Evaluation analysis of NASA SMAP L3 and L4 and SPoRT-LIS soil moisture data in the United States

Soil moisture has a critical role in the development, frequency and persistence of climatic and hydrologic extremes such as drought, heat wave and flooding events. In situ soil moisture data are uneven and sparse in time, and space. This highlights the need to utilize other soil moisture sources to fill this spatiotemporal gap. The goal of this study is to validate one satellite-based and two model-based soil moisture datasets with in situ data across the United States. Soil moisture information from the Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) enhanced level 3 (L3) (SMAP L3) and modeled level 4 (L4) (SMAP L4) data at 9-km resolution and Short-term Prediction Research and Transition-Land Information System (SPORT-LIS) modeled at 3-km resolution were selected for evaluation. SPoRT-LIS is a near real-time, high resolution operational land analysis data. Ground-based data were obtained from the North American Soil Moisture Database (NASMD) for 362 stations. Seven statistical indicators including anomaly, Spearman, and Pearson correlation coefficients, the systematic error (Bias), root mean square error (RMSE), unbiased root mean square error (ubRMSE), and normalized standard deviation (SDV) were used to evaluate the satellite- and model-derived soil moisture data. In addition, the triple collocation (TC) error model was used to measure the error among SMAP L4, SPORT-LIS and ground-based data. This study assesses which satellite or modeled dataset is most appropriate for specific times and locations to use as a surrogate for in situ observations. Temporal and spatial analysis demonstrated that, overall, SMAP L4 performed better than SMAP L3 and SPORT-LIS. Strong agreement was observed between SMAP L4 and in situ observations (p = 0.53, Bias = 0.006) in all seasons and most regions with various land covers, especially in winter and in the central regions of the United States. For croplands, SMAP L4 presented the best agreement with in situ data, analyzing all period (p = 0.60) and non-winter period (p = 0.61) separately.