Search for: All records

Abstract Land surface temperature (LST) is crucial for understanding earth system processes. We expanded the Advanced Baseline Imager Live Imaging of Vegetated Ecosystems (ALIVE) framework to estimate LST in near‐real‐time for both cloudy and clear sky conditions at a five‐minute resolution. We compared two machine learning (ML) models, Long Short‐Term Memory (LSTM) networks and Gradient Boosting Regressor (GBR), using top‐of‐atmosphere observations from the Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) on the GOES‐16 satellite against observations from hundreds of observation sites for a five‐year period. Long Short‐Term Memory outperformed GBR, especially at coarser resolutions and under challenging conditions, with a clear sky R²of 0.96 (RMSE 2.31K) and a cloudy sky R²of 0.83 (RMSE 4.10K) across CONUS, based on 10‐repeat Leave‐One‐Out Cross‐Validation (LOOCV). GBR maintained high accuracy and ran 5.3 times faster, with only a 0.01–0.02 R²drop. Feature importance revealed infrared bands were key in both models, with LSTM adapting dynamically to atmospheric changes, while GBR utilized more time information in cloudy conditions. A comparative analysis against the physically based ABI_LSTproduct showed strong agreement in winter, particularly under clear sky conditions, while also highlighting the challenges of summer LST estimation due to increased thermal variability. This study underscores the strengths and limitations of data‐driven models for LST estimation and suggests potential pathways for integrating ML models to enhance the accuracy and coverage of LST products. 

Abstract Climate change is intensifying the hydrologic cycle and altering ecosystem function, including water flux to the atmosphere through evapotranspiration (ET). ET is made up of evaporation (E) via non‐stomatal surfaces, and transpiration (T) through plant stomata which are impacted by global changes in different ways. E and T are difficult to measure independently at the ecosystem scale, especially across multiple sites that represent different land use and land management strategies. To address this gap in understanding, we applied flux variance similarity (FVS) to quantify how E and T differ across 13 different ecosystems measured using eddy covariance in a 10 × 10 km area from the CHEESEHEAD19 experiment in northern Wisconsin, USA. The study sites included eight forests with a large deciduous broadleaf component, three evergreen needleleaf forests, and two wetlands. Average T/ET for the study period averaged nearly 52% in forested sites and 45% in wetlands, with larger values after excluding periods following rain events when evaporation from canopy interception may be expected. A dominance analysis revealed that environmental variables explained on average 69% of the variance of half‐hourly T, which decreased from summer to autumn. Deciduous and evergreen forests showed similar E trajectories over time despite differences in vegetation phenology, and vapor pressure deficit explained some 13% of the variance E in wetlands but only 5% or less in forests. Retrieval of E and T within a dense network of flux towers lends confidence that FVS is a promising approach for comparing ecosystem hydrology across multiple sites to improve our process‐based understanding of ecosystem water fluxes.