Evaluation of Different Radiative Transfer Models for Microwave Backscatter Estimation of Wheat Fields

This study aimed to analyze existing microwave surface (Oh, Dubois, Water Cloud Model “WCM”, Integral Equation Model “IEM”) and canopy (Water Cloud Model “WCM”, Single Scattering Radiative Transfer “SSRT”) Radiative Transfer (RT) models and assess advantages and disadvantages of different model combinations in terms of VV polarized radar backscatter simulation of wheat fields. The models are driven with field measurements acquired in 2017 at a test site near Munich, Germany. As vegetation descriptor for the canopy models Leaf Area Index (LAI) was used. The effect of empirical model parameters is evaluated in two different ways: (a) empirical model parameters are set as static throughout the whole time series of one growing season and (b) empirical model parameters describing the backscatter attenuation by the canopy are treated as non-static in time. The model results are compared to a dense Sentinel-1 C-band time series with observations every 1.5 days. The utilized Sentinel-1 time series comprises images acquired with different satellite acquisition geometries (different incidence and azimuth angles), which allows us to evaluate the model performance for different acquisition geometries. Results show that total LAI as vegetation descriptor in combination with static empirical parameters fit Sentinel-1 radar backscatter of wheat fields only sufficient within the first half of the vegetation period. With the saturation of LAI and/or canopy height of the wheat fields, the observed increase in Sentinel-1 radar backscatter cannot be modeled. Probable cause are effects of changes within the grains (both structure and water content per leaf area) and their influence on the backscatter. However, model results with LAI and non-static empirical parameters fit the Sentinel-1 data well for the entire vegetation period. Limitations regarding different satellite acquisition geometries become apparent for the second half of the vegetation period. The observed overall increase in backscatter can be modeled, but a trend mismatch between modeled and observed backscatter values of adjacent time points with different acquisition geometries is observed.