Intercomparison and validation of MODIS and GLASS leaf area index (LAI) products over mountain areas: A case study in southwestern China

The validation study of leaf area index (LAI) products over rugged surfaces not only gives additional insights into data quality of LAI products, but deepens understanding of uncertainties regarding land surface process models depended on LAI data over complex terrain. This study evaluated the performance of MODIS and GLASS LAI products using the intercomparison and direct validation methods over southwestern China. The spatio-temporal consistencies, such as the spatial distributions of LAI products and their statistical relationship as a function of topographic indices, time, and vegetation types, respectively, were investigated through intercomparison between MODIS and GLASS products during the period 2011–2013. The accuracies and change ranges of these two products were evaluated against available LAI reference maps over 10 sampling regions which standed for typical vegetation types and topographic gradients in southwestern China. The results show that GLASS LAI exhibits higher percentage of good quality data (i.e. successful retrievals) and smoother temporal profiles than MODIS LAI. The percentage of successful retrievals for MODIS and GLASS is vulnerable to topographic indices, especially to relief amplitude. Besides, the two products do not capture seasonal dynamics of crop, especially in spring over heterogeneously hilly regions. The yearly mean LAI differences between MODIS and GLASS are within ±0.5 for 64.70% of the total retrieval pixels over southwestern China. The spatial distribution of mean differences and temporal profiles of these two products are inclined to be dominated by vegetation types other than topographic indices. The spatial and temporal consistency of these two products is good over most area of grasses/cereal crops; however, it is poor for evergreen broadleaf forest. MODIS presents more reliable change range of LAI than GLASS through comparison with fine resolution reference maps over most of sampling regions. The accuracies of direct validation are obtained for GLASS LAI (r=0.35, RMSE=1.72, mean bias=−0.71) and MODIS LAI (r=0.49, RMSE=1.75, mean bias=−0.67). GLASS performs similarly to MODIS, but may be marginally inferior to MODIS based on our direct validation results. The validation experience demonstrates the necessity and importance of topographic consideration for LAI estimation over mountain areas. Considerable attention will be paid to the improvements of surface reflectance, retrieval algorithm and land cover types so as to enhance the quality of LAI products in topographically complex terrain.