Professional Documents
Culture Documents
R.N. Sahoo
I.A.R.I., New Delhi -110012
1. Introduction
The term hyperspectral is used to refer to spectra consisting of large number of narrow,
contiguously spaced spectral bands. In the field of remote sensing, the term hyperspectral is
also used interchangeably with other terms such as spectroscopy, spectrometry,
spectroradiometry and rarely ultraspectral. Spectroscopy is a branch of physics concerned
with the production, transmission, measurement and interpretation of electromagnetic spectra.
Spectrometry or spectroradiometry is the measure of photons as a function of wavelength.
Ultraspectral is beyond hyperspectral, a goal that has not been achieved yet. Spectrometers
are used in laboratories, field, aircraft or satellites to measure the reflectance spectra of
natural surfaces. When an image is constructed from an imaging spectrometer that records the
spectra for contiguous image pixels, the terms shift to become imaging spectroscopy, imaging
spectrometry or hyperspectral imaging. Hyperspectral imaging is a new technique for
obtaining a spectrum in each position of a large array of spatial positions so that any one
spectral wavelength can be used to make a recognizable image (Clark, 1999). By analyzing
the spectral features in each pixel, and thus specific chemical bonds in materials, we can
spatially map materials. The narrow spectral channels that constitute hyperspectral sensors
enable the detection of small spectral features that might otherwise be masked within the
broader bands of multi-spectral scanner systems. In this regard, we hypothesis that
hyperspectral sensors could help to overcome the traditional problems faced when using the
broader bands of multi- spectral scanner systems, such as the saturation problem in estimating
quantity and the estimation of quality.
1.1 Advantages of Hyperspectral Remote Sensing
Direct field techniques for estimating soil and vegetation attributes require frequent
destructive sampling. Such techniques are difficult, extremely labour intensive and costly in
terms of time and money. They can hardly be extended to cover large areas. However, remote
sensing technique particularly of high spectral resolution has been found to be very potential
for quantitative assessment of soil and vegetation at spatial scale. A major limitation of
broadband remote sensing products is that they use average spectral information over
broadband widths resulting in loss of critical information available in specific narrow bands
(Blackburn, 1998, Thenkabail et al.. 2000). Recent developments in hyperspectral remote
sensing or imaging spectrometry have provided additional bands within the visible, NIR and
shortwave infrared (SWIR) (Figure 1). Most hyperspectral sensors acquire radiance
information in less than 10 nm bandwidths from the visible to the SWIR (400-2500 nm)
(Asner, 1998). For example, the spectral shift of the red-edge (670-780 nm) slope associated
with leaf chlorophyll content, phenological state and vegetation stress, is not accessible with
broadband sensors (Collins, 1978; Horler, et al.1983).
II.108
For characterizing soils from hyperspectral reflectance data Kumar et al. (2006) collected
eighty seven surface soil samples (0-15cm) representing 23 soil series were collected from 23
sites of five different places of India encompassing 5 different climatic zones including soils
from 4 soil taxonomic orders (Vertisols from Nagpur, Alfisols from Ranchi and Inceptisols
from IARI farm) on the basis of reports on soils of different states published by the National
Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning and spectral studies were carried out using FS 3
ASD spectroradiometer (having spectral range 350-2500nm). Reflectance spectra of soil
samples that represent four soil orders within the examined population are given in Fig.1.
These signatures can easily be attributed to several common soil constituents. The most likely
component in the NIR region is the OH groups in both the adsorbed water (at 1.4m and
1.9m) and the crystal water of clay minerals (at 1.45m and 2.2m ) (Hunt and Salisbury
1970). Also the CO3 in the calcite mineral is very active in the NIR region of soils (major
peak at 2.33) (Hunt et al.1971; Gaffey 1986).
From the analysis of the reflectance spectra pattern different soils orders namely Alfisols,
Inceptisols, Mollisols and Vertisols could also be discriminated. The spectral pattern of
Alfisols showed higher reflectance pattern in the IR region (Fig 1) than the others three soils
orders (Inceptisols, Vertisols, and Mollisols), due to high free iron oxide content as well as
due to high kaolinite and interstratified kaolinite content. Alfisols showed high absorption
pattern in the visible region than the Inceptisols and Vertisols. These soils showed strong
absorption peaks near 450 nm and weak absorption peak near 550 nm. The absorption band
near 450 nm is caused by paired and single Fe3+ electron transitions to higher energy state
(Sherman and Waite,1985), the small absorption peak near 550 nm may be due to the
chromophore FeO-OH found in goethite (Mortimore et al. 2004) which is dominated in
Alfisols. In VIS region, convex curve was found which is characteristic of Alfisols soil
orders. These convex curves were broader for high iron and free iron oxide containing soil
samples. Mollisols spectral reflectance was lowest one as compared to all other soil orders
throughout the spectral region (350-2500 nm). Lowest spectral reflectance pattern of
Mollisols was mainly due to the high organic matter content. Spectral reflectance pattern of
Vertisols showed higher reflectance pattern than Mollisols but lower than Inceptisols and
Alfisols. In VIS region concave curve was observed for Vertisols as well as for Mollisols.
The concave and convex pattern of the reflectance spectra were observed in the VIS region
because these were guided with organic matter and iron content of the soils which were
highly correlated in this region. Spectral reflectance of Inceptisols was observed to be higher
than Vertisols and Mollisols but less than Alfisols. It may be due to its low organic matter
content and sandy loam texture.
VIS (350-710 nm) region of spectra was dominated with several features and specific pattern
with respective bands where but NIR (710-1110 nm) region was featureless. (Fig 1). These
four soil orders namely Mollisols, Vertisols, inceptisols, and Alfisols in red bad (650-700 nm)
showed around 10, 15, 25, and more than 25 % reflectance respectively. So VIS region was
found to be more useful for discriminating these four soil orders as compared to NIR region
of spectra. The spectral pattern in short wave infrared (SWIR, 1100-2500 nm) region of
Alfisols shows the characteristic absorption peak near 1400, 2200, and 2300 nm bands. This
1400 nm peak may be attributed due to the first overtone of the O-H stretch and a second
doublet at 2200 and 2300nm is due to the combination Al-OH bend plus O-H stretch. This
metal-OH bend plus O-H stretch combination near 2200 nm and 2300 nm are diagnostic
absorption features for clay minerals (Clark et al. 1990). Inceptisols spectra in SWIR region
also showed characteristic absorption peaks at near 1400, 2200, and 2300 nm bands. These
two soil orders alongwith its characteristics absorption peaks, also have universal water
absorption band near 1900 nm. Alfisols showed stronger reflectance peaks near 2300 nm, due
II.109
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 1(A). Spectral reflectance pattern of representative soil of four soil orders in (a)
full range, 350-2500nm, (b) only visible range (c) only NIR range and (d)
SWIR range.
II.110
II.111
Figure 2. Study area and soil spectral data collection in the farmers field in situ and
laboratory condition.
II.112
II.113
Figure 5. Observed and predicted values of saturated hydraulic conductivity [ln(Ks)] (a and
b), and van Genuchten parameters, ln() (c and d), and van Genuchten parameter,
n (e and f) with the best performances (left side) and worst performances (right
side) among pedotransfer functions and spectrotransfer functions developed with
different combination of predictor variables for each hydraulic property.
II.114
II.115
Figure 6. Comparison of Hyperion reflectance data with field and laboratory reflectance
spectra. Brown and green line is soil reflectance collected in laboratory and field
conditions respectively and blue line for hyperion data. Light blue strip in the
graphs indicates the spectral range not considered due to noise.
II.116
II.117
II.118
The spectral properties of live foliage set up the radiation field in a canopy, and these spectral
properties express the presence and abundance of both the inputs and products of
photosynthesis (Figure 9). Leaf pigments such as chlorophylls, carotenoids, and anthocyanins
are expressed in the 400-700 nm range, matching the wavelength region of maximum solar
input to the biosphere. The relative contribution of pigments to the reflectance and
transmittance properties of foliage varies by wavelength in this region, and all pigments have
overlapping absorption features (Figure 10). Chlorophyll a (chl-a) displays maximum
absorptions in the 410- 430 nm and 600-690 nm regions; whereas chlorophyll b (chl-b) shows
maximum absorptions in the 450-470 nm range. Carotenoids absorb most efficiently between
440 and 480 nm. In the foliage of many canopy species, chl-b dominates the overall
absorption spectrum at shorter and longer wavelengths in the visible spectrum, whereas
carotenoids can be a major contributor at slightly longer wavelengths (gray line, Figure 10).
In the near-infrared (700-1300 nm) and shortwave-infrared (1300-2500 nm), the leaf
spectrum is dominated by water content, thickness, and, to a lesser degree, protein-nitrogen
(N), cellulose and lignin content (Figure 9) (Curran 1989). In particular, live foliage is a very
efficient at scattering radiation in the 750-1300 nm range; this is caused by internal scattering
at the air-cell-water interfaces within the leaves (Thomas et al.. 1971, Hunt et al.. 1987). At
longer wavelengths (> 1300 nm), relatively small amounts of water (and resulting air-water
interfaces) 4 effectively trap radiation, resulting in absorption that exceeds scattering
processes in this portion of the spectrum. Meanwhile, leaf structural properties, especially
area per mass (specific leaf area or SLA), play an underlying but integral role in containing
the biochemicals in a functional form adapted for leaf carbon fixation and related
photosynthetic processes (Jacquemound et al..1996, 2000).
II.119
Figure 9. The radiance spectrum of a leaf or canopy expresses the presence and
abundance of the building blocks and products of photosynthesis. Elemental
and molecular contributions to the spectrum are labeled. This spectrum was
acquired over lowland Hawaiian rainforest using the Airborne Visible and
Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS).
II.120
II.121
(a)
(b)
Figure 11(a and b). Spectral Shift in healthy and stressed plant and (b) REP position for
low/nil and high N treated plot of wheat crop.
3.1.2 Continuum-removal and band-depth normalization
Absorptions in a spectrum are composed of the continuum and individual features, where the
continuum is the background absorption onto which other absorption features are placed
over. The continuum is simply an estimate of the other absorptions present in the spectrum,
not including the one of interest (Clark & Roush, 1984). In an experiment, (Mutanga,
Skidmore et al.. 2003) tested the utility of using four variables derived from continuumremoved absorption features for predicting canopy nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium
and magnesium concentration (Figure 12).
II.122
Figure 12. Estimation of canopy nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium and magnesium
concentration using four variables derived from continuum-removed absorption
features (From Mutanga et al.2003)
3.2 Parameter Retrieval from Hyper BRDF through radiative transfer modelling
Different methods to estimate canopy biophysical variables from reflectance data have been
developed and can be grouped into two approaches such as (1) statistical approach and (2)
physical process based approach (using Radiative Transfer Models). Using statistical
approach, many researchers have developed empirical relationships between vegetation
indices (VIs) and canopy biophysical variables. The equations defining such empirical and
semi-empirical relationships not only vary in the mathematical form (Linear, power,
Exponential, etc) but also in their empirical coefficients, depending upon the cultivars,
regions and the data normalizations approaches adopted. These methods are very simple but
the accuracy of biophysical variable estimation may be quite low. They are suffering from
severe limitations due to the lack of physics introduced in the retrieval technique and the
small amount of radiometric information they can exploit. Alternately, physical modeling
approach is based on the inversion of canopy reflectance models that describe the radiative
transfer in the canopy as a function of biophysical variables which characterize the canopy
architecture and the optical properties of vegetation elements and the soil. In the mid-80s, the
anisotropic properties were observed to be crucial for diagnosing plant canopy functioning.
Enhanced understanding of the physical processes that govern the interactions between light
and the canopy elements, bi-directional canopy reflectance (CR) models emerged for its
II.123
inversion issues on multidirectional data in the early 90s for retrieval of biophysical
parameters (Goel, 1987).
Inversion of bidirectional canopy reflectance (CR) models emerged as a promising alternative
for retrieval issues (Goel 1989; Myneni et al. 1991; Liang and Strahlar, 1993; Tripathi et al.
2006, 2009). The space borne instruments like POLDER, ADEOS, MISR, TERRA, etc were
designed to study both the spectral and directional characteristics of the earth surfaces. This
trend depicts one of the scientific stakes to come in remote sensing, which is to take
advantage of both the spectral and the directional signatures of vegetation in order to retrieve
the biophysical parameters.
Tripathi et al. (2006) conducted one field experiment with the objectives set as (i) to relate
canopy biophysical parameters and geometry to its bidirectional reflectance, (ii) to evaluate a
canopy reflectance model to best represent the radiative transfer within the canopy for its
inversion and (iii) to retrieve crop biophysical parameters through inversion of the model.
Two varieties of the mustard crop (Brassica juncea L) were grown with two nitrogen
treatments to generate a wide range of Leaf Area Index (LAI) and biomass. The reflectance
data obtained at 5nm interval for a range of 400-1100nm were integrated to IRS LISS II
sensors four band values using Newton Cotes Integration technique. Biophysical parameters
were estimated synchronizing with the bi-directional reflectance measurements. The radiative
transfer model PROSAIL was used for its evaluation and to retrieve biophysical parameters
mainly LAI and Average Leaf Angle (ALA) through its inversion. Look Up Table (LUT) of
BRDF was prepared simulating through PROSAIL model varying only LAI (0.2 interval
from 1.2 to 5.4 ) and ALA (5 interval from 40 to 55) parameters and inversion was done
using a merit function and numerical optimization technique given by Press et al. 1986. The
derived LAI and ALA values from inversion were well matched with observed one with
RMSE 0.521 and 5.57, respectively.
The radiative transfer model PROSAIL was used for retrieval of LAI, Chlorophyll (Cab) and
equivalent water thickness (Cw) of wheat crop of Trans Gangetic Plains through its inversion
(Fig 13). The model was calibrated for major parameters such as LAI, Cab, Cw and biomass
(Cm) and sensitivity analysis was performed. Inversion of PROSAIL model was carried out
for LAI, Cab and Cw using Look Up Table (LUT) approach. The merit function was
computed and used to best fit the measured data with the simulated one. Results revealed that
LAI, Cab and Cw, were very well retrieved with RMSE 0.3892, 4.307 and 0.0063
respectively when compared with measured values. The retrieved products were evaluated
with its corresponding regressed products through different vegetation indices. RMSE
between these regressed estimation and measured parameter values were 0.553, 5.204 and
0.01 for LAI, Cab and Cw respectively.
II.124
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
EWT
Chl
Figure 13. The LAI, Equivalent Water Thickness and Total Chlorophyll content of wheat
crop in Trans Gangetic Plain of India retrieved from MODIS data through
radiative transfer modelling.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
Barbe, D.F. (1980). Charge Coupled Devices. Topics in Applied Physics, Vol.38.
Springer- Verlag, Berlin.
5.
Baret, F. and Guyot, G. (1991). Potential and limits of vegetation indices for LAI and
APAR assessment. Remote Sensing of Environment, 35, 161-173.
6.
Barman, D., Sehgal, V.K., Sahoo, R.N. and Nagarajan, S. (2010). Relationship of
Bidirectional Reflectance of Wheat with Biophysical Parameters and its Radiative
Transfer Modeling Using PROSAIL, J. Ind. Soc. Remote Sens., 38, 141- 151.
7.
Boegh, E., Soegaard, H., Broge, N., Hasager, C.B., Jensen, N.O. and Schelde, K.
(2002). Airborne multispectral data for quantifying leaf area index, nitrogen
concentration, and photosynthetic efficiency in agriculture. Remote Sensing of
Environment. 81,179193.
8.
Bonham-Carter, G.F. (1988). Numerical procedures and computer program for fitting an
inverted Gaussian model to vegetation reflectance data. Computer & Geosciences,
14,339-356.
9.
Broge, N.H. and Leblanc, E. (2000). Comparing prediction power and stability of
broadband and hyperspectral vegetation indices for estimation of green leaf area index
and canopy chlorophyll density. Remote Sensing of Environment. 76, 156-172.
II.125
11. Casa,R. and Jones, H.G. (2004). Retrieval of crop canopy properties: a comparison
between model inversion from hyperspectral data and image classification.
International Journal of Remote Sensing, 23, 1119-1130.
12. Cheng, Cheng Ji, (Ed.). (1989). Manual for the Optical-Chemical Processing of
Remotely Sensed Imagery. ESCAP / UNDP Regional Remote Sensing Programme
(RAS/86/141), Beijing, China.
13. Cho & Skidmore (2006). A new technique for extracting the red edge position from
hyperspectral data: The linea.r extrapolation method. Remote Sensing of Environment
101, 181193.
14. Clark, R.N. and Roush, T.L. (1984). Reflectance spectroscopy: Quantitative analysis
techniquesfor remote sensing applications. Journal of Geophysical Research, 89 (B7),
6329-6340.
15. Clark, R.N. (1999). Spectroscopy of rocks and minerals and principles of spectroscopy.
In:Rencz, A. N. (Ed.): Remote sensing for the Earth sciences: Manual of remote
sensing, 3rd ed., Vol. 3 New York, Chichester, Weinheim. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: 358.
16. Curran, P.J.(1989). Remote sensing of foliar chemistry. Remote Sensing of
Environment, 30, 271-278.
17. Curran, P. J. (1985). Principles of Remote Sensing, Longman, London.
18. Dawson, T.P. and Curran, P.J. (1998). A new technique for interpolating the reflectance
red edge position. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 19(11) ,2133-2139.
19. Demetriades Shah, T.H., Steven, M.D. and Clark, J.A. (1990). High resolution
derivative spectra in remote sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment, 33, 55-64.
20. Despan, D. and Jacquemoud, S. (2004). Optical properties of soil and leaf: Necessity
and problems of modeling. In: Schnermark, M. von, Geiger, B., Rser, H. P. (Eds.):
Reflection properties of vegetation and soil. Berlin. Wissenschaft und Technik Verlag:
39-70.
21. Duckworth, J. (1998). Spectroscopic quantitative analysis. In: Workman, J.,
Springsteen, A. W. (Eds.): Applied spectroscopy. A compact reference for practitioners.
San Diego, New York, London. Academic Press: 93-164.
22. Elachi, Charles, (1987). Introduction to the Physics and Techniques of Remote Sensing,
John Wiley & Sons, New York.
23. Franklin, E. (Eds.): Remote sensing of forest environments - Concepts and case studies.
Boston,Dordrecht, London. Kluwer Academic Publishers: 279-300.
24. Franklin, J., Phinn, R., Woodcock, C.E. and Rogan, J. (2003). Rationale and conceptual
framework for classification approaches to assess forest resources and properties. In:
Wulder, M. A.,
25. Goel, N. (1989). Inversion of canopy reflectance models for estimation of biophysical
parameters from reflectance data, In Theory and Applications of Optical Remote
Sensing (G. Asrar, Ed), Wiley Interscience, New York.205-250.
26. Goel, N.S. (1987). Models of vegetation canopy reflectance and their use in estimation
of biophysical parameters from reflectance data, Remote Sensing Reviews, 1, 221.
II.126
27. Goel, N.S. (1989). Inversion of canopy reflectance models for estimation of biophysical
parameters from reflectance data, In Theory and Applications of Optical Remote
Sensing (G. Asrar, Ed), Wiley Interscience, New York, 205-250.
28. Guyot, G. (1990). Optical properties of vegetation canopies. In: Steven, M. D., Clark, J.
A. (Eds.): Applications of remote sensing in agriculture. London. Butterworths: 19-43.
29. Horler, D.N., Dockray, M. and Barber, J. (1983). The red edge of plant leaf reflectance.
International Journal of Remote Sensing. 4, 273-288.
30. Jacquemoud, S. and Baret, F. (1990). 'PROSPECT: A model of leaf optical properties
spectra, Remote Sensing of Environment. 34, 251-256.
31. Jacquemoud, S. (1993). Inversion of the PROSPECT + SAIL canopy reflectance model
from AVIRIS equivalent spectra: Theoretical study, Remote Sensing of Environment,
44(2-3), 281-292.
32. Jensen, J.R. (1996). Image Preprocessing: Radiometric and Geometric Correction. In :
Introductory Digital Image Processing. Prentice Hall publisher (Second Edition). 107135.
33. Kadupitiya, H.K., Sahoo, R.N., Gupta, V.K., Ahmed, N. and Ray, S.S. ( 2009).
Modeling soil chemical composition using hyperspectral reflectance data., In ISRS
Annual Convention and National Symposium on Advances in Geo-spatial Technologies
with special emphasis on Sustainable Rainfed Agriculture by Indian Soc. Of Remote
Sensing, Nagpur, Sept 17-19.
34. Kadupitiya, H.K., Sahoo, R.N., Ray, S.S., Chakraborty, D. and Ahmed, N. (2010).
Quantitative Assessment of Soil Chemical Properties using Visible (VIS) and Nearinfrared (NIR) Proximal. Hyperspectral data Tropical Agriculturist, 158, 41-60.
35. Kokaly, R.F. and Clark, R.N. (1999). Spectroscopic determination of leaf biochemistry
usingband-depth analysis of absorption features and stepwise multiple linear regression.
Remote Sensing of Environment, 67, 267-287.
36. Kruse, F.A., Lefkoff, A.B., Boardman, J.B., Heidebrecht, K.B., Shapiro, A.T., Barloon,
P.J. and Goetz, A.F.H. (1993). The Spectral Image Processing System (SIPS) Interactive Visualization and Analysis of Imaging spectrometer Data. Remote Sensing of
the Environment. 44, 145 163.
37. Kruse, F.A., Lefkoff, A.B. and Boardman, J.W. (1993). The Spectral Image Processing
System (SIPS) - Interactive visualization and analysis of imaging spectrometer data.
Remote Sensing of Environment. 44, 145-163.
38. Liang, S. and Strahler, A.H. (1993). Calculation of the angular radiance distribution for
a coupled atmosphere and canopy. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote
Sensing, 31(2), 491-502.
39. Lillesand, Thomas, M. and Kiefer, R.W. (1987). Remote Sensing and Image
Interpretation, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York.
40. Lucas, N.S. and Curran, P.J. (1999). Forest ecosystem simulation modeling: The role of
remote sensing. Progress in Physical Geography. 23(3), 391-423.
41. Myneni,R.B. and Ross, J. (1991). Photon-Vegetation interactions: applications in
optical remote sensing and plant ecology, Springer-Verlag, New York. 565 .
42. Nilson, T. and Kuusk, A. (1989). A reflectance model for the homogeneous plant
canopy and its inversion. Remote Sensing of Environment. 27, 157-167.
II.127
43. Press, W.H., Flannery, B.P., Teukolsky, S.A. and Vetterling, W.T. (1986). Numerical
Recipes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 994.
44. Ranjan, R., Sahoo, R.N., Tomar, R.K,, Nagarajan, S., Gupta, V.K. and Sharma, A.R.
(2008). Characterization of different crop residues and their differential affect on wheat
crop growth with hyper-spectral remote sensing. National Symposium on Advances in
remote sensing technology with special emphasis on microwave remote sensing (ISRS
symposium 2008), Dec. 18-20, Nirma University Campus, Ahmedabad.
45. Sabins, Floyd, F., Jr., (1987). Remote Sensing Principles and Interpretations, 2nd ed.,
W. H. Freeman and Company, New York.
46. Sahoo, R.N. (2008) Potential Application of Hyperspectral Remote Sensing in
Agriculture In National Seminar on Hyperspectral Remote Sensing and Spectral
Signature Database Management System Hyperspec 2008 Feb 14-15, 2008,
Annamalai University, Chidambaram, Tamilnadu.
47. Sahoo, R.N., Bhavanarayana, M., Panda, B.C., Arika, C.N. and Kaur, R. (2005). Total
information content as an index of soil moisture J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing. 33(1),
17-24.
48. Sahoo, R.N., Tomar, R.K., Pandey, S., Chandana, P., Gupta, R.K., Sharama, R.K.,
Singh, S., Sehgal, V.K., Chakraborty, D. and Kalra, N. (2006). Remote sensing based
growth monitoring of RCT adopted wheat in rice based cropping system in TransGangetic Plain. Presented in 2nd International Rice Congress-Science, Technology and
Trade for Peace and Prosperity 26th International Rice Research Conference, Oct 913, New Delhi: 495.
49. Salisbury, J., Milton, N.M. and Walsh, P.A. (1987). Significance of non-isotropic
scattering from vegetation for geobotanical remote sensing. International Journal of
Remote Sensing, 8, 997-1009.
50. Santra, P., Sahoo, R.N., Das, B.S. and Gupta, V.K. (2009). Estimation of Soil Hydraulic
Properties using Spectral Reflectance in Visible and NearInfrared Region
Geoderma,152, 338-349.
51. Schmidt and Skidmore (2002). Spectral discrimination of vegetation types in a coastal
wetland.Sciences. In: Rencz, A. N. (Ed.): Remote sensing for the Earth sciences:
Manual of remote Sensing of Environment. 67, 267-287.
52. Singh, D.K., Sahoo, R.N., Ahmed, N., and Gupta, V.K. (2008). Quantitative
Assessment of Soil Parameters from Hyperspectral Remote Sensing Data, National
Symposium on Advances in remote sensing technology with special emphasis on
microwave remote sensing (ISRS symposium 2008), Dec. 18-20, Nirma University
Campus, Ahmedabad.
53. Singh, D.K., Ahmed, N., Sahoo, R.N. and Gupta, V.K. ( 2008). Characterization of
some soil orders in relation to hyper-specteral reflectance data, National Symposium on
Advances in remote sensing technology with special emphasis on microwave remote
sensing (ISRS symposium 2008), Dec. 18-20, Nirma University Campus, Ahmedabad.
54. Singh, D.K., Ahmed, N., Sahoo, R.N. and Gupta, V.K. (2009). Determination of Some
Soil Properties using Hyper-Spectral Reflectance Data, Fourth World Congress on
Conservation Agriculture, Feb 4-7, New Delhi, India.
55. Toselli, F. (Ed.), (1989). Applications of Remote Sensing to Agrometeorology, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
II.128
56. Tripathi R., Sahoo, R.N., Sehgal, V.K., Gupta ,V.K., Tomar, R.K. and Chopra, U.K.
(2009). Estimation of biophysical parameters of wheat from MODIS reflectance
through Radiative transfer modeling In ISRS Annual Convention and National
Symposium on Advances in Geo-spatial Technologies with special emphasis on
Sustainable Rainfed Agriculture by Indian Soc. Of Remote Sensing, Nagpur, Sept 1719, 2009.
57. Tripathi, R., Sahoo, R.N., Sehgal, V.K., Tomar, R.K., Chakraborty, D., and Nagarajan
S. (2012). Inversion of PROSAIL Model for Retrieval of Plant Biophysical Parameters.
J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens, 40(1), 19 28.
58. Tripathi, R., Sahoo, R.N., Sehgal, V.K., Tomar, R.K., Pandey, S., Chakraborty, D. and
Kalra, N. ( 2006). Retrieval of plant biophysical parameters through inversion of
PROSAIL model. Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6411, 64110F-1 0277-786X/06/$15. doi:
10.1117/12.697954.
59. Tucker, C.J. ( 1980). Remote sensing of leaf water content in the near infrared. Remote
Sensing of Environment, 10, 23 32.
60. Ustin, S. L., Smith, M. O., Jacquemoud, S. (1999). Geobotany: Vegetation mapping for
Earth Sciences. In: Rencz, A.N. (Ed.): Remote sensing for the Earth sciences: Manual of
remote sensing, 3rd ed., Vol. 3. New York, Chichester, Weinheim. John Wiley &
Sons.189-248.
61. Verhoef, W. and Bunnik, N.J.J.(1981). Influence of crop geometry on multispectral
reflectance determined by the use of canopy reflectance models. Proc.Intl.Colloq.
Signatures Remotely Sens. Objects, Augnon, France, 273-290.
62. Vermote, E.F. and Vermeulen, A.(1999). Atmospheric correction algorithm: Spectral
reflectances (MOD09). Algorithm Theoretical Background Document available online
at http://modarch.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/ ATBD/atbd_mod08.pdf (accessed 23 Feb. 2008)
63. Zarco, Tejada., P.J., Rueda, C.A. And Ustin, S.L.(2003). Water content estimation in
vegetation with MODIS reflectance data and model inversion methods. Remote Sensing
of Environment, 85(1), 109-124.
II.129