Remote-sensing of benthic chlorophyll: should ground-truth data be expressed in units of area or mass? [An article from: Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology]

This digital document is a journal article from Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, published by Elsevier in 2005. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Media Library immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.

Description:
During low tide, field spectrometric data (350-1050 nm) were acquired from intertidal mudflats in the upper reaches of Sydney Harbour, after which samples of sediment were taken using a small contact core. A total of 103 spectra/sediment pairs of samples were acquired. In the laboratory, amounts of chlorophyll in the contact cores were determined spectrophotometrically. The proportion of fine sediment (400 nm were found to be more tightly correlated with area-normalised chlorophyll (maximal correlation=-0.51 at 666 nm) than with weight-normalised chlorophyll (maximal correlation=-0.41 at 664 nm). The relationship between R562/R647 and area-normalised chlorophyll was stronger (R^2=0.66) than for weight-normalised chlorophyll (R^2=0.47). The residuals from the regression of weight-normalised chlorophyll on R562/R647 were strongly correlated with the mass per unit mass of sediment that was