×

You are using an outdated browser that does not fully support the intranda viewer.
As a result, some pages may not be displayed correctly.

We recommend you use one of the following browsers:

Full text

Title
Mesures physiques et signatures en télédétection

2.2. Empirical approach
Leaf surface and mesophyll structure induce confounding effects when chlorophyll or carotenoid are to be
retrieved from reflectance measurements. They act linearly (offset and multiplicative factor) on leaf reflectance as
demonstrated by equation (1). For this reason, ratios of reflectances observed in the blue domain where carotenoid
and chlorophyll absorb, and in the red domain where only chlorophyll absorb lead to a First order approximation
of C c /C a )when reflexion by the leaf surface is small. However, derivation of an analytical relationship from
equation (1) is not straightforward, except when C c is strongly linked to C a . For limnology and oceanography
studies, Margalef (1974) used the ratio of absorbances in the blue (A b ) and the red (A r ):A b /A r to empirically
estimate the CjC a ratio. Analogously, we defined the simple ratio pigment index ( SRP1) as the ratio between
blue (R b ) and red (R r ) reflectances: SRPI=R b /R r . Penuelas et al. (1993a, and b) proposed in the same way the
normalized difference pigment index, (NDPI=(R r -R b )l(R r +R b )) to evaluate the ratio of total pigments to
chlorophyll a. Note that both indices are functionally linked since NDPI=(1-SRPI)/(1+SRPI). These two former
indices are empirically derived and might suffer from some limitations. In the following, we will derive semi
empirical approaches to derive C c /C a ratio from equation (1).
2.3. Semi-empirical approach
If the specular component is supposed to be dominant in the R s term, equation (1) could be written as follows in
3 spectral domains :
blue domain: R b =R s +S.exp(-k a b C a -k c b C c )
red domain R T -=R s +S.exp(-k a T C a ) (2)
near infrared domain: R n -R s +S
Thus, we have:
R n -R b =S(l-exp(-k a h C a -k c h C c ),
and R n -R r =S(l-exp(-k a T .C a )) (3)
We define the structure independent pigment index ( SIPI ) as:
SIPI =(R n -R r )l(R n -R b )=(\-exp{-kJ.C a ))l{ 1 -exp(.-k b >C a -k b >C c )) (4)
Thus, the SIPI index becomes a function of C a and C c and the effect of the structural components should be
eliminated. However, the relationship between SIPI and C ( JC a ratio could not be derived analytically, except if
carotenoid and chlorophyll pigment concentration are closely linked together.
3. MATERIAL AND METHODS
3.1. Plant material
Several plant species and conditions were chosen to get a wide range of variation in leaf pigmentation. The
species studied were maize (Z ea mays L.), wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), tomato ( Lycopersicon esculentum
Mill.), soybean ( Glycine max L.), and sunflower ( Helianthus annuus L.), grown in a greenhouse, and sugar beet
(Beta vulgaris L.), oak (Quercus robur L.), maple (Acer negundo L.), and a succulent plant (Othonopssis
cheiriifolia L.), grown outdoor. Several leaves of each species were collected, and their spectral reflectances were
measured. Precise description of the leaves could be found in Baret et al. (1988), Malthus (1989) and Jacquemoud
and Baret (1990).
3.2. Reflectance measurement
Directional-hemispherical reflectance of the adaxial faces of the leaves was measured in the laboratory using a
Varian Cary 17 DI spectrophotometer. It is equipped with an integrating sphere coated with Barium sulfate.
Complementary bidirectional reflectance of the upper face of sugar beet leaves were measured in the laboratory
with the GER IRIS spectrophotometer as described in Malthus (1989). For both instruments, the spectral
resolution was better than 2 nm in the 400 nm-800 nm domain studied. A 5 nm sampling interval was used for
both instruments. The wavelength calibration was checked. Reflectance data were calibrated using a known
barium sulfate reference sample. The accuracy of the measurements was about 1% reflectance.
343