Comparison of Two Water Color Algorithms: Implications for the Remote Sensing of Water Bodies with Moderate to High CDOM or Chlorophyll Levels.

Martha Otte Burket, Leif G Olmanson, Patrick L Brezonik

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

2citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

Landsat-Derived Forel-Ule Index in the Three Gorges Reservoir over the Past Decade: Distribution, Trend, and Driver.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
Article
Spatial and Temporal Analysis of Water Quality in High Andean Lakes with Sentinel-2 Satellite Automatic Water Products.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Martha Otte BurketDepartment of Civil, Environmental, and Geo-Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.

Leif G OlmansonDepartment of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55455, USA.

Patrick L BrezonikDepartment of Civil, Environmental, and Geo-Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9077-121X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The dominant wavelength and hue angle can be used to quantify the color of lake water. Understanding the water color is important because the color relates to the water quality and its related public perceptions. In this paper, we compared the accuracy levels of two methods in calculating dominant wavelength and hue angle values using simulated satellite data calculated from in situ reflectance hyperspectra for 325 lakes and rivers in Minnesota and Wisconsin. The methods developed by van der Woerd and Wernand in 2015 and Wang et al. in 2015 were applied to simulated sensor data from the Sentinel-2, Sentinel-3, and Landsat 8 satellites. Both methods performed comparably when a correction algorithm could be applied, but the correction method did not work well for the Wang method at hue angles < 75°, equivalent to levels of colored dissolved organic matter (CDOM,

Indexed as

chlorophyllcolored dissolved organic matter (CDOM)dominant wavelengthForel–Ule indexhue angleLandsat 8reflectance spectraSentinel-2Sentinel-3water color

Identifiers

PMID36772113

DOI10.3390/s23031071

PMCPMC9920161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.