPL3E retrievals into HBV-IMERG improved the median R by +0.06, suggesting that data assimilation yields significant benefits at the global scale.
17-40
Beck, Hylke E.
edbdb027-f978-47dd-a9d3-43a1cce92e9a
Pan, Ming
5f0a6106-cf97-4213-b345-6b220f3d9bc4
Miralles, Diego G.
ce0c5485-e556-4c5b-a8c6-5241b090f307
Reichle, Rolf H.
4bb98546-7b05-44e7-a4a4-67af0e60cd60
Dorigo, Wouter A.
af379457-f3f2-46b6-8bd8-c99d95ed0017
Hahn, Sebastian
7be950a2-daa7-409a-a834-a195a442e6d9
Sheffield, Justin
dd66575b-a4dc-4190-ad95-df2d6aaaaa6b
Karthikeyan, Lanka
85401867-e1f6-4c34-98e9-108e8e67dcd5
Balsamo, Gianpaolo
1c4acbb3-5f48-48cb-b06a-aa405ff287c8
Parinussa, Robert M.
2821e2b4-bfe9-4e33-a66f-bb8cc98ff351
van Dijk, Albert I.J.M.
31892b83-b661-4668-8208-8a2bed27743c
Du, Jinyang
b9bb2c6f-7950-4faa-9875-eeb0bc4f8b35
Kimball, John S.
20bb351d-1453-4a3e-a42a-41df3ee66b07
Vergopolan, Noemi
3c455209-3f04-4ef3-9687-d637239ec4b4
Wood, Eric F.
ee59ebb9-367e-48ce-beab-22666be5095d
4 January 2021
Beck, Hylke E.
edbdb027-f978-47dd-a9d3-43a1cce92e9a
Pan, Ming
5f0a6106-cf97-4213-b345-6b220f3d9bc4
Miralles, Diego G.
ce0c5485-e556-4c5b-a8c6-5241b090f307
Reichle, Rolf H.
4bb98546-7b05-44e7-a4a4-67af0e60cd60
Dorigo, Wouter A.
af379457-f3f2-46b6-8bd8-c99d95ed0017
Hahn, Sebastian
7be950a2-daa7-409a-a834-a195a442e6d9
Sheffield, Justin
dd66575b-a4dc-4190-ad95-df2d6aaaaa6b
Karthikeyan, Lanka
85401867-e1f6-4c34-98e9-108e8e67dcd5
Balsamo, Gianpaolo
1c4acbb3-5f48-48cb-b06a-aa405ff287c8
Parinussa, Robert M.
2821e2b4-bfe9-4e33-a66f-bb8cc98ff351
van Dijk, Albert I.J.M.
31892b83-b661-4668-8208-8a2bed27743c
Du, Jinyang
b9bb2c6f-7950-4faa-9875-eeb0bc4f8b35
Kimball, John S.
20bb351d-1453-4a3e-a42a-41df3ee66b07
Vergopolan, Noemi
3c455209-3f04-4ef3-9687-d637239ec4b4
Wood, Eric F.
ee59ebb9-367e-48ce-beab-22666be5095d
Beck, Hylke E., Pan, Ming, Miralles, Diego G., Reichle, Rolf H., Dorigo, Wouter A., Hahn, Sebastian, Sheffield, Justin, Karthikeyan, Lanka, Balsamo, Gianpaolo, Parinussa, Robert M., van Dijk, Albert I.J.M., Du, Jinyang, Kimball, John S., Vergopolan, Noemi and Wood, Eric F.
(2021)
Evaluation of 18 satellite- And model-based soil moisture products using in situ measurements from 826 sensors.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 25 (1), , [hess25172021].
(doi:10.5194/hess-25-17-2021).
Abstract
Information about the spatiotemporal variability of soil moisture is critical for many purposes, including monitoring of hydrologic extremes, irrigation scheduling, and prediction of agricultural yields. We evaluated the temporal dynamics of 18 state-of-the-art (quasi-)global near-surface soil moisture products, including six based on satellite retrievals, six based on models without satellite data assimilation (referred to hereafter as “open-loop” models), and six based on models that assimilate satellite soil moisture or brightness temperature data. Seven of the products are introduced for the first time in this study: one multi-sensor merged satellite product called MeMo (Merged soil Moisture) and six estimates from the HBV (Hydrologiska Byråns Vattenbalansavdelning) model with three precipitation inputs (ERA5, IMERG, and MSWEP) with and without assimilation of SMAPL3E satellite retrievals, respectively. As reference, we used in situ soil moisture measurements between 2015 and 2019 at 5 cm depth from 826 sensors, located primarily in the USA and Europe. The 3-hourly Pearson correlation (R) was chosen as the primary performance metric. We found that application of the Soil Wetness Index (SWI) smoothing filter resulted in improved performance for all satellite products. The best-to-worst performance ranking of the four single-sensor satellite products was SMAPL3ESWI, SMOSSWI, AMSR2SWI, and ASCATSWI, with the L-band-based SMAPL3ESWI (median R of 0.72) outperforming the others at 50 % of the sites. Among the two multi-sensor satellite products (MeMo and ESA-CCISWI), MeMo performed better on average (median R of 0.72 versus 0.67), probably due to the inclusion of SMAPL3ESWI. The best-to-worst performance ranking of the six open-loop models was HBV-MSWEP, HBV-ERA5, ERA5-Land, HBV-IMERG, VIC-PGF, and GLDAS-Noah. This ranking largely reflects the quality of the precipitation forcing. HBV-MSWEP (median R of 0.78) performed best not just among the open-loop models but among all products. The calibration of HBV improved the median R by +0.12 on average compared to random parameters, highlighting the importance of model calibration. The best-to-worst performance ranking of the six models with satellite data assimilation was HBV-MSWEP+SMAPL3E, HBV-ERA5+SMAPL3E, GLEAM, SMAPL4, HBV-IMERG+SMAPL3E, and ERA5. The assimilation of SMAPL3E retrievals into HBV-IMERG improved the median R by +0.06, suggesting that data assimilation yields significant benefits at the global scale.
Text
hess-25-17-2021
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 23 October 2020
Published date: 4 January 2021
Additional Information:
Funding Information:
Financial support. This research has been supported by the U.S.
Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 471538
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/471538
ISSN: 1027-5606
PURE UUID: f2432ef9-ecc0-4da4-a26e-31a3afe0d3e2
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 10 Nov 2022 17:39
Last modified: 18 Mar 2024 03:33
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Hylke E. Beck
Author:
Ming Pan
Author:
Diego G. Miralles
Author:
Rolf H. Reichle
Author:
Wouter A. Dorigo
Author:
Sebastian Hahn
Author:
Lanka Karthikeyan
Author:
Gianpaolo Balsamo
Author:
Robert M. Parinussa
Author:
Albert I.J.M. van Dijk
Author:
Jinyang Du
Author:
John S. Kimball
Author:
Noemi Vergopolan
Author:
Eric F. Wood
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics