HYPERSPECTRAL RETRIEVAL OF CANOPY WATER CONTENT THROUGH
INVERSION OF THE BEER-LAMBERT LAW
Wocher M.1; Berger, K.1; Danner, M.1; Mauser, W.1; Hank, T.1
1
Dept. of Geography, Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Luisenstr. 37, 80333 Munich, Germany
ABSTRACT
The retrieval of quantitative equivalent water thickness on
canopy level (EWTc) is an agriculturally important task for
hyperspectral remote sensing. In this study the Beer-
Lambert law is applied to inversely determine water content
from measured winter wheat spectra collected in 2015 and
2017. The spectral model is calibrated using a look-up-
table (LUT) of 50.000 PROSPECT spectra. Validation was
performed using two leaf optical properties
datasets (LOPEX93 and ANGERS) and in-situ data
acquired in Southern Germany. After considering
destructive in-situ water content measurements separately
for leaves, stems, and fruits, results indicate optically active
plant water by plant component in the 930 to 1060 nm range
of canopy reflectance. Results for spectrally derived EWTc
were most promising for leaves and ears reaching
coefficients of determination up to 0.75 and a normalized
RMSE (nRMSE) of 24% between measured and estimated
canopy water content.
Index Terms— hyperspectral, canopy water content,
agriculture, spectroscopy, EnMAP
1. INTRODUCTION
The quantification of equivalent water thickness at canopy
level (EWTc) plays an essential role in understanding and
managing the impact of cultivated areas on the earth’s water
cycle. The knowledge of quantities of water stored in
agricultural crops is crucial, particularly for environmental
process models [1]. Moreover, quantifying canopy water
content is important in view of water use efficiency of
agricultural crops [2] and evaluation of plant physiological
status [3, 4]. Nonetheless, measuring canopy water content
from space remains a difficult task. Over the last 30 years,
various studies have investigated the possibilities of
hyperspectral remote sensing to retrieve quantitative
information on plant water content [2, 5-7]. One approach of
EWT retrieval is the inversion of radiative transfer models
(RTM) using e.g. look-up-tables (LUT), artificial neural
networks (ANN) or other machine learning algorithms (for
an overview it is referred to [8]). Those techniques are
mostly computationally expensive and mathematically
978-1-5386-7150-4/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE 3805
highly non-linear. In this study, a simple physically-based
model is presented which opens up a promising opportunity
for a fast retrieval of EWTc from top-of-canopy spectra. In
view of future hyperspectral satellite missions like the
German Environmental Mapping and Analysis Program
(EnMAP) [9], fast and efficient retrieval methods for large
datasets are required. A collection of easy to use retrieval
tools, such as the one presented here, will be integrated into
the EnMAP-Box, a free of charge software that will be
distributed along with the future EnMAP data [10].
2. MATERIAL & METHODS
2.1. Study sites & field data
The field measurements were collected at two winter wheat
fields (triticum aestivum) of communal farmland 30 km
north of Munich (Southern Germany). One of the
fields (48°14’51.46’’N 11°42’24.10’’E) was sampled from
March to July during a field campaign in 2015. The second
site (48°14’56.7’’N 11°43’03.6’’E) was sampled similarly
in 2017. Based on long-term biomass distribution pattern
observations (TalkingFields Base Map:
www.talkingfields.de) three different sampling points were
preselected at each study site representing low, medium, and
high persistent relative fertility. Destructive canopy
measurements were collected on a weekly basis. Since it
was not possible to conduct destructive measurements on
the exact same location where continuous spectral
measurements were taken, the sampling points are expected
to reflect the average field water content conditions. The
samples were separated into leaves, stems and fruit
compartments, weighed in fresh state and oven-dried for
24 h at 105 °C before dry weight was determined. Average
water content per plant compartment and per square meter
surface area was calculated from laboratory results and from
farm management metadata (e.g. sowing information:
seedlings per meter and row spacing).
2.2. Spectral measurements
Within every study site a 30×30 m grid of nine 10×10 m
squares was marked out delineating one elementary
sampling unit (ESU). The grid layout enables the simulation
IGARSS 2018
of a future EnMAP pixel. At each sampling date with clear
sky conditions all the ESUs were revisited and spectral
measurements were taken using an ASD FieldSpec3 Jr.
(Boulder, CO, USA) spectroradiometer. Five nadir
measurements were conducted per ESU. Throughout the
measurements the sensor was slightly moved back and forth
while maintaining the observation angle to obtain a
representative spectral sample of the whole canopy. The five
recorded spectra were averaged and a spatial mean of the
complete 30×30 m grid was calculated. Further post-
processing included splice-correction, white reference
baseline calibration, and application of a Savitzky-Golay-
Filter. Altogether, the evaluated dataset comprised plant
water content samples with corresponding spectral
measurements for 19 dates.
2.3. Radiative transfer model
A large look-up-table (LUT) of 50,000 simulated leaf
spectral signatures was generated using the latest version of
the leaf optical properties model PROSPECT-D [7, 11]. It
simulates leaf spectral reflectance and transmittance as a
function of leaf pigments (chlorophyll content Cab,
Carotenoids Car, and Anthocyanins Canth), dry matter (Cm)
and brown pigments (Cbrown) as well as in dependence of a
leaf structural parameter N and water content (Cw) using
specific absorption coefficients. Considering the impact of
plant water on the 970 nm absorption band, within LUT
generation, all parameters with sensitivity in the NIR region
were uniformly distributed over the maximum possible
value range. Leaf pigments, having no effect on reflectance
in the NIR, remained constant.
2.4. Beer-Lambert law inversion
The Beer-Lambert law is mathematically formulated as
Eq. 1:
Φ = Φ0 𝑒 −𝛼(𝜆)𝑑 . (1)
Passing through a medium of length 𝑑 the incident radiation
intensity Φ0 is extenuated. The absorption characteristics of
a medium are defined by its wavelength dependent
absorption coefficients 𝛼(𝜆). For this study water absorption
coefficients for pure liquid water determined by Palmer and
Williams [12] were used. Furthermore, it is assumed that
within the absorption band at 970 nm water is the dominant
existing active absorber and no further absorption effects
occur. Thus, concluding from Eq. 1, the absorption of
measured fresh leaves at 970 nm is uniquely dependent on
the thickness of the optically active water layer. For dry
leaves absorption by liquid water is neglectable, resulting in
a linear reflectance at 970 nm. For the retrieval of EWT,
Eq. 1 is rearranged in accordance with Bach [13] (Eq. 2),
where 𝑅0 is the measured reflectance, 𝑑 is the thickness of
3806
the optically active water layer, and 𝑅′ is the 𝑑-dependent
reflectance:
𝑅0
𝑅′ = (2)
𝑒 −𝛼(𝜆)𝑑
Using Eq. 2, 𝑑 is iteratively optimized so that the sum of
absolute residuals between the modelled reflectance and the
linear connection between the descending and ascending
vertices of the 970 nm absorption is minimal ().
Figure 1: Determination of optically active water thickness 𝑑 from
a measured spectrum through minimization of residuals to
assumed dry reflectance line (dotted line).
Describing the thickness of the optically active water in cm,
the results can directly be compared to measured EWT on
leaf or canopy scale. Through a previous LUT-based
minimization of the standard deviation of modelled EWT
results the examined wavelength range was limited to
930 - 1060 nm.
3. RESULTS
The retrieval method was first applied to all the spectra
within the generated LUT. With a coefficient of
determination (R²) of 0.96 the approach indicates a strong
correlation between PROSPECT modeled water content Cw
and optically active water content 𝑑. However, the high
normalized root mean square error (nRMSE) of 238% while
the intercept is close to zero revealed a strong systematical
offset. The method was further tested on the LOPEX93 [14]
and ANGERS [15] datasets, which showed a similar bias.
Since the offset seemed to be defined solely by the slope of
the regression line, the water absorption coefficients were
adjusted by multiplying the slope of the linear regression
model as a constant, accounting for unknown effects of leaf
structure on reflectance in the 970 nm domain [16].
Subsequently the altered absorption coefficients of the 930
to 1060 nm range were used for an improved water content
retrieval. Applying the algorithm with updated coefficients
to the LOPEX93 data, measured EWT was estimated with
R² = 0.90 and nRMSE = 25% and for ANGERS data with
Figure 2: Correlations of modelled water contents with destructively measured water contents of leaves (A), sums of leaves + stems (B)
leaves + ears (C), and leaves + stems + ears (D). Error statistics: coefficient of determination (R²) and normalized root mean square error
(nRMSE = RMSE meanobservations-1).
0.93 and 16% respectively. The minimization process for
retrieving optically active water with recalibrated absorption
coefficients was then applied to in-situ spectral winter wheat
data. The results were compared to combinations of
destructively measured leaf, stem, and ear water
contents (Figure 2). Considering only the measured water
content of leaves, the results showed low correlation
(Figure 2 [A]: R² = 0.31; nRMSE = 91%). The sum of leaf
and stem water content yielded better results ([B]: R² = 0.69;
nRMSE = 53%) and best results were obtained when adding
the water contents of leaves and fruits ([C]: R² = 0.75;
nRMSE = 24%). Summing up leaf, stem, and fruit water
contents yet again resulted in an underestimation of
measured EWT ([D]: R² = 0.79; nRMSE 63%).
4. DISCUSSION
Absolute measures of EWTc were inversely extracted from
top-of-canopy winter wheat spectra. The results indicated a
3807
strong correlation between water absorption centered around
970 nm and measured EWTc. When applied to
PROSPECT-D spectra the linear offset of the regression
model indicates that the absorption coefficients of pure
liquid water differ from those of leaves because reflectance
in interaction with the leaf surface and multiple leaf internal
reflections are not accounted for [17]. Using the slope of the
regression as a factor to adjust the absorption coefficients
the absolute quantification of EWT c improves. The
comparison of retrieved EWT c from in-situ spectra with
measured EWTc of different plant constituents raises the
question, how deep radiation of specific wavelengths
penetrates into the canopy and thus, which amounts of water
actually can be observed by optical sensors [18]. Although
absorption by water and vegetation in the NIR is low and
penetration depth of radiation is higher in this wavelength
range [3], the presented results indicate that not all of the
contained canopy water is observed by the sensor. Our
results suggest that in the case of winter wheat EWTc – as
obtained by the algorithm – mostly reflects the water
contained in the leaves and ears.
5. CONCLUSION
The proposed algorithm based on the inversion of the Beer-
Lambert law effectively succeeds in the determination of
leaf and ear wheat canopy water content. Therefore, a
software tool will be provided within the new EnMAP-Box
to retrieve water content information from hyperspectral and
future EnMAP data. To test transferability to various crop
types additional destructive plant constituent specific water
content data with corresponding canopy spectra are needed.
Furthermore, the presented approach has to be evaluated in
view of radiation penetration depth at 970 nm. Ultimately,
specific leaf water absorption coefficients considering leaf
surface and leaf internal reflections may have to be collected
within a new leaf optical properties dataset.
6. REFERENCES
[1] M. Vohland, "Using imaging and non-imaging
spectroradiometer data for the remote detection of
vegetation water content," Journal of Applied Remote
Sensing, vol. 2, p. 13, 2008.
[2] J. G. P. W. Clevers, L. Kooistra, and M. E. Schaepman,
"Estimating canopy water content using hyperspectral
remote sensing data," International Journal of Applied
Earth Observation and Geoinformation, vol. 12, pp. 119-
125, 2010.
[3] J. Peñuelas, I. Filella, C. Biel, L. Serrano, and R. Savé,
"The reflectance at the 950–970 nm region as an indicator of
plant water status," International Journal of Remote
Sensing, vol. 14, pp. 1887-1905, 1993.
[4] J. Peñuelas, J. Pinol, R. Ogaya, and I. Filella,
"Estimation of plant water concentration by the reflectance
Water Index WI (R900/R970)," International Journal of
Remote Sensing, vol. 18, pp. 2869-2875, 1997.
[5] P. Ceccato, S. Flasse, S. Tarantola, S. Jacquemoud, and
J.-M. Grégoire, "Detecting vegetation leaf water content
using reflectance in the optical domain," Remote Sensing of
Environment, vol. 77, pp. 22-33, 2001.
[6] J. G. P. W. Clevers, L. Kooistra, and M. E. Schaepman,
"Using spectral information from the NIR water absorption
features for the retrieval of canopy water content,"
International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and
Geoinformation, vol. 10, pp. 388-397, 2008.
[7] S. Jacquemoud and F. Baret, "PROSPECT: A model of
leaf optical properties spectra," Remote Sensing of
Environment, vol. 34, pp. 75-91, 1990.
3808
[8] J. Verrelst, G. Camps-Valls, J. Muñoz-Marí, J. P. Rivera,
F. Veroustraete, J. G. P. W. Clevers, et al., "Optical remote
sensing and the retrieval of terrestrial vegetation bio-
geophysical properties – A review," ISPRS Journal of
Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, vol. 108, pp. 273-
290, 2015.
[9] L. Guanter, H. Kaufmann, K. Segl, S. Foerster, C.
Rogass, S. Chabrillat, et al., "The EnMAP Spaceborne
Imaging Spectroscopy Mission for Earth Observation,"
Remote Sensing, vol. 7, p. 8830, 2015.
[10] S. van der Linden, A. Rabe, M. Held, B. Jakimow, P.
Leitão, A. Okujeni, et al., "The EnMAP-Box—A Toolbox
and Application Programming Interface for EnMAP Data
Processing," Remote Sensing, vol. 7, p. 11249, 2015.
[11] J. B. Féret, A. A. Gitelson, S. D. Noble, and S.
Jacquemoud, "PROSPECT-D: Towards modeling leaf
optical properties through a complete lifecycle," Remote
Sensing of Environment, vol. 193, pp. 204-215, 2017.
[12] K. F. Palmer and D. Williams, "Optical properties of
water in the near infrared," Journal of the Optical Society of
America, vol. 64, pp. 1107-1110, 1974.
[13] H. Bach, Die Bestimmung hydrologischer und
landwirtschaftlicher Oberflächenparameter aus
hyperspektralen Fernerkundungsdaten: Geobuch-Verlag,
1995.
[14] B. Hosgood, S. Jacquemoud, J. Andreoli, A.
Verdebout, A. Pedrini, and G. Schmuck, Leaf Optical
Properties Experiment 93 (LOPEX93): European
Commission, 1995.
[15] S. Jacquemoud, C. Bidel, and F. G. Pavan., "ANGERS
Leaf Optical Properties Database (2003). Data set. Available
on-line [http://ecosis.org] from the Ecological Spectral
Information System (EcoSIS)," ed, 2003.
[16] J.-B. Feret, C. François, G. P. Asner, A. A. Gitelson, R.
E. Martin, L. P. R. Bidel, et al., "PROSPECT-4 and 5:
Advances in the leaf optical properties model separating
photosynthetic pigments," Remote Sensing of Environment,
vol. 112, pp. 3030-3043, 2008.
[17] G. A. Carter, "Primary and Secondary Effects of Water
Content on the Spectral Reflectance of Leaves," American
Journal of Botany, vol. 78, pp. 916-924, 1991.
[18] D. A. Sims and J. A. Gamon, "Estimation of vegetation
water content and photosynthetic tissue area from spectral
reflectance: a comparison of indices based on liquid water
and chlorophyll absorption features," Remote Sensing of
Environment, vol. 84, pp. 526-537, 2003.