Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBrewin, RJW
dc.contributor.authorDall'Olmo, G
dc.contributor.authorPardo, S
dc.contributor.authorvan Dongen-Vogels, V
dc.contributor.authorBoss, ES
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-07T10:34:46Z
dc.date.issued2016-06-01
dc.description.abstractTo evaluate the performance of ocean-colour retrievals of total chlorophyll-a concentration requires direct comparison with concomitant and co-located in situ data. For global comparisons, these in situ match-ups should be ideally representative of the distribution of total chlorophyll-a concentration in the global ocean. The oligotrophic gyres constitute the majority of oceanic water, yet are under-sampled due to their inaccessibility and under-represented in global in situ databases. The Atlantic Meridional Transect (AMT) is one of only a few programmes that consistently sample oligotrophic waters. In this paper, we used a spectrophotometer on two AMT cruises (AMT19 and AMT22) to continuously measure absorption by particles in the water of the ship's flow-through system. From these optical data continuous total chlorophyll-a concentrations were estimated with high precision and accuracy along each cruise and used to evaluate the performance of ocean-colour algorithms. We conducted the evaluation using level 3 binned ocean-colour products, and used the high spatial and temporal resolution of the underway system to maximise the number of match-ups on each cruise. Statistical comparisons show a significant improvement in the performance of satellite chlorophyll algorithms over previous studies, with root mean square errors on average less than half (~0.16 in log10 space) that reported previously using global datasets (~0.34 in log10 space). This improved performance is likely due to the use of continuous absorption-based chlorophyll estimates, that are highly accurate, sample spatial scales more comparable with satellite pixels, and minimise human errors. Previous comparisons might have reported higher errors due to regional biases in datasets and methodological inconsistencies between investigators. Furthermore, our comparison showed an underestimate in satellite chlorophyll at low concentrations in 2012 (AMT22), likely due to a small bias in satellite remote-sensing reflectance data. Our results highlight the benefits of using underway spectrophotometric systems for evaluating satellite ocean-colour data and underline the importance of maintaining in situ observatories that sample the oligotrophic gyres.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipNEODAASen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipCMEMSen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipNatural Environment Research Council (NERC)en_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 183, pp. 82 - 97en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.rse.2016.05.005
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/38265
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherElsevieren_GB
dc.rights© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).en_GB
dc.subjectPhytoplanktonen_GB
dc.subjectOcean colouren_GB
dc.subjectRemote sensingen_GB
dc.subjectChlorophyllen_GB
dc.subjectValidationen_GB
dc.subjectAtlantic Oceanen_GB
dc.titleUnderway spectrophotometry along the Atlantic Meridional Transect reveals high performance in satellite chlorophyll retrievalsen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2019-08-07T10:34:46Z
dc.identifier.issn0034-4257
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.journalRemote Sensing of Environmenten_GB
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-05-14
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2016-06-01
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2019-08-07T10:32:13Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2019-08-07T10:34:48Z
refterms.panelCen_GB
refterms.depositExceptionpublishedGoldOA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).