Journal of Geovisualization and Spatial Analysis (2018) 2: 14

https://doi.org/10.1007/s41651-018-0021-y

Split-Window Algorithm for Retrieval of Land Surface

Temperature Using Landsat 8 Thermal Infrared Data
Gopinadh Rongali 1 & Ashok K. Keshari 1 & Ashvani K. Gosain 1 & Rakesh Khosa 1

Published online: 5 September 2018

# Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Abstract
Land surface temperature (LST) plays a vital role in global climate change, radiation budgets, heat balance, vegetation, snowmelt,
glacier hydrology, and geo-biophysical processes. It is, therefore, essential to determine LST precisely over large areas. With
advancements in remote sensing, LST can now be estimated. In this study, a critical appraisal of various LST inversion algorithms
is presented. These algorithms include mono-window (MW), split-window (SW), dual-angle (DA), single-channel (SC), and
Sabmao method. The main objective is to derive an SW algorithm to retrieve LST from Landsat 8 satellite data and demonstrate
the application to the Beas River basin in India. Located within the Himalayan range, the study area is characterized by heterogeneity
and rugged terrain with areas covered by snow and glacier. The satellite imagery is a product of the Optical Land Imager (OLI) with a
spatial resolution of 30 m and a thermal infrared sensor (TIRS) having a spatial resolution of 100 m. The SW algorithm requires
spectral radiance and emissivity from two bands of the TIRS as input for the estimation of LST. The spectral radiance has been
estimated using the TIRS bands 10 and 11. The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and the threshold technique of OLI
bands (2 to 5) have been used to derive the emissivity. The estimates of LST from the TIRS and OLI bands using the SW algorithm
are found to be accurate and close to the in situ air temperature measurements and the LST values obtained from the MW algorithm.
Results obtained show that the values of LST are high in the barren/rocky areas and low in the snow/glacier areas. The study reveals
that the LST estimates from SW and MW algorithms are linearly transferable with negligible loss of accuracy. The LST estimates
from the SW algorithm differs at most by up to 5 °C with the measured air temperature.

Keywords Land surface temperature . Remote sensing . Split-window . Thermal infrared sensor . Optical land imager . NDVI

Introduction can be retrieved for an area using the thermal infrared bands of
remote sensing satellites. The recently launched Landsat 8
Estimation of land surface temperature (LST) over large areas satellite, also referred as Landsat data continuity mission
was difficult before the existence of earth observation satel- (LDCM), is capable of providing high spatial resolution as
lites (EOS). Remote sensing satellites with high spatial reso- compared with previous Landsat satellites including the mul-
lution sensors have paved the way to estimate LST easily. LST tispectral scanner system (MSS), thematic mapper (TM), and
the enhanced thematic mapper plus (ETM+). Optical land
imager (OLI) sensor acquires data with a spatial resolution
* Gopinadh Rongali of 30 m in eight bands situated in the electromagnetic spec-
gopinadh01@gmail.com trum and an additional panchromatic (PAN) band having a
spatial resolution of 15 m. Using the two bands situated in
Ashok K. Keshari
akeshari@civil.iitd.ac.in
the atmospheric window between 10 and 12 μm (Barsi et al.
2014; Jiménez-muñoz et al. 2014; Sobrino et al. 2015), the
Ashvani K. Gosain thermal infrared sensor (TIRS) estimates the radiance at 100 m
gosain@civil.iitd.ac.in
spatial resolution. OLI sensor was incorporated since the
Rakesh Khosa launch of the LDCM design, whereas the thermal imaging
rkhosa@civil.iitd.ac.in
was excluded in the beginning from the LDCM requirements.
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology
In recent years, due to wide use of Landsat 5 TM or Landsat 7
Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India ETM+ thermal data, particularly in the application of water
14 Page 2 of 19
resources management for agricultural fields, a TIRS was in-
cluded as a part of LDCM (Irons et al. 2012). These applica-
tions depend on the solution of the energy balance equation
involving heat fluxes and retrieve the evapotranspiration. LST
can be estimated if TIRS data are available.
Landsat 8 was launched in 2013 and put into orbit with two
instruments on-board. The first one is the OLI sensor, and it
has nine spectral bands in the visible, near-infrared (NIR), and
shortwave infrared (SWIR) spectral regions of the electromag-
netic spectrum. The second one is the TIRS, and it has two
spectral bands in the longwave infrared (LWIR). The relative
spectral response of the TIRS bands is shown in Fig. 1. The
Landsat 8 has two TIRS bands in the atmospheric window in
between 10 and 12 μm, whereas Landsat TM/ETM+ sensors
have single thermal band (Fig. 1). One band of in the previous
satellites becomes two TIRS bands in Landsat 8, and, thus the
bandwidths of the TIRS bands are narrower than the TM/
ETM+ TIR band. This constitutes the major improvement in
the Landsat 8 satellite sensors over Landsat TM/ETM+.
LST is a parameter which plays a vital role in the geo-
biophysical studies (Quattrochi and Luvall 1999; Kalma
et al. 2008; Kustas and Anderson 2009; Weng 2009;
Feizizadeh and Blaschke 2012; Mallick 2014; Song et al.
2015). LST provides the temperature of a surface. It represents
the earth’s Bskin^ temperature. When LST rises, it leads to an
imbalance in the environmental conditions such as melting of
snow and glacier and changes in the vegetation of land surface
and climatic conditions. Sudden rainfall may also be experi-
enced due to associated weather changes. Increase in LST
causes the melting of glaciers and ice sheets in the polar region
and leads to floods and a rise in sea level. The climate condi-
tions of monsoon countries are affected due to an increase in
the LST that leads to unpredictable rainfall. LST has affected
the vegetative area on the whole earth surface, and thus the
effect of change in LST also gets reflected in the land use and
land cover (LU/LC) of an area. The natural and anthropogenic
activities change the LU/LC of an area as it evolves with the
local climate. These aspects show significance and necessitate
Fig. 1 Relative spectral response
for the Landsat (5, 7, and 8)
thermal bands (Yuet al. 2014)
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
the development of appropriate algorithm for the precise esti-
mation of land surface temperature.
LST is an important factor in several applications, such as
global climate change studies, radiation budgets estimates,
heat balance studies, control for climate models, evapotrans-
piration estimation, and glacier hydrological study. The
knowledge of LST is also important to address a range of
interdisciplinary issues in earth sciences central to urban cli-
matology, global environmental change, and human-
environment interactions. LST can provide important infor-
mation about physical properties at the surface. Climate also
plays a vital role in many environmental processes (Dousset
and Gourmelon 2003; Weng et al. 2004). Estimation of LST
using remote sensing may prove to be a better alternative to
conventional methods. The advantages of using remotely
sensing are the availability of high resolution data, consistent
and repetitive coverage, and the capability of measuring the
earth surface conditions (Owen et al. 1998).
Although many SW algorithms have been used with other
sensors (Sobrino and Romaguera 2004; Tang et al. 2008),
some adaptations are required for the TIRS spectral bands.
Therefore, the present study is aimed at developing a SW
algorithm that can be adapted for use with Landsat 8 TIRS
data. Further, in snowmelt runoff studies, air temperature is an
important component. In rugged terrain, such as the
Himalayas, meteorological stations collecting air temperature
data are sparsely located and the observations, being point
data, are not representative of the whole terrain. In addition,
the air temperature is measured manually and hence it is sus-
ceptible to errors. In such conditions, LST maps prepared
from satellite images are an attractive alternative as it provides
a continuous dataset. They are prepared from satellite data that
automatically measure radiance values, are free from human
error provided and provide an accurate radiometric calibration
of the sensor channels. These viewpoints warrant the devel-
opment of remote sensing-based techniques to precisely esti-
mate distributed values of LST. The main objective of this
paper is to develop an SW algorithm for LST retrieval from
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
the Landsat 8 TIRS data. The application is demonstrated for a
Himalayan river basin, namely, Beas River basin, Himachal
Pradesh, India.
In the following sections, we first present the derivation of
the algorithm and the computation of the brightness tempera-
ture (TB) for the LST retrieval. The present study utilizes the
SW algorithm to estimate LST using Landsat 8 bands having
moderate spatial resolution of 30 m. In this study, two TIRS
bands and four OLI bands have been used to estimate LST for
the entire Beas River basin. TIRS consists of two thermal
bands (10 and 11) from Landsat 8. For the retrieval of LST,
OLI sensor bands (2 to 5) was used for the evolution of the
land surface emissivity (LSE) using the fractional vegetation
cover (FVC). The SW algorithm combines both the TB and
LSE to estimate the LST for each ground pixel. Secondly, we
evaluate the performance of the algorithm by comparing it
with the MW algorithm. We validate the proposed algorithm
by comparing it with in situ air temperature data downloaded
from the National Remote Sensing Centre’s (NRSC)
Meteorological and Oceanographic Satellite Data Archival
Centre (MOSDAC) Website (http://www.mosdac.gov.in/) for
three ground stations (Chelsea, GB Pant Inst. Mohal-Kullu,
and Bajaura) located in the study area.
Appraisal of LST Inversion Techniques
A number of algorithms have been used by the researchers to
estimate the LST using satellite imageries, particularly thermal
infrared (TIR) band data as it is capable to decipher the ther-
mal characteristic of the land surface. These algorithms are,
namely mono-window (MW), split-window (SW), dual-angle
(DA), single-channel (SC), and Sobmao method (Becker and
Li 1990a; Kerr et al. 1992; Jiménez-Muñoz 2003; Sobrino
et al. 2004; Li et al. 2013; Skokovic et al. 2014). Among these
algorithms, SW, DA and Sobmao are more commonly used
(Wan and Dozier 1996; Wan 1997; Wan and Li 1997; Sobrino
et al. 2004). The SC studies were carried out mostly in urban
areas, and arid and semi-arid regions. Further, a single thermal
band was mostly used.
The MW algorithm is capable of retrieving surface tem-
perature directly based on the surface thermal radiation trans-
fer equation without atmospheric correction (Qin et al.
2001). It is advantageous as it requires only two atmospheric
parameters; atmospheric mean effective temperature and
surface temperature.
The advantages of the SC algorithm is its simplicity. The
SC algorithm is applicable to sensors with only one TIR chan-
nel. The use of the SC algorithm is limited as it requires a
priori knowledge of the pixel emissivity in the TIR channel
and also needs accurate atmospheric profiles and an excellent
radiative transfer model (RTM) to estimate atmospheric quan-
tities. The main disadvantages of the SC algorithm are the
substantial effects of the uncertainty of atmospheric patterns
Page 3 of 19 14
on the accuracy of LST retrieval, the large time requirement
for the forward calculations of atmospheric amounts using
RTM, use of empirical relationships, and poor results at high
atmospheric water vapor contents (Qin et al. 2001; Jiménez-
Muñoz 2003; Cristóbal et al. 2009; Jimenez-Munoz et al.
2009).
The SW algorithm is advantageous because of simplicity
and high efficiency. In the SW algorithm, the LST is retrieved
with known emissivity using the different atmospheric ab-
sorptions in adjacent TIR channels. Further, the SW algorithm
does not require accurate atmospheric profiles and the algo-
rithm is suitable for various sensors with no less than two TIR
channels within the atmospheric window. However, the SW
algorithm requires a priori knowledge of the pixel emissivity
in each TIR channel. The main disadvantages of the SW al-
gorithm is that many parameterizations of the coefficients are
available which can lead to varying performance and the ac-
curacy is degraded in the presence of high total column water
vapor (WV) or at large viewing zenith angles (McMillin 1975;
Becker and Li 1990b; Sobrino et al. 1994; Wan et al. 1996).
The DA algorithm assumes that the LSTs are independent
of the viewing zenith angle (VZA), and the atmosphere is
horizontally uniform and stable over the observation time,
which may not be true in real time domain. The advantages
of the DA algorithm are simplicity and high efficiency. In this
algorithm, the accurate atmospheric profiles are not required,
and the LST retrieval accuracy is insensitive to the uncer-
tainties in the optical properties of the atmospheric absorbents.
The main limitation of the DA algorithm is the lack of a priori
knowledge of the angular variation of the emissivity at satel-
lite pixel scale. Further, the algorithm requires a significant
difference in the slant path-lengths and accurate geometric
registration. The DA algorithm is applicable only to the ho-
mogeneous surfaces (Sobrino et al. 1996; Sòria and Sobrino
2007).
The Sobmao method is a combined approach of Sobrino
and Mao methods. It is accurate than the Sobrino method and
simple to use (Mao et al. 2005; Galve et al. 2008; Zhao et al.
2009). Along-track scanning radiometer-2 (ATSR-2) data was
used in MODTRAN 3.5 simulations to generate LST and sea
surface temperature (SST) in a part of New South Wales using
SW, DA, and mixed structures (MS) algorithms.
A number of studies were conducted to determine LST
using TIRS radiation emitted from the surface using SW algo-
rithm (Becker and Li 1990b; Ulivieri et al. 1994; Coll and
Caselles 1997; Sobrino and Raissouni 2000; Li et al. 2013;
Xia et al. 2014). The SW algorithm uses the two adjacent
TIRS channels, centered at 11 and 12 μm, in case of advanced
very high-resolution radiometer (AVHRR) to retrieve surface
temperatures based on their different atmospheric transmit-
tance. The LST of the SW algorithm rectifies the atmospheric
effects based on the differential absorption in the infrared
bands.
14 Page 4 of 19
The accuracy of the SW algorithm depends on the magni-
tude of the difference between the emissivities of the surface
in the two bands (Becker 1987). Caselles et al. (1998) carried
out a study to minimize the errors in the retrieval of LST by
using the two separate, relatively narrow, thermal bands. The
utilized TIRS data was having 100 m spatial resolution and
16 days of revisit period, and as a result, applications were
different than those of other sensors with coarser spatial
resolutions and shorter revisit times. Cuenca et al. (2013) used
SW algorithm to make the atmospheric correction of the ther-
mal data by selecting two TIRS bands. Alipour and Esmaeily
(2005) derived LST using the normalized difference vegeta-
tion index (NDVI) threshold technique. They found a positive
relationship with NDVI and LU/LC method when compared
with the in situ measurements. The NDVI values were found
in four different years in the Kunsan City, Chollabuk, Korea.
The outputs of LST and NDVI were compared, and a positive
correlation was obtained between them. Changes over time
were also measured and it was found that the LST increases
with time (Anbazhagan and Paramasivam 2016; Nikam et al.
2016). The LST and NDVI were estimated by using the
Landsat 7 image. For the analysis of LST, each pixel of the
FVC was calculated. Mallick and Bharath (2008) observed the
correlation between the LST and NDVI. A healthy positive
relationship was observed between LST and NDVI. The meth-
odology was preferable to calculate NDVI and surface
emissivity.
Zhao et al. (2009) utilized the specific methods as proposed
by Sobrino, and Mao to retrieve LST using Moderate
Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) data for
the Hebei and Shanxi, North China plain. Results of LST for
the minimum, maximum and mean temperature as obtained
from the Sobrino method and the Mao method were compared
with the standard values of the LST. It was observed that the
Sobrino method output ranges greater while the output of Mao
method has less value than the standard values of the LST.
Akhoondzadeh and Saradjian (2008) estimated LST using
MODIS bands of 31 and 32 and advanced spaceborne ther-
mal emission and reflection radiometer (ASTER) data for
one of the semi-arid regions in Iran. Both data acquisitions
are of the same date and time. It was observed that the outputs
of LSTof MODIS and ASTER exactly match with each other.
The MW and SC algorithms were obtained to estimate the
LST in Alastair City, Iran. Using the NDVI, the emissivity
was estimated and LU/LC was obtained by using the super-
vised classification method. Similar findings were also ob-
tained by Khandelwal et al. (2016). The study carried out in
the northern Negev Desert, Israel (Du et al. 2014; Rozenstein
et al. 2014) shows that the SW algorithm can be adjusted for
estimating LST from Landsat 8 data to get better accuracy.
TB and LSE were the inputs for the SW algorithm. The effi-
ciency of the adjusted SW algorithm was obtained by using
the MODTRAN 4.0 software.
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
Methodology
The present study utilizes SW algorithm to retrieve LST using
Landsat 8 TIRS data. Along with TIRS, data from OLI are
also required to estimate the LST while using the proposed
SW algorithm. Firstly, Landsat 8 OLI sensor bands 2, 3, 4, and
5 are layer stacked, and the NDVI image is generated using
bands 4 and 5. The FVC image is obtained using the image of
the NDVI. The FVC is calculated by taking the fraction of
area covered by the vegetation. The proposed SW algorithm
uses the FVC image to generate the land surface emissivity
(LSE) image. The LSE image measures the inbuilt character-
istics of the earth surface indicating the ability to convert ther-
mal energy or heat energy into the radiant energy.
The estimation of LSE requires emissivity of the soil
and vegetation for bands 10 and 11. The LSE images of
bands 10 and 11 are obtained individually, and then mean
and difference of LSE are calculated. The NDVI image is
reclassified into soil and vegetation and the NDVI images
for soil and vegetation are obtained separately. Secondly,
Landsat 8 has two TIRS bands. The TB is estimated for
bands 10 and 11. Thermal calibration process is per-
formed by converting thermal digital number (DN) values
of raw thermal bands 10 and 11 of TIRS into the top of
atmospheric (TOA) spectral radiance and after using the
TB. Lastly, the LST is estimated by using the SW coeffi-
cient values, TB, mean LSE, difference LSE and water
vapor constant. The flowchart of the proposed SW algo-
rithm to estimate LST using TIRS bands 10 and 11 and
OLI sensor bands 2–5 are shown in Fig. 2.
Split-Window Algorithm for LST Retrieval
The SW algorithm is based on the different atmospheric ab-
sorption behaviour of two radiometric channels within the 10–
12.5 μm window region. It was initially proposed to produce
real-time surface temperature patterns for seas and water bod-
ies where the surface was commonly assumed to be a black
body. Later, it was shown that the use of the SW algorithm
actually minimizes the small surface emittance effect on re-
trieved sea surface temperature (SST) and a suitable overesti-
mation of atmospheric water vapor absorption can compen-
sate for the surface emittance effect in a reasonable range of
atmospheric total water vapor content (Ulivieri et al. 1994).
The SW algorithm removes the atmospheric effect using
the differential atmospheric absorption in the two adjacent
thermal infrared channels centered at 11 and 12 μm, and fi-
nally applies the linear or nonlinear combination of brightness
temperatures to calculate LST (Wan and Dozier 1996). Since
it does not require accurate information about the atmospheric
profiles at the time of the acquisition, a variety of SW algo-
rithms have been developed and modified to successfully re-
trieve LST from several sensors. Based on the new refinement
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
Fig. 2 Flowchart of the split-
window algorithm
of the generalized SW algorithm (Wan 2014), a nonlinear
structure of TB as described below was adopted to obtain
LST from the TIRS of Landsat 8.
The proposed SW algorithm utilizes the atmospheric win-
dow in the range of 10 μm to 12 μm wavelengths for the TIRS
bands (10 and 11). The basis of the SW algorithm is the radi-
ance attenuation for atmospheric absorption, which is propor-
tional to the radiance difference of simultaneous measure-
ments at two different wavelengths, each of them being sub-
ject to varying amounts of atmospheric absorption (McMillin
1975). The mathematical structure for estimation of LST can
be expressed as (Sobrino et al. 1996; b; Jiménez-Muñoz and
Sobrino 2008):


2
T s ¼ T i þ c1 T i −T j þ c2 T i −T j þ c0
þ ðc3 þ c4 wÞð1−εÞ þ ðc5 þ c6 wÞΔε ð1Þ
where, Ts is land surface temperature, Ti and Tj are at-sensor
TB of the SW bands i and j in Kelvin, ε is mean emissivity, Δε
is emissivity difference, w is total atmospheric water vapor
content (g/cm2), and c0 to c6 are SW coefficients to be deter-
mined from simulated data. The mean emissivity and emissiv-
ity difference are expressed as:
ε = 0.5(εi − εj) and Δε = (εi − εj).
Page 5 of 19 14
The flowchart of SW algorithm utilized in the present study
for the estimation of LST is shown in Fig. 2. The mathematical
expression for LST can be expressed as:
LST ¼ TB10 þ C 1 ðTB10 −TB11 Þ þ C 2 ðTB10 −TB11 Þ2
þ C 0 þ ðC 3 þ C 4 W Þð1−mÞ þ ðC 5 þ C 6 W ÞΔm ð2Þ
where, LST is land surface temperature in Kelvin (K), C0 to C6
are SW coefficient values, TB10 and TB11 are brightness tem-
peratures of bands 10 and 11 in Kelvin (K), m is mean of the
LSE of the TIRS bands, W is atmospheric water vapor content,
and Δm is the difference in the LSE. The values of SW coef-
ficients are given in Table 1 (Sobrino et al. 2003; Zhao et al.
2009; Skokovic et al. 2014). The step-wise procedure for the
utilized SW algorithm are as follows:
Step 1: The TOA spectral radiance of the TIRS bands (10
and 11) and the OLI sensor bands (2–5) are estimated
individually by using Eq. 3. Equation 3 converts the
Table 1 Split-window coefficient values
Constant C0 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6
Value − 0.268 1.378 0.183 54.300 − 2.238 − 129.200 16.400
14 Page 6 of 19 J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14

raw image into the spectral radiance of the image. The

equation is implemented using the raster calculator in
ArcGIS 10.3 (Fig. 3).
 
Lmax −Lmin
Lλ ¼  Band þ Lmin ð3Þ
DN max

where, Lλ is top of atmospheric spectral radiance in watts/

(m2 × srad × μm), Lmax is maximum spectral radiance of re-
spective bands (10 or 11), and Lmin is minimum spectral radi-
ance of respective bands (10 or 11).DNmax = Qcalmax −
Qcalmin difference of maximum and minimum calibration of
the sensor
Step 2: The TB is estimated for bands 10 and 11. TB is
the electromagnetic radiation traveling to the upward di-
rection from the top of the Earth’s atmosphere. A thermal
calibration process has been performed by converting
thermal DN values of raw thermal bands (10 and 11) of
TIRS into TOA spectral radiance and after using the TB
as shown below:
TB ¼ K2=ðlnðK1=Lλ þ 1ÞÞ−273:15 ð4Þ
where, K1 and K2 are thermal constant values of the bands 10
and 11 from the metadata file, and L is top of atmospheric
spectral radiance.
Step 3: The NDVI is estimated using OLI sensor optical
bands (4 and 5) from the composite of bands (2, 3, 4 and
5) using the equation as shown below:
Band5 −Band4 NIR−RED
NDVI ¼ ¼ ð5Þ
Band5 þ Band4 NIR þ RED
It ranges from − 1 < NDVI < + 1
Step 4: The FVC image is obtained using the image of the
NDVI obtained from step 3 using Eq. 5. The FVC is
calculated by taking the fraction of area covered by the
vegetation. Figure 4 shows the flowchart to perform the
Fig. 4 Flowchart for the computation of fractional vegetation cover
computation of FVC image. The SW algorithm uses the
FVC image to estimate the LSE image. The NDVI image
is reclassified into soil and vegetation, and the NDVI
values are calculated separately for soil and vegetation
using ArcGIS 10.3. The implementation for the compu-
tation of the FVC image is carried out using Eq. 6.
NDVI−NDVIðsoilÞ
FVC ¼ ð6Þ
NDVIðvegetationÞ−NDVIðsoilÞ
NDVI−0:15
FVC ¼
0:48−0:15
Step 5: The LSE image is generated from the FVC image
obtained in step 4 using the SW algorithm in Eq. 7. The
generation of LSE image estimation requires emissivity
of the soil and vegetation of the bands 10 and 11, and
these emissivity values are given in Table 2. The LSE
images of bands 10 and 11 are generated individually.
LSE ¼ εs  ð1−FVCÞ þ εv  FVC ð7Þ
where, εs is emissivity of the soil, εv is emissivity of the veg-
etation, and FVC is fractional vegetation cover.
Step 6: The LSE images of bands 10 and 11 as obtained in
step 5 are combined through mean, by using Eq. 8 and
difference between them is computed from Eq. 9.

LSE10 þ LSE11
Mean of the LSE ¼ m ¼ ð8Þ
2

Difference of the LSE ¼ Δm ¼ LSE10 −LSE11 ð9Þ

Table 2 Emissivity
values Emissivity Band 10 Band 11

εs 0.971 0.977
εv 0.987 0.989
Fig. 3 Flowchart of the thermal calibration process
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14 Page 7 of 19 14

Fig. 5 ASTER-DEM of the Beas

river basin up to Pandoh dam with
the locations of the hydro-
meteorological stations

Step 7: The LST is estimated using the algorithm by using
Eq. 10. The LST in Kelvin using the SW algorithm is
expressed as:
LST ¼ TB10 þ 1:378 ðTB10−TB11Þ
þ 0:183 ðTB10−TB11Þ2−0:268
þ ð54:300−2:238ð0:013ÞÞð1−Mean LSEÞ
þ ð−129:200 þ 16:400ð0:013ÞÞðDifference of LSEÞ
ð10Þ
where, TB10 and TB11 are TB of the bands (10 and 11), C0 to
C9 are split-window algorithm coefficient values, m is mean of
the LSE, Δm is difference of the LSE, and W is atmospheric
water vapor content.
Mono-window Algorithm
Qin et al. (2001) developed the following expression for
obtaining the LST using the MW algorithm:
T S ¼ ½að1−C−DÞ þ ðbð1−C−DÞ þ C þ DÞT sensor −DT a =C ð11Þ
with C = ετ, D = (1 − τ)[1 + (1 − ε)τ], a = − 67.355351, b =
0.458606.where, ε is land surface emissivity, τ is total atmo-
spheric transmissivity, Tsensor is at-sensor brightness tempera-
ture, Ta is mean atmospheric temperature, and T0 is near-
surface air temperature.
The mean atmospheric temperature is given by:
T a ¼ 16:01110 þ 0:92621T 0 ð12Þ
14 Page 8 of 19
Recently, a new MW algorithm was developed by Rongali
et al. (2018) which utilizes the following expression for LST
inversion:
    Sensor
TB
LST ¼ TB= 1 þ w* *lnðLSEÞ ð13Þ
p
where, LST is land surface temperature (K), TB is at satellite
temperature (K), W is wavelength of emitted radiance
(11.5 μm), p is a constant and its value is equal to 14,380,
and LSE is land surface emissivity. The details of the MW
algorithm and its sensitivity are described in previous studies
(Qin et al. 2001; Rongali et al. 2018).
Description of the Study Area
The Beas River basin up to Pandoh dam has been selected for
the study area as shown in Fig. 5. The basin lies between 31°
to 32° N latitude and 77° to 78° E longitude and characterizes
the Himalayan rugged terrain. The Beas River is one of the
main rivers of the Indus river system. It starts from the
Rohtang pass and flows to proximal north-south direction up
to Larji. At Larji, it takes a right angle and turns towards the
southwest and flows in the same direction up to the Pandoh
dam. The distance between the origin of Beas River and the
Pandoh dam is approximately 116 km. The tributaries of the
Beas River are Parbati and Sainj Khad rivers. These are glacier
fed rivers. The Beas River basin catchment up to the Pandoh
dam is approximately 5383 km2. The catchment area mainly
has impulsive slopes and the rocks are commonly bare. The
Beas River basin contains high peaks in the east as well as in
the north of the river valley. The elevation varies from 857 m
near the Pandoh dam up to 6582 m on the northeast border of
the Parbati sub-catchment. In the Beas River during the winter
season, a substantial portion of the river becomes snow cov-
ered. The Beas River is mainly fed by snowmelt in the sum-
mer. Some of the significant tributaries which join the up-
stream of the Pandoh dam are Parbati river near Bhuntar,
Tirthan, and Sainj rivers near Larji, Sabari Nala near Kulu,
and Bakhli Khad near the Pandoh dam. Pandoh dam diverts
water from the Beas river to the Sutlej river for power gener-
ation at Dehar powerhouse located on the right bank of the
Sutlej.
Data and Software Used
The present study utilizes TIRS bands (10 and 11) to estimate
TB, and OLI sensor spectral bands (2 to 5) have been utilized
to obtain NDVI image of the Beas river basin. The study area
is covered in one tile (Table 3). Landsat 8 gives metadata of
the bands of thermal constant and rescaling factor, and these
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
Table 3 Landsat 8 satellite image metadata
Metadata details of TIRS and OLI (Landsat 8)
Optical land imager Thermal infrared
sensor
Date of acquisition 24 Apr 2015
Sun elevation 62.54
Path/row 147/038
Bands 9 2
Resolution 30 m 100 m
Radiance-Mult-Band-10 – 0.0003342
Radiance-Mult-Band-11 – 0.0003342
Radiance-Add-Band-10 – 0.10000
Radiance-Add-Band-11 – 0.10000
K1 for band 10 – 777.89
K2 for band 11 – 480.89
K1 for band 10 – 1321.08
K2 for band 11 – 1201.14
Source: Landsat 8 MTL file (path 147, row 038) (https://earthexplorer.
usgs.gov)
values are used as input to various algorithms for the estima-
tion of LST.
In the present study, the TIRS bands (10 and 11) and the
OLI sensor bands (1 to 9) of the Landsat 8 satellite data from
24 April 2015 have been used for the estimation of LST. The
thermal constants (K1 and K2) and other image statistics have
been obtained from metadata of the image file and are given in
Table 3. ERDAS IMAGINE 9.2, ArcGIS 10.3, and ENVI 4.8
software have been used for the processing of the Landsat 8
data.
Results and Discussion
Figure 6 shows the NDVI image of the Beas river basin as on
24 April 2015, which has been estimated from band 4 (RED)
and band 5 (NIR) of the OLI sensor using the ArcGIS 10.3
raster calculator. It is evident from this figure that the NDVI
value varies from −0.262 to 0.611. The higher NDVI values
closer to 1 indicates the healthy and green vegetation cover
area. Using the NDVI image as an input, the NDVI image was
reclassified for soil and vegetation separately. The average
value of NDVI was calculated for soil being equal to 0.15
and that of to be vegetation is 0.48. The values of NDVI for
soil and the vegetation were taken as input to obtain the FVC
image by using Eq. 6 and the LSE image by using Eq. 7.
These mathematical map calculations were implemented with
the raster calculator in ArcGIS 10.3. The raster maps obtained
for the difference and the mean of the LSE for bands 10 and 11
are shown in Figs. 7 and 8, respectively. It is evident from
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
Fig. 6 Normalized differential
vegetation index image of the
study area on 24th April 2015
Fig. 7 that the difference of LSE for bands 10 and 11 ranges in
between − 0.008 and − 0.005, whereas Fig. 8 shows that the
mean LSE value ranges in between 1.443 and 1.462 for the
study area during April month for the Beas river basin.
The NDVI image shows that the NDVI values range be-
tween − 0.26 and 0.61. The southwestern portion of the Beas
River basin has the highest NDVI values, whereas the area
under snow has a negative value (Fig. 6). The LSE image (Fig.
8) has been obtained using the NDVI threshold value tech-
nique. The LSE value of the Beas River basin ranges between
1.44 and 1.46. The highly elevated regions in the Beas river
basin have extensive snow cover. Hence, the LSE image
shows low values in these areas. High LSE values have been
found in the western and south-western areas of the basin,
whereas the low LSE values have been found in the northern
and eastern regions of the study area.
Page 9 of 19 14
The TIRS bands (10 and 11) are used to estimate the TB
in Celsius using Eq. 4. The computed TB for the study area
is shown in Figs. 9 and 10 for bands 10 and 11, respective-
ly. It is evident from these figures that the TB varies from
− 13.258 to 36.379 for band 10, whereas it varies from −
14.041 to 34.034 °C for band 11. The area statistics for
various class intervals of TB are shown in Figs. 11 and
12 for bands 10 and 11, respectively. It is evident from
Figs. 11 and 12 that class 2 exhibits 36.29% of the total
area at a temperature between − 4.98 and 3.28 °C in TB
image of band 10, and class 5 of the TB image of band 11
exhibits maximum of 31.73% of the total area at a temper-
ature between 18.13 and 26.17 °C.
Figure 13 shows the LST as obtained from the proposed
SW algorithm for the study area. It reveals that LST varies
between − 38.80 and 27.40 °C. For comparison purpose,
14 Page 10 of 19
Fig. 7 Difference of the land
surface emissivity image of bands
10 and 11 on 24th April 2015
the LST was also computed using the MW algorithm for
the study area on the same date 24 April 2015. The LST
obtained from the MW algorithm is shown in Fig. 14, and it
has similar order of values as that obtained from the SW
algorithm.
Figure 13 has been derived by making use of the LSE
image, TB image and the emissivity difference image
obtained from LSE images of bands 10 and 11 of the
TIRS sensor. The LST output image shows that the land
surface temperature varies from less than − 38.79 °C to
more than 27.4 °C. The highest LST of more than
27.4 °C has been found in the southern regions of the
study area, where the barren lands and wastelands are
mainly found. The lowest category of less than −
38.79 °C temperature has been found in the highly ele-
vated regions, snow-covered areas.
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
Figure 14 shows the spatial distribution of the estimated
LST from the MW algorithm for 24 April 2015. The mini-
mum and maximum temperatures are − 14.667 and
33.078 °C, respectively, with a mean average of 9.546 °C.
The highest LST values are observed in the southern plains
of the study area, whereas the lowest LST values are ob-
served in the highly elevated regions that experienced snow
fall during that time. The area statistics of the LST obtained
from SW algorithm shown in Table 4 reveals that it divides
the whole area into three major surface temperature classes
2, 3, and 4. Class 2 has 44.85% of the area under an average
surface temperature of − 22.24 °C. Class 3 has 21.25% area
under an average surface temperature of − 11.21 °C, and
class 4 has 30.23% area under an average surface tempera-
ture of − 0.18 °C. The remaining 2.38% of an area is covered
in class 1 which has an average temperature of − 33.28 °C.
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
Fig. 8 Mean of the land surface
emissivity image of bands 10 and
11 on 24th April 2015
Comparison of Algorithms
Landsat 8 TIRS data has been utilized for estimating LST
of the study area of the Beas River basin. Two LST retriev-
al algorithms, namely, MW and SW algorithms have been
used for comparative performance evaluation. The initial
pre-processing of remote sensing data has been carried out
by building customized models in ArcGIS and ERDAS
Imagine software. The United States Geological Survey
(USGS) has published that the calibration variability of
band 10 of TIRS (0.12 W/m2/sr/μm) is better than that of
band 11 (0.2 W/m2/sr/μm) (Yu et al. 2014). Also, band 11
is more affected by the water vapor absorption and so more
sensitive to errors in atmospheric profiles (Coll et al.
2012). Hence, in the present study, band 10 has been used
for LST retrieval using the MW algorithm. The SW
Page 11 of 19 14
algorithm is the most popular among all the operational
algorithms used for space-based LST retrieval. The SW
algorithm proposed by Jiménez-Muñoz and Sobrino
(2008) has been used in the present study, and the SW
coefficients required for Landsat 8 TIRS data have been
taken from Skokovic et al. (2014).
LSE is an indispensable input in all the LST retrieval algo-
rithms. Though methods for simultaneous retrieval of LSE
and LST are available, due to their computational complexity,
prior known LSE method has been implemented in the present
study. LSE maps have been generated using a semi-empirical,
NDVI threshold method of LSE estimation. NDVI, mean
LSE, and difference LSE estimated using NDVI threshold
method from two Landsat 8 OLI images acquired on 24
April 2015 (path 147/row 038) of the Beas river basin are
shown in Figs. 6, 7, and 8, respectively.
14 Page 12 of 19
Fig. 9 Brightness temperature of
band 10 with classes of
temperature intervals
The comparison between computed values of LST obtained
from the proposed SW algorithm and that obtained from the
MW algorithm shows a similar order of values. However, the
MW algorithm has higher LST values. Regression analysis
between results obtained from these two algorithms for LST
shows a value of R2 equal to 0.95, as shown in Fig. 15. The
close correlation between retrieved LST using the SW algo-
rithm with the LST retrieved from the MW algorithm suggests
that they are linearly transferable with negligible loss of
accuracy.
The difference in the estimates of LST from SW and MW
algorithms can be attributed to the spectral bands and the
atmospheric water vapor content used in the LST retrieval.
The SW algorithm uses two spectral bands (bands 10 and
11) at approximately 11 and 12 μm wavelengths, whereas
the MW algorithm uses only one spectral band (band 10) at
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
approximately 11.5 μm wavelength in the atmospheric win-
dow to retrieve the LST. Further, the SW algorithm uses the
atmospheric water vapor content which is site specific and
provides true value of the prevailing condition at the site. On
the other hand, the atmospheric water vapor content is not
utilized in the MW algorithm. The atmospheric water vapor
content is a sensitive parameter that influences the weather
and in high land surface temperature. Since two spectral
bands are used in SW algorithm to determine emissivity
and brightness temperature and these values together with
the atmospheric water vapor content are used in LST retriev-
al, the SW algorithm is capable to capture field conditions
more closely and provide better results as compared with the
MW algorithm. This becomes more evident heterogeneous
surfaces. The difference map of the LST obtained from SW
and MW algorithms has been produced and shown in
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14 Page 13 of 19 14

Fig. 10 Brightness temperature

of band 11 with classes of
temperature intervals

Fig. 16. The spatial distribution of the difference has been

also discussed. It is evident from Fig. 16 that the difference
in the estimates of LST from these two algorithms in the
range of − 8.78 to − 2.02 with an average of − 5.4 °C for
most of the areas in the study domain. The difference is
more pronounced in the snow-covered areas and is within
the range of − 29.06 to − 22.30.

Validation of Retrieved LST

The two major validation studies carried out with the

ground measurements or near-surface air temperature
(Srivastava et al. 2009; Li et al. 2013) for LST inversion
Srivastava et al. (2009) has shown that the LST values
Fig. 11 Area statistics of classified brightness temperature image of band 10 varies up to 5 °C as compared with the ground
14 Page 14 of 19 J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14

measurements, however, the accuracy of results in some

Fig. 12 Area statistics of the classified brightness temperature image of
band 11
areas showed a difference of ± 2 °C with actual ground tem-
perature measurements. Li et al. (2013) found LST retriev-
ing error of 0.7 °C in comparison with the mean near-
surface air temperature measurement. Sometimes, the dif-
ferences can be great depending on weather conditions and
other factors (Gallo et al. 2011). It should also be taken into
consideration that there is a 1 m to 2 m difference between
the LST and the air temperature, which means that differ-
ences in the temperatures are normal and expected.
For the study area considered in the present study, no
ground measurements of LST are available on the field. In
the present study, the LST obtained from Landsat 8 using the
SW algorithm was compared with the in situ air temperature
observed at three stations. The comparison is shown in
Fig. 17. Figure 17 shows close agreement for the computed
LST and measured in situ air temperature. In general, air

Fig. 13 Land surface temperature

image of the Beas river basin on
the 24th April 2015 using SW
algorithm
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14 Page 15 of 19 14

Fig. 14 Land surface temperature

image of the Beas river basin on
the 24th April 2015 using MW
algorithm

temperature is higher than the LST. It is also evident from factor derived from the FVC using optical bands of the OLI
Fig. 17 that the LST retrieved using the SW algorithm fol- sensor. The algorithm has been applied to the Beas River
lows the same trend as that for the measured data. Since the basin, Himachal Pradesh, India, characterized by rugged
comparison has been made for air temperature, the differ-
ence can sometimes may be large as the resolution of
Landsat 8 for the used bands is 100 m for the thermal band
Table 4 Statistics of the land surface temperature image obtained from
and 30 m for the red and NIR bands. The LST was calculated
SW algorithm
and taken according to the pixel occupied by the respective
meteorological stations. Temperature Temperature Average Area (%)
class interval temperature

1 − 38.79 to − 27.76 − 33.27 2.3826

Conclusions 2 − 27.76 to − 16.73 − 22.24 44.8570
3 − 16.73 to − 5.69 − 11.21 21.2520
A SW algorithm has been presented to compute LST using 4 − 5.69 to 5.33 − 0.18 30.2326
Landsat 8 images. SW algorithm has a dynamic mathematical 5 5.33 to 16.36 10.84 1.2711
tool that enables to estimate LST using the brightness temper- 6 16.36 to 27.40 21.88 0.1
ature of the thermal bands of the TIRS sensor and the LSE
14 Page 16 of 19 J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14

terrain having heterogeneity in land surface and snow and

glacier covered areas.
The study shows that the raster maps of LST can be suc-
cessfully obtained using the proposed SW algorithm based on
satellite data of Landsat 8 with multibands OLI and TIRS
sensors. Results obtained from the proposed SW algorithm
have been compared with the results obtained from the MW
algorithm and in situ measurements of air temperature to as-
sess the performance of the SW algorithm. It is observed that
the LST obtained from SW and MW algorithms are having
similar order of values, however, the MW algorithm estimates
higher temperature values as compared with the SW
algorithm.
The spatial distribution of temperature difference obtained
from these two algorithms shows that the difference is small in
Fig. 15 Difference map of the land surface temperature obtained from
most of the land areas, whereas it is large in snow-covered SW and MW algorithms

Fig. 16 Comparision between

retrieved LST from Landsat 8
TIRS data using MW and SW
algorithms
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
Fig. 17 Comparison between in situ air temperature and land surface
temperature obtained using SW algorithm from Landsat 8 on 24 April
2015 at three different stations
areas. Regression analysis of LST obtained from these two
algorithms suggests that they are closely correlated with a
value of R2 equal to 0.95 and are linearly transferable with
negligible loss of accuracy. The computed LST values can
differ at the most up to 5 °C with the in situ air temperature
measurements.
The study reveals that the basin has extensive snow cover in
the hilly regions. In the north-eastern parts, it has low values of
LST, whereas in the south-western plains with barren lands, un-
cultivable land and urban areas have high LST values. The Beas
River basin has low snow cover area under vegetation, and it is
restricted to the hilly areas in the southwestern and southeastern
regions. Results obtained reveal that 44.85% of the total area is
under the temperature of − 27.76 to − 16.73 °C, and the amount
of 21.25% of the entire area is under the temperature of − 16.73
to − 5.69 °C during April. The remaining 30.23% of the total area
is under the temperature of − 5.96 to 5.33 °C. The average LST is
found to be − 5.70 °C in the study area.
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank USGS earth ex-
plorer for online availability of Landsat 8 and ASTER GDEM data. We
also thank the NRSC, Hyderabad, India for providing the air temper-
ature data downloaded from the MOSDAC Website that were used in
this study. We are thankful to the anonymous reviewers for their con-
structive comments and suggestions. This has greatly helped to raise
the quality of paper.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
Ethical Approval This paper does not contain any studies with human
participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual
participants included in the study.
Page 17 of 19 14
References
Akhoondzadeh M, Saradjian MR (2008) Comparison of land surface
temperature mapping using Modis and Aster images in semi-arid
area. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci XXXVII:
873–876
Alipour T, Esmaeily A (2005) Land surface temperature. Int Arch
Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci XXXVIII-4/C7
Anbazhagan S, Paramasivam CR (2016) Statistical correlation between
land surface temperature (LST) and vegetation index (NDVI) using
multi-temporal Landsat TM data. Int J Adv Earth Sci Eng 5:333–
346
Barsi JA, Schott JR, Hook SJ, Raqueno NG, Markham BL, Radocinski
RG (2014) Landsat-8 thermal infrared sensor (TIRS) vicarious ra-
diometric calibration. Remote Sens 6:11607–11626. https://doi.org/
10.3390/rs61111607
Becker F (1987) The impact of spectral emissivity on the measurement of
land surface temperature from a satellite. Int J Remote Sens 8:1509–
1522. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431168708954793
Becker F, Li ZL (1990a) Toward a local split window method over land
surface. Int J Remote Sens 11:369–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01431169008955028
Becker F, Li ZL (1990b) Towards a local split window method over land
surfaces. Int J Remote Sens 11:369–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01431169008955028
Caselles V, Rubio E, Coll C, Valor E (1998) Thermal band selection for
the PRISM instrument 3. Optimal band configurations. J Geophys
Res 103:17057–17067
Coll C, Caselles V (1997) A split-window algorithm for land surface
temperature from advanced very high resolution radiometer data:
validation and algorithm comparison. J Geophys Res 102(doi):
16697–16713. https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD00929
Coll C, Caselles V, Valor E, Niclòs R (2012) Comparison between dif-
ferent sources of atmospheric profiles for land surface temperature
retrieval from single channel thermal infrared data. Remote Sens
Environ 117:199–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.09.018
Cristóbal J, Jiménez-Muñoz JC, Sobrino JA, Ninyerola M, Pons X (2009)
Improvements in land surface temperature retrieval from the
Landsat series thermal band using water vapor and air temperature.
J Geophys Res Atmos 114:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1029/
2008JD010616
Cuenca RH, Ciotti SP, Hagimoto Y (2013) Application of Landsat to
evaluate effects of irrigation forbearance. Remote Sens 5:3776–
3802. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs5083776
Dousset B, Gourmelon F (2003) Satellite multi-sensor data analysis of
urban surface temperatures and landcover. ISPRS J Photogramm
Remote Sens 58:43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-2716(03)
00016-9
Du C, Ren H, Qin Q, Meng J, Li J (2014) Split-window algorithm for
estimating land surface temperature from Landsat 8 TIRS data. Int
Geosci Remote Sens Symp 3578–3581. https://doi.org/10.1109/
IGARSS.2014.6947256
Feizizadeh B, Blaschke T (2012) Thermal remote sensing for land surface
temperature monitoring: Maraqeh County, Iran 2. Methods and data.
IEEE Int Geosci Remote Sens Symp 2217–2220. https://doi.org/10.
1109/IGARSS.2012.6350808
Gallo K, Hale R, Tarpley D, Yu Y (2011) Evaluation of the relationship
between air and land surface temperature under clear- and cloudy-
sky conditions. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 50:767–775
Galve JM, Coll C, Caselles V, Valor E, Mira M (2008) Comparison of
split-window and single-channel methods for land surface tempera-
ture retrieval from MODIS and AATSR data. Int Geosci Remote
Sens Symp 3:294–297. https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2008.
4779341
14 Page 18 of 19
Irons JR, Dwyer JL, Barsi JA (2012) The next Landsat satellite: the
Landsat data continuity mission. Remote Sens Environ 122:11–21.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.08.026
Jiménez-Muñoz JC (2003) A generalized single-channel method for re-
trieving land surface temperature from remote sensing data. J
Geophys Res 108:4688. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003480
Jiménez-Muñoz JC, Sobrino JA (2008) Split-window coefficients for
land surface temperature retrieval from low-resolution thermal in-
frared sensors. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett 5:806–809. https://
doi.org/10.1109/LGRS.2008.2001636
Jimenez-Munoz JC, Cristobal J, Sobrino JA, Soria G, Ninyerola M, Pons
X, Pons X (2009) Revision of the single-channel algorithm for land
surface temperature retrieval from Landsat thermal-infrared data.
IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 47:339–349. https://doi.org/10.
1109/TGRS.2008.2007125
Jiménez-muñoz JC, Sobrino JA, Skokovi D, Mattar C, Cristóbal J (2014)
Land surface temperature retrieval methods from Landsat-8 thermal
infrared sensor data. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett 11:1840–1843
Kalma JD, McVicar TR, McCabe MF (2008) Estimating land surface
evaporation: a review of methods using remotely sensed surface
temperature data. Surv Geophys 29:421–469. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10712-008-9037-z
Kerr YH, Lagouarde JP, Imbernon J (1992) Accurate land surface tem-
perature retrieval from AVHRR data with use of an improved split
window algorithm. Remote Sens Environ 209:197–209
Khandelwal S, Goyal R, Kaul N, Mathew A (2016) Assessment of land
surface temperature variation due to change in elevation of area
surrounding Jaipur, India. Egypt J Remote Sens Space Sci 21:1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2017.01.005
Kustas W, Anderson M (2009) Advances in thermal infrared remote
sensing for land surface modeling. Agric For Meteorol 149:2071–
2081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2009.05.016
Li ZL, Tang BH, Wu H, Ren H, Yan G, Wan Z, Trigo IF, Sobrino JA
(2013) Satellite-derived land surface temperature: current status and
perspectives. Remote Sens Environ 131:14–37. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.rse.2012.12.008
Mallick J (2014) Land characterization analysis of surface temperature of
semi-arid Mountainous City Abha, Saudi Arabia using remote sens-
ing and GIS. J Geogr Inf Syst 06:664–676. https://doi.org/10.4236/
jgis.2014.66055
Mallick YKJ, Bharath BD (2008) Estimation of land surface temperature
over Delhi using Landsat-7 ETM+. J Ind Geophys Union 12:131–140
Mao K, Qin Z, Shi J, Gong P (2005) A practical split-window algorithm
for retrieving land-surface temperature from MODIS data. Int J
Remote Sens 26:3181–3204. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01431160500044713
McMillin L (1975) Estimation of sea surface temperatures from two
infrared window measurements with different absorption. J
Geophys Res 80:5113–5117
Nikam BR, Ibragimov F, Chouksey A, Garg V, Aggarwal SP (2016)
Retrieval of land surface temperature from Landsat 8 TIRS for the
command area of Mula irrigation project. Environ Earth Sci 75:1–
17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5952-3
Owen TW, Carlson TN, Gillies RR (1998) An assessment of satellite
remotely-sensed land cover parameters in quantitatively describing
the climatic effect of urbanization. Int J Remote Sens 19:1663–1681.
https://doi.org/10.1080/014311698215171
Qin Z, Karnieli A, Berliner P (2001) A mono-window algorithm for
retrieving land surface temperature from Landsat TM data and its
application to the Israel-Egypt border region. Int J Remote Sens 22:
3719–3746. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160010006971
Quattrochi DA, Luvall JC (1999) Thermal infrared remote sensing for
analysis of landscape ecological processes: methods and applications.
Landsc Ecol 577–598. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118801628.ch03
Rongali G, Keshari AK, Gosain AK, Khosa R (2018) A mono-window
algorithm for land surface temperature estimation from Landsat 8
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
thermal infrared sensor data: a case study of the Beas River Basin,
India. Pertanika J Sci Technol 26:829–840
Rozenstein O, Qin Z, Derimian Y, Karnieli A (2014) Derivation of land
surface temperature for landsat-8 TIRS using a split window algo-
rithm. Sensors (Switzerland) 14:5768–5780. https://doi.org/10.
3390/s140405768
Skokovic D, Sobrino JA, Jiménez Muñoz JC, Soria G, Julien Y, Mattar C,
Cristóbal J (2014) Calibration and validation of land surface tem-
perature for Landsat8- TIRS sensor TIRS Landsat-8 characteristics.
L Prod Valid Evol ESA/ESRIN 27
Sobrino JA, Raissouni N (2000) Toward remote sensing methods for land
cover dynamic monitoring: application to Morocco. Int J Remote
Sens 21:353–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/014311600210876
Sobrino JA, Romaguera M (2004) Land surface temperature retrieval
from MSG1-SEVIRI data. Remote Sens Environ 92:247–254.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2004.06.009
Sobrino J, Li Z, Stoll M, Becker F, Anonymous (1994) Improvements in
the split-window technique for land surface temperature determina-
tion. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 32:243–253
Sobrino JA, Li Z, Stoll MP, Becker F (1996) Multi-channel and multi-
angle algorithms for estimating sea and land surface temperature
with ATSR data. Int J Remote Sens 17:2089–2114. https://doi.org/
10.1080/01431169608948760
Sobrino JA, El Kharraz J, Li ZL (2003) Surface temperature and water
vapor retrieval from MODIS data. Int J Remote Sens 24:5161–5182.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0143116031000102502
Sobrino JA, Jiménez-Muñoz JC, Paolini L (2004) Land surface temper-
ature retrieval from Landsat TM 5. Remote Sens Environ 90:434–
440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2004.02.003
Sobrino JA, Skoković D, Jiménez-Muñoz JC (2015) Spatial analysis of
the homogeneity of the land surface temperature in three Spanish
test sites. Int J Remote Sens 36:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01431161.2015.1055611
Song L, Liu S, Kustas WP, Zhou J, Ma Y (2015) Using the surface
temperature-albedo space to separate regional soil and vegetation
temperatures from ASTER data. Remote Sens 7:5828–5848.
https://doi.org/10.3390/rs70505828
Sòria G, Sobrino JA (2007) ENVISAT/AATSR derived land surface tem-
perature over a heterogeneous region. Remote Sens Environ 111:
409–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2007.03.017
Srivastava P, Majumdar TJ, Bhattacharya AK (2009) Surface temperature
estimation in Singhbhum shear zone of India using Landsat-7
ETM+ thermal infrared data. Adv Space Res 43:1563–1574
Tang B, Bi Y, Li ZL, Xia J (2008) Generalized split-window algorithm for
estimate of land surface temperature from Chinese geostationary
FengYun meteorological satellite (FY-2C) data. Sensors 8:933–
951. https://doi.org/10.3390/s8020933
Ulivieri C, Castronuovo MM, Francioni R, Cardillo A (1994) A split
window algorithm for estimating land surface temperature from sat-
ellites. Adv Space Res 14:59–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-
1177(94)90193-7
Wan Z (1997) A physics-based algorithm for retrieving land-surface emis-
sivity and temperature from EOS/MODIS data. IEEE Trans Geosci
Remote Sens 35:980–996. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.602541
Wan Z (2014) New refinements and validation of the collection-6
MODIS land-surface temperature/emissivity product. Remote Sens
Environ 140:36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.08.027
Wan Z, Dozier J (1996) A generalized split-window algorithm for retriev-
ing land-surface temperature from space. IEEE Trans Geosci
Remote Sens 34:892–905
Wan Z, Li Z (1997) A physics-based algorithm for retrieving land-surface
emissivity and temperature from EOS/MODIS data. IEEE Trans
Geoscience Remote Sens 4:980–996
Wan Z, Dozier J, Member A (1996) A generalized split-window algo-
rithm for retrieving land-surface temperature from space. IEEE
Trans Geosci Remote Sens 34:892–905
J geovis spat anal (2018) 2: 14
Weng Q (2009) Thermal infrared remote sensing for urban climate and
environmental studies: methods, applications, and trends. ISPRS J
Photogramm Remote Sens 64:335–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
isprsjprs.2009.03.007
Weng Q, Lu D, Schubring J (2004) Estimation of land surface
temperature-vegetation abundance relationship for urban heat island
studies. Remote Sens Environ 89:467–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rse.2003.11.005
Xia L, Mao K, Ma Y, Zhao F, Jiang L, Shen X, Qin Z (2014) An algo-
rithm for retrieving land surface temperatures using VIIRS data in
Page 19 of 19 14
combination with multi-sensors. Sensors (Switzerland) 14:21385–
21408. https://doi.org/10.3390/s141121385
Yu X, Guo X, Wu Z (2014) Land surface temperature retrieval from
Landsat 8 TIRS-comparison between radiative transfer equation-
based method, split window algorithm and single channel method.
Remote Sens 6:9829–9852. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs6109829
Zhao S, Qin Q, Yang Y, Xiong Y, Qiu G (2009) Comparison of two split-
window methods for retrieving land surface temperature from
MODIS data. J Earth Syst Sci 118:345–353. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s12040-009-0027-4