Journal of Great Lakes Research Supplement 39 (2013) 2–5
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Great Lakes Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jglr
Commentary
Retrospection and introspection on remote sensing of inland water
quality: “Like Déjà Vu All Over Again”
Robert P. Bukata
Canada Centre for Inland Waters, Environment Canada, 867 Lakeshore Road, Burlington, Ontario L7R 4A6, Canada
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 29 November 2011
Accepted 2 April 2013
Available online 21 May 2013
Communicated by George Leshkevich
Keywords:
Limno-optics history
Dual solitudes
Water quality
Two solitudes
An unfortunate reality is that a mutually isolationist chasm has
historically existed between oceanographers and limnologists. Ocean-
ographers studied oceans and limnologists studied lakes, invariably in
two distinct solitudes. From as early as the start of the 20th Century,
physical oceanographers conducted exceptional ocean optics research
and bio-optical modeling for oceanic waters. From the launch of
ERTS-1/Landsat-1 in August, 1972 up to and beyond the post-2000
launches of MODIS and MERIS physical limnologists conducted excep-
tional lake optics research and biogeo-optical modeling for inland and
coastal water bodies. A greater than tri-decadal (and counting) history
of such lake optics research and biogeo-optical modeling of inland wa-
ters (based on sound scientific principles) was independently written
by limnologists. Sadly, however, those ~40 years of limno-optics history
also contain optical models (purporting the ability to remotely monitor
inland and coastal water quality) which were/are not based on sound
scientific principles.
Around the start of the new millennium, oceanographers began
directing their attention to coastal ocean waters and discovered (as
had their limnology counterparts in the very early 1970s for inland
waters) that coastal waters were considerably more complex than
mid-ocean waters. And, as a consequence of the mutually isolationist
chasm, many (particularly younger) ocean scientists and their students
E-mail address: rbukata@cogeco.ca.
0380-1330/$ – see front matter © 2013 International Association for Great Lakes Research. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2013.04.001
are most often unaware of the approximately four decade history that
has produced: a) Monte Carlo simulations of the energy transfer occur-
ring in optically complex lake waters, b) field and laboratory methods
of determining the optical cross section spectra (inherent optical proper-
ties) of suspended and dissolved organic and inorganic color-producing
agents (CPAs) in lake waters, c) non-linear multivariate optimization
methodology, and d) inverse biogeo-optical models that extract the
co-extant concentrations of these color-producing agents from full
color spectra of inland waters obtained from satellite altitudes. Happily,
all the scientific research comprising this ~40 years of limno-optics
history is equally pertinent to coastal ocean waters.
Despite research recently performed on coastal ocean waters,
many young oceanography-trained scientists (and other newcomers
to lake and coastal studies) are standing at the same threshold that
their limnology counterparts stood in 1972. They are facing the
same challenges and pitfalls that limnologists faced at the launch of
ERTS-1. Therefore, the legendary quote “Like Déjà Vu All Over
Again,” from the legendary Larry “Yogi” Berra, sends an important
message to the current generation of dedicated environmental sci-
ence students, inland water remote sensing data providers, inland
water quality stewards, and political policy makers. These 21st Centu-
ry would-be analyzers of satellite-acquired data and users of remote-
ly sensed inland (and coastal) water quality products risk committing
errors comparable to those made by the early 1970s remote sensing
investigators, errors that came close to destroying the credibility of
environmental monitoring from satellite altitudes. This ~ 40-year
history of remote sensing of optically-complex inland waters must
be remembered, particularly since some of that history must not be
repeated.
A brief retrospective of remote sensing of inland waters
Environmental monitoring from space began in August, 1972 with
NASA's launch of the Earth Resources Technology Satellite (ERTS-1).
Oceanographers, in their solitude, were aware that chlorophyll and
temperature could be monitored remotely and had a feel for how to
proceed extracting chlorophyll concentrations from satellite determi-
nations of mid-ocean water color. They also understood that ocean
optics played an important role in remote monitoring of ocean color
and that bio-optical models would be required to extract chlorophyll
concentrations from satellite monitoring of ocean color. Limnologists,
however, in their solitude, had little to no understanding as to what
inland water quality parameters could be monitored from space or
 R.P. Bukata / Journal of Great Lakes Research Supplement 39 (2013) 2–5
how to extract them if they could be monitored as lake optics had yet
to advance much beyond measurements of Secchi depths.
Oceanography had profited from decades of exemplary ocean
optics theoretical and field research (modeling the interactions of
downwelling spectral solar and sky radiation with the air-water
interface and the subsurface aquatic absorption and scattering
centers) from such stalwarts as Secchi (1866/1955), Raman (1922),
Jerlov (1951, 1976), Preisendorfer (1953), Cox and Munk (1956),
Chandrasekhar (1960), Yentsch (1962), Duntley (1963), Petzold
(1972), Morel (1973), Kirk (1975a,b), and Maul (1985), amongst nu-
merous others. By contrast, lake optics and remote sensing of lakes
had not yet reached its infancy when ERTS-1 (which was quickly
renamed Landsat-1) was launched in 1972.
Another major advantage that oceanographers had over their
limnology-oriented colleagues was that apart from water bubbles and
molecular water itself, the only aquatic colorants in the so-called
“Case 1” waters are chlorophyll-bearing phytoplankton and their covar-
iant by-products.
The forerunner to ocean color satellite sensors was the short-lived
(less than 8 years) Coastal Zone Color Scanner (CZCS) aboard
Nimbus-7 launched in 1978. Thus, by the launch times of ERTS-1/
Landsat-1 and Nimbus-7 a fairly solid scientific basis existed upon
which successful oceanic bio-optical models could be developed,
thereby enabling remote multispectral sensors to monitor ocean
water color and, by inference, ocean water quality. Subsequent to
CZCS there has been no shortage of ocean color monitoring satellite
sensors, including but not restricted to Landsats-2 to 7, SeaWiFS,
ADEOS, Hyperion, ARIES, MODIS, and MERIS. Whilst bio-optical models
were essential and adequate to monitoring mid-ocean color (Case 1
waters) from space, biogeo-optical models were essential to monitoring
coastal and inland water color from space because of the contribution of
CPAs not simply related to chlorophyll bearing phytoplankton (Case 2
waters).
In an epic work, Gordon et al. (1975) utilized a Monte Carlo simu-
lation of the radiative energy transfer process to relate the apparent
optical properties (AOPs) to the inherent optical properties (IOPs)
of mid-oceanic waters containing mid-oceanic color producing agents
(CPAs, molecular water and chlorophyll), thereby producing the first
operational bio-optical ocean model.
The first operational biogeo-optical model that related the AOPs
of a lake (Lake Ontario) to its IOPs (referred to, in the limnology
solitude, as “optical cross section spectra”) of inland water CPAs (mo-
lecular water, chlorophyll, suspended particulates, dissolved organic
carbon, and non-living organics) was formulated (via Monte Carlo
simulations and non-linear multivariate optimization analyses) at
Environment Canada's National Water Research Institute (NWRI) by
Bukata et al. (1979, 1981a,b) and Jerome et al. (1983). For the first time,
a biogeo-optical model was formulated that enabled the simultaneous
extraction of concentrations of chlorophyll, suspended particulates, and
dissolved organic carbon [a surrogate for colored dissolved organic mat-
ter, CDOM] from a single full spectrum satellite, aircraft, or ship-borne
satellite-mimic determination of lake water color.
A compact introspective on remote sensing of inland waters
At the early 1970s onset of environmental monitoring from satellites
(and aircraft), novice environmental researchers made a somewhat
understandable (but in retrospect, unforgiveable) error in not realizing
that, although almost every environmental variable may be somehow
related to every other environmental variable and all environmental
variables may be somehow related to downwelling solar radiation, for
any composite ecosystem, no single environmental variable is solely
directly relatable to any other single internal or external environmental
variable. Nonetheless, a very common remote sensing malpractice
became the irresponsible regressions of reflectance return (from an en-
vironmental target) recorded by a remote sensor against every inner,
3
outer, and/or surrounding feature of that target. Such non-scientific
willy-nilly regression plots performed grave disservice to the remote
sensing of the so-called “Case 2” waters. The poster child for all that is
wrong with such simplistic empiricism is the work by Rogers et al.
(1975, 1976) described in the interim Landsat-1 cost-benefits report
to the Goddard Space Flight Center by Rogers (1975) of the Bendix
Aerospace Systems Division, Ann Arbor, MI. The rampant empiricism
(McKeon and Rogers, 1976) claimed that 12 water quality indicators
(temperature, Secchi depth, conductivity, chloride, chlorophyll, so-
dium, potassium, magnesium, calcium, total phosphorous, total
dissolved phosphorus, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen) could be gleaned
from a single Landsat image of Saginaw Bay! Astoundingly, the poster
child appears to have grown into a poster adolescent with the recent
retrograde, albeit published, work of Vincent et al. (2004, 2005)
purporting water quality parameter extraction by employing even
more outlandish empirical regressions of Landsat-7 data. It is
as though the 30 years separating 1975 from 2005 had never
occurred.
The multivariate nature (in terms of both the number of variables
and the range of variation in concentrations of the variables) of opti-
cally complex water bodies imposes non-linear multivariate analyses
approaches [such as Levenberg (1944)-Marquardt (1963) optimiza-
tion] on inverse modeling of remotely sensed data collected over
inland and coastal waters.
The mathematics involved in the development and applications of
aquatic optical models is precise, complex, computer-intensive, and
can oftentimes become irritatingly tedious. Several text books have
been devoted to the governing mathematics and honest critiques of
the applicability of ensuing models [e.g., Dekker (1993), Kirk (1994),
Mobley (1994), Bukata et al. (1995), amongst others] and the reader
is encouraged to capitalize upon the availability of those books,
and, most importantly, to also become familiar with the totality of in-
valuable intelligence contained within the research papers and re-
ports by the researchers cited within the extensive bibliographies
of those books.
The point here, which cannot be overemphasized, is that much first
class work has been done in the years between 1972 and 2000 that has
addressed virtually every issue that has enabled the remote monitoring
of optically complex waters (inland and coastal) to provide reliable
time-series data on changing inland lake and coastal water quality.
Much first class work has also been directed towards those issues that
have impeded such reliability. Awareness of most of this work, howev-
er, has yet to penetrate the oceanography solitude.
Studies of Lake Ontario and the Russian Lake Ladoga by Bukata et al.
(1991a,b) illustrated the total inappropriateness of using empirical
ratio-retrieval ocean chlorophyll algorithms on inland lakes. Fig. 1 of
their 1991a paper compared the directly measured chlorophyll concen-
trations in Lake Ladoga with the predicted chlorophyll concentration
outputs (Cchl) of six contemporary ratio-retrieval ocean chlorophyll
algorithms (derived from empirical regressions) of the form
y
C chl ¼ x½Rðλ1 Þ=Rðλ2 Þ
where R(λ1) and R(λ2) are reflectance values at wavelengths λ1 and λ2,
respectively, and x and y are empirically-determined constants.
In addition to complete lack of agreement between the measured
and predicted concentrations for each empirical ratio-retrieval ocean
chlorophyll algorithm, there was total lack of agreement amongst the
algorithms themselves. However, very respectable agreements be-
tween directly measured and predicted chlorophyll concentrations
in Lake Ladoga resulted from use of the multivariate biogeo-optical
model and the optical cross section spectra (IOPs) for the CPAs of
Lake Ladoga.
It is standard practice for Space Agencies (NASA, NOAA, ESA, CSA,
Indian Space Agency, etc.) to provide satellite data/information to end-
users in five distinct levels (ranging from the raw spectro-radiometric
4 R.P. Bukata / Journal of Great Lakes Research Supplement 39 (2013) 2–5
data of Level 0 to the designated environmental products of Level 4),
with each higher order level representing the successful completion of
a complex task in the conversion of data into information. To navigate
from level to level requires a large framework of theoretical models
that include removal of the obfuscating influence of the atmosphere
between the satellite and the water body being monitored, inference of
CPA concentrations, temporal and spatial binning, scaled mapping of
CPA concentrations, and estimation of primary production, amongst
others. Space Agency-derived Level 4 products depend solely upon what-
ever algorithms the Space Agency decides (usually through awarding of
contracts resulting from competitive proposals) is best for producing the
desired product (such as aquatic primary production).
Chlorophyll extraction algorithms based on band-ratioing empiri-
cism work surprisingly well for mid-oceans. And a large number of
empirical (band-ratioing) chlorophyll extraction algorithms exist from
which Space Agencies can choose to hard-wire into each individual
environmental satellite. Thus, testing, critiquing, and seeking out the
most suitable algorithm to use as the on-board automatic generator of
Level 2 and Level 3 chlorophyll-related products became paramount
for ocean scientific study and for ocean stewardship applications. Some
of the most intensive of such testing, critiquing, and seeking has been
performed by O'Reilly et al. (1998, 2000) in support of SeaWiFS. The
O'Reilly et al.'s work is invaluable in illustrating that such empirical
band-ratioing algorithms have displayed success in mapping oceanic
chlorophyll. Such empirical algorithms do not, however, display success
in mapping inland and coastal aquatic chlorophyll. Yet, the outputs of
such empirical algorithms comprise Levels 2 and 3 inland and coastal
water quality information products that are readily available to and
used by hosts of both scientific and non-scientific end-users.
All of the models (and their validation) up to and including Level 4
are the responsibility of optical, bio-optical, and/or biogeo-optical
modelers. Modelers are responsible whether their models be very
good, good with caveats, or downright bad in the transformation of
remotely-sensed data into water quality information. Complicating
the issue is that Level 4 information that interests non-scientific end
users is invariably not amenable to scientific or mathematical rigor.
Thus, Level 4 models are not developed by lake optics or remote
sensing scientists, but by statisticians, bureaucrats, politicians, and
lawyers. Those models that have been written are used to produce
government state-of-the-environment reports that invariably result
in bureaucratic policies on environmental issues and imposition of
government rules and regulations that restrict human activity. Enig-
matically, it is these restrictive Level 4 products which are essential
for remote sensing of inland and coastal water quality to have a
large enough population of non-scientific users to survive.
It is not only the historical dual solitudes that are keeping a
traffic-jam of young oceanographers at the 1972 ERTS-1/Landsat-1
starting gate. The rapid advance of technology (that so worried
alarmist prognosticator Alvin Toffler in his 1970 scare-a-thon book
“Future Shock”) in the latter half of the 20th Century also played its
part. Two worrisome examples follow:
1. Use of Google: Because a large amount of formative forward and
inverse color model development and multivariate optimization
technique application occurred when there was either no Internet
or merely an infantile Internet, much of the 20th Century years of
aquatic optics research and mathematical modeling is not readily
available to aspirant oceanography-oriented students (and their
instructors) who are pursuing the development of environmental
applications that include remote sensing of optically complex
inland waters.
2. As cumbersome main-frame computers gave way to desk-top
computers and wireless note-books, the Levels 2, 3 and 4 models
became readily available as formatted computer disks that could
be inserted into the desk-top and note-book computers of
non-scientific end-users. The demarcation between modelers
and purchasers of models became blurred. The modeler was re-
placed by a disk with which managers and other bureaucrats
could input a set of numbers and get an output number without
the encumbrance of having to know anything at all about the
model, its origin, its virtues, or its limitations. Modelers are now a
species-at-risk and are rapidly becoming irrelevant in a field and
an activity that so heavily relies upon them.
Combinations of a) forgotten decades of first-rate biogeo-optical
modeling history, b) Google searches that may not go back much fur-
ther than 5 years, c) the restrictive (in time and space) of empirical
water quality extraction algorithms, d) replacement of modelers
with purchasers of models, e) reliance on Space Agency algorithms
to provide both scientific and lay end-users with Level 2, Level 3
and possibly Level 4 inland water products, f) policy models that
have yet to be formulated, and others issues (such as resulting dim-
inution in the quality of research papers submitted to mainstream
remote sensing journals) deferred for future introspection, all
present serious challenges to aspirant remote sensing enthusiasts
that could prove unnecessarily comparable to those that had been
faced and successfully combated by scientists between 1972 and
2000. All these issues certainly have the distinctive aura of “like
déjà vu all over again” and require emphasizing past wisdom and
lessons learned:
“Study the past if you would define the future.”– Confucius, Chinese
teacher, politician, and philosopher, circa 500BC
A crossover bridge between the two solitudes?
There are numerous Institutes of Oceanography. Institutes of
Limnology are either exceedingly scarce or non-existent. Oceanogra-
phy has long been a recognized degree-granting discipline from a va-
riety of universities specializing in marine sciences. However, to the
best of the author's knowledge, limnology is not a recognized degree-
granting university discipline. This disparity in degree-granting ideolo-
gies at universities renders the isolationist chasm between the two
solitudes not only all the broader, but also somewhat surreal. Surreal
or not, however, this mutually isolationist chasm has long-existed.
Historically, and understandably, oceanographers conducting ocean
optics research have historically learned from and referenced the ocean
optics work of other oceanographers. Because lakes very rarely occu-
pied the agendas (and the collective minds) of oceanographic institutes,
it is also understandable that the solid scientific base in lake optics
would escape the agenda (ergo, the collective minds) of oceanogra-
phers and oceanographic institutes. Therefore, the historical isolationist
chasm between oceanographers and limnologists continued beyond
2000. This isolationist chasm was very rarely, if ever, breached in the
past. And it continues to be very rarely breached in the present.
Oceanographers “discovered” coastal waters around the start of
the new millennium. At that time some oceanographers and some
surrogate “limnologists” (the author included) bridged the mutually
isolationist chasm by collaborating on the writing of IOCCG (2000),
the third in the excellent series of monographs periodically prepared
by the International Ocean-Color Coordinating Group.
Although many oceanographers still maintain a mid-ocean fixation
(with minimal to maximal focus on coastal ocean waters), a significant
number have also become interested in oceanic bays and large global
lakes. Thus, it is not unreasonable to assert that oceanographers, having
turned collective minds to coastal oceans, found themselves in a posi-
tion akin to the position in which limnologists found themselves at
the launch of ERTS-1/Landsat-1.
A large number of environmentalists without scientific backgrounds
in ocean nor lake physics, chemistry, or biology have also recently turned
their attention to coastal oceans, bays, and inlets, as well as both large
 R.P. Bukata / Journal of Great Lakes Research Supplement 39 (2013) 2–5
and small lakes. This accumulated interest in global freshwaters resulted
in quite a post-2000 line-up at the 1972 lake optics starting gate.
Happily, many young oceanographers have, to a large extent, over-
come the technological pitfalls and, crossed, as it were, the Rubicon of
dual solitudes (either on their own, from the tutelage of enlightened
mentors, or both) and are using satellite-acquired multispectral data
to monitor Case 2 water quality with the confidence and the skills
of a seasoned veteran. Inexplicably, however, the mutually isolation-
ist ocean-lake chasm was only marginally closed by these talented
oceanography-trained scientists. Although the distinctive solitudes
of oceanography and limnology are now somewhat intermingled (due
to both groups currently sharing common interests and agendas in
optically complex waters), the indelible myopia remains an indelible
myopia.
Today most coastal oceanographers either ignore or are unaware of
the extensive lake optics history and continue to reference either the
oceanographic work they were taught in class or recent work of other
coastal oceanographers. Those environmentalists who are neither ocean-
ographers nor limnologists do not know whom to reference. Most of the
time members of this latter group are far too busy giving press releases to
local papers cheerleading their discovery that there are things in lakes
that are not in oceans. Thus, this latter group very often wastes time
re-inventing wheels (of questionable roundness) for cars that have al-
ready been wheeled-out well over 30 years ago and are traveling
smoothly. Valuable scientific history has been erased from time.
It is imperative to recall history rather than repeating it, rather than
rewriting it, and rather than re-committing the same (or committing
larger) errors contained in it. Inland and coastal water remote sensing
science and technology, whilst far from immaculate, is, nonetheless,
quite sound and dependable.
The future will be grateful that the past was remembered.
“The farther backward you can look, the farther forward you are
likely to see.”– British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill, circa
1945.
This Commentary is a part of a much larger whole. It is being ex-
panded in both issue and detail (and will contain some unsolicited
advice on how to deal with the issues and details). Watch for an ex-
tended opinion-piece by R.P. Bukata and R.H. Stavn appearing at a
venue near you soon.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author. As
such, they are not to be construed as reflecting the views of any col-
league, institute, government, or funding agency. Nor are they to be
construed as reflecting views of the Journal of Great Lakes Research,
its Editorship, or the Sponsors of this Special Remote Sensing Issue.
References
Bukata, R.P., Jerome, J.H., Bruton, J.E., Jain, S.C., 1979. Determination of inherent optical
properties of Lake Ontario coastal waters. Appl. Opt. 18, 3926–3932.
Bukata, R.P., Jerome, J.H., Bruton, J.E., Jain, S.C., Zwick, H.H., 1981. Optical water quality
model of Lake Ontario. 1. Determination of optical cross sections of organic and in-
organic particulates in Lake Ontario. Appl. Opt. 20, 1696–1703.
Bukata, R.P., Jerome, J.H., Bruton, J.E., Jain, S.C., Zwick, H.H., 1981. Optical water quality
model of Lake Ontario. 2. Determination of chlorophyll a and suspended mineral
concentrations of natural waters from submersible and low altitude optical
sensors. Appl. Opt. 20, 1704–1714.
Bukata, R.P., Jerome, J.H., Kondratyev, K.Ya., Pozdnyakov, D.V., 1991. Estimation of or-
ganic and inorganic matter in inland waters: optical cross sections of Lakes Ontario
and Ladoga. J. Great Lakes Res. 17, 461–469.
Bukata, R.P., Jerome, J.H., Kondratyev, K.Ya., Pozdnyakov, D.V., 1991. Satellite monitor-
ing of optically-active components of inland waters: an essential input to regional
climate change impact studies. J. Great Lakes Res. 17, 470–478.
5
Bukata, R.P., Jerome, J.H., Kondratyev, K.Ya, Pozdnyakov, D.V., 1995. Optical Properties
and Remote Sensing of Inland and Coastal, Waters. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL
(362 pp.).
Chandrasekhar, S., 1960. Radiative Transfer. Dover Publications, Inc., New York (393 pp.).
Cox, C., Munk, W., 1956. Slopes of the sea surface deduced from photographs of sun glit-
ter. Bulletin Scripps Inst. of Oceanogr., 6. University of Calif., San Diego 401–488.
Dekker, A.G., 1993. Detection of optical water quality parameters for eutrophic waters
by high resolution remote sensing. (Doctoral thesis) University of Amsterdam, The
Netherlands (222 pp.).
Duntley, S.Q., 1963. Light in the Sea. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 53, 214–233.
Gordon, H.R., Brown, O.B., Jacobs, M.M., 1975. Computed relationships between the in-
herent and apparent properties of a flat homogeneous ocean. Appl. Opt. 14, 417–427.
IOCCG, 2000. Remote sensing of ocean colour in coastal and other optically-complex
waters. In: Sathyendranath, S. (Ed.), Reports of the International Ocean-Colour
Coordinating Group. No. 3. IOCCG, Dartmouth, Canada (140 pp.).
Jerlov, N.G., 1951. Optical studies of ocean water. Rep. Swedish Deep-Sea Exped. 3,
1–59.
Jerlov, N.G., 1976. Marine Optics. Elsevier Oceanographic Series, 14. Elsevier, Amsterdam
(231 pp.).
Jerome, J.H., Bukata, R.P., Bruton, J.E., 1983. Spectral attenuation and irradiance in Laurentian
Great Lakes. J. Great Lakes Res. 9, 60–68.
Kirk, J.T.O., 1975. A theoretical analysis of the contribution of algal cells to the attenu-
ation of light within natural waters I. General treatment of suspensions of
pigmented cells. New Phytol. 75, 11–20.
Kirk, J.T.O., 1975. A theoretical analysis of the contribution of algal cells to the attenu-
ation of light within natural waters II. Spherical cells. New Phytol. 75, 21–36.
Kirk, J.T.O., 1994. Light and Photosynthesis in Aquatic Ecosystems. Cambridge University
Press, U.K.(509 pp.).
Levenberg, K., 1944. A method for the solution of non-linear problems in least squares.
Quart. Appl. Math. 2, 164–168.
Marquardt, D.W., 1963. An algorithm for least squares estimation of non-linear param-
eters. J. Int. Soc. Appl. Math. 29, 71–84.
Maul, G.A., 1985. Introduction to Satellite Oceanography (evolved from lecture-material
from a course taught by the author at the University of Miami). Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands (606 pp.).
McKeon, J.B., Rogers, R.H., 1976. Water quality map of Saginaw Bay from computer pro-
cessing of Landsat-2 data. Special Report Prepared for Goddard Space Flight Center
(6 pp.).
Mobley, C.D., 1994. Light and Water: Radiative Transfer in Natural Waters. Academic
Press, San Diego, CA (592 pp.).
Morel, A., 1973. Diffusion de la luminière par les eaux de mer: Résultats expérimentaux et
approche théorique. Optics of the Sea: AGARD Lecture Series, 61, pp. 31.1–31.74.
O'Reilly, J.E., Maritorena, S., Mitchell, B.G., Siegal, D.A., Carder, K.L., Garver, S.A., Kahru,
M., McClain, C., 1998. Ocean color chlorophyll algorithms for SeaWiFS. J. Geophys.
Res. 103, 24937–24953.
O'Reilly, J.E., Maritorena, S., Siegal, D.A., O'Brien, M.C., Toole, D., Mitchell, B.G., Kahru,
M., Chavez, F.P., Strutton, P., Cota, G.F., Hooker, S.B., McClain, C.R., Carder, K.L.,
Müeller-Karger, F., Harding, L., Magnuson, A., Phinney, D., Moore, G.F., Aiken, J.,
Arrigo, K.R., Letelier, R., Culver, M., 2000. Ocean color chlorophyll a algorithms
for SeaWiFS, OC2 and OC4: Version 4. SeaWiFS Postlaunch Technical Report Series,
vol. II. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland (Ch.2. NASA-TM-
2000-206892).
Petzold, T.J., 1972. Volume scattering functions for selected ocean waters. Scripps Inst.
of Oceanogr. Ref. 72-28.University of Calif., San Diego (79 pp.).
Preisendorfer, R.W., 1953. Lectures on photometry, hydrologic optics, atmospheric op-
tics. Lecture Notes. : Scripps Inst. Of Oceanogr., vol. 1. University of Calif., San Diego.
Raman, C.V., 1922. On the molecular scattering of light in water and the colour of the
sea. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 101, 64–79.
Rogers, R.H., 1975. Application of Landsat to the surveillance and control of lake eutro-
phication in the Great Lakes Basin. Type II Report for the Period of August 11
through November 11, 1975, Prepared for Goddard Space Flight Center (55 pp.).
Rogers, R.H., Shah, N.J., McKeon, J.B., Wilson, C., Reed, L., Smith, V.E., Thomas, N.A., 1975.
Application of Landsat to the surveillance and control of eutrophication in Saginaw
Bay 1975. Appendix A, Type II Report for the Period of August 11 through
November 11, 1975, Prepared for Goddard Space Flight Center: Also presented at
the Tenth International Symposium on Remote Sensing of Environment, October
6-10, 1975. (11 pp.).
Rogers, R.H., Shah, N.J., McKeon, J.B., Smith, V.E., 1976. Computer mapping of water
quality in Saginaw Bay with Landsat digital data. Proceedings of ACSM-ASP
Convention, Washington, D.C. February 22-28, 1976.
Secchi, A., 1866. Relazione della esperienze fatta a bordo della Pirocorvetta
L'Immacolata Concezione per determinaire la transparenza del mar, In: Cialdi, A.
(Ed.), Sul moto ondoso del mare e su le correnti di esso specialment auquelle
littorali, 2nd ed. , pp. 255–288 (From available translation, Dec. 1955. Dept. of
the Navy, Office of Chief of Naval Operations, O.N.I. Trans. No. A-655, Op-923M4B).
Vincent, R.K., Qin, X., McKay, R.M., Miner, J., Czajkowski, K., Savino, J., Bridgeman, T.,
2004. Phycocyanin detection from Landsat TM data for mapping cyanobacterial
blooms in Lake Erie. Remote. Sens. Environ. 89 (3), 381–392.
Vincent, R.K., McKay, R.M., Al-Rshaidat, M.M.D., Czajkowski, K., Bridgeman, T., Savino,
J., 2005. Mapping the bacterial content of surface waters with Landsat TM data: im-
portance for monitoring global surface sources of potable water. Paper presented
at and included in ASPRS Pecora 16: Global Priorities in Land Remote Sensing. October
23–27, 2005, Sioux Falls, South Dakota (6 pp.).
Yentsch, C.S., 1962. Measurement of visible light absorption by particulate matter in
the ocean. Limnol. Oceanogr. 7, 207–217.