000890910 001__ 890910
000890910 005__ 20210623133411.0
000890910 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125616
000890910 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a0022-1694
000890910 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1879-2707
000890910 0247_ $$2Handle$$a2128/27354
000890910 0247_ $$2WOS$$aWOS:000639844900018
000890910 037__ $$aFZJ-2021-01241
000890910 082__ $$a690
000890910 1001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)180577$$aQu, Yuquan$$b0
000890910 245__ $$aInter-comparison of several soil moisture downscaling methods over the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, China
000890910 260__ $$aAmsterdam [u.a.]$$bElsevier$$c2021
000890910 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000890910 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000890910 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1615465660_11291
000890910 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000890910 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000890910 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000890910 520__ $$aMicrowave remote sensing is able to retrieve soil moisture (SM) at an adequate level of accuracy. However, these microwave remotely sensed SM products usually have a spatial resolution of tens of kilometers which cannot satisfy the requirements of fine to medium scale applications such as agricultural irrigation and local water resource management. Several SM downscaling methods have been proposed to solve this mismatch by downscaling the coarse-scale SM to fine-scale (several kilometers or hundreds of meters). Although studies have been conducted over different climatic zones and from different data sets with good results, there is still a lack of a comprehensive comparison and evaluation between them to guide the production of high-resolution and high-accuracy SM data. Therefore, in this study we compared several SM downscaling methods (from 0.25° to 0.01°) based on polynormal fitting, physical model, machine learning and geostatistics over the Qinghai-Tibet plateau where there is a wide range of climate conditions from four aspects, that is, comparison with the original microwave product, comparison with in situ measurements, inter-comparison based on three-cornered hat (TCH) method, and a spatial feasibility analysis. The comparison results show that the method based on a physical model, in this case the Disaggregation based on Physical And Theoretical scale Change (DisPATCh) method, has the highest ability on preserving the coarse-scale feature of original microwave SM product, while to some extent, this ability could be a disadvantage for improving the accuracy of the downscaling results. In addition, soil evaporation efficiency (SEE) alone is not sufficient to represent SM spatial patterns over complex land surface. Geostatistics based area-to-area regression Kriging (ATARK) introduces the highest uncertainty caused by the overcorrection during the residual interpolation process while this process can also improve correlation (R) and correct the bias as well as provide more feasible spatial patterns and details. Two machine learning methods, the random forest (RF) and Gaussian process regression (GPR) show high stability on all comparison results but provide smoother spatial patterns. The multivariate statistical regression (MSR) method performs worst due to the fact that its simple linear regression model could not meet the requirement of SM fitting on complicated land surface. Moreover, all five downscaling methods show a declining accuracy after downscaling. This phenomenon may be caused by the spatial mismatch on fine-scale. In addition, this could also be caused by the tendency that downscaled results will usually provide more spatial details from downscaling predictors, while they cannot capture the temporal changes of the microwave SM product well. In general, this phenomenon tends to be more significant over heterogeneous land surface. All in all, five widely used soil moisture downscaling methods were compared based on a comprehensive comparison scheme to add to the body of knowledge in applicability of downcaling methods under different weather conditions.
000890910 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-217$$a217 - Für eine nachhaltige Bio-Ökonomie – von Ressourcen zu Produkten (POF4-217)$$cPOF4-217$$fPOF IV$$x0
000890910 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef
000890910 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)173794$$aZhu, Zhongli$$b1$$eCorresponding author
000890910 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)129506$$aMontzka, Carsten$$b2
000890910 7001_ $$00000-0001-8295-8973$$aChai, Linna$$b3
000890910 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aLiu, Shaomin$$b4
000890910 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aGe, Yong$$b5
000890910 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aLiu, Jin$$b6
000890910 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aLu, Zheng$$b7
000890910 7001_ $$00000-0002-1526-6341$$aHe, Xinlei$$b8
000890910 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aZheng, Jie$$b9
000890910 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aHan, Tian$$b10
000890910 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)1473173-3$$a10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125616$$gVol. 592, p. 125616 -$$p125616$$tJournal of hydrology$$v592$$x0022-1694$$y2021
000890910 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/890910/files/Qu2020.pdf$$yPublished on 2020-10-11. Available in OpenAccess from 2022-10-11.
000890910 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:890910$$pdnbdelivery$$pVDB$$pVDB:Earth_Environment$$pdriver$$popen_access$$popenaire
000890910 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)180577$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b0$$kFZJ
000890910 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)129506$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b2$$kFZJ
000890910 9130_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-250$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-200$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bErde und Umwelt$$lTerrestrische Umwelt$$vTerrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction$$x0
000890910 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-217$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-210$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-200$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bForschungsbereich Erde und Umwelt$$lErde im Wandel – Unsere Zukunft nachhaltig gestalten$$vFür eine nachhaltige Bio-Ökonomie – von Ressourcen zu Produkten$$x0
000890910 9141_ $$y2021
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0160$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEssential Science Indicators$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1160$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Engineering, Computing and Technology$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1190$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBiological Abstracts$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0600$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEbsco Academic Search$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNCND4$$2HGFVOC$$aCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0530$$2StatID$$aEmbargoed OpenAccess
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bJ HYDROL : 2019$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0113$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bASC$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1060$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2021-02-02
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0420$$2StatID$$aNationallizenz$$d2021-02-02$$wger
000890910 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2021-02-02
000890910 920__ $$lyes
000890910 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118$$kIBG-3$$lAgrosphäre$$x0
000890910 980__ $$ajournal
000890910 980__ $$aVDB
000890910 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000890910 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118
000890910 9801_ $$aFullTexts