1,419
Views
22
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Spatiotemporal mixed effects modeling for the estimation of PM2.5 from MODIS AOD over the Indian subcontinent

ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon

Figures & data

Figure 1. Measured PM2.5 concentrations (μg/m3) across 33 ground monitoring stations for the study area during January 2017 – August 2017. Tamil Nadu and Punjab states shaded in gray color are chosen for the study on Gap filling where AOD values are missing (Section 4.2 and 5.2).

Figure 1. Measured PM2.5 concentrations (μg/m3) across 33 ground monitoring stations for the study area during January 2017 – August 2017. Tamil Nadu and Punjab states shaded in gray color are chosen for the study on Gap filling where AOD values are missing (Section 4.2 and 5.2).

Figure 2. Methodology adopted for the estimation of daily PM2.5 from MODIS AOD over the Indian subcontinent.

Figure 2. Methodology adopted for the estimation of daily PM2.5 from MODIS AOD over the Indian subcontinent.

Figure 3. Proportionate extent of (a) Agricultural area (b) Road density (c) Forest cover (d) Open spaces calculated within 10 km × 10 km grid.

Figure 3. Proportionate extent of (a) Agricultural area (b) Road density (c) Forest cover (d) Open spaces calculated within 10 km × 10 km grid.

Figure 4. Percentage availability of AOD data during the study period of January – August 2017 for the Indian sub-continent.

Figure 4. Percentage availability of AOD data during the study period of January – August 2017 for the Indian sub-continent.

Table 1. Statistical summary of parameters associated with the spatiotemporal mixed effects model.

Figure 5. Scatterplot showing the measured and estimated PM2.5 (μgm/m3) using spatiotemporally modified MEM with the combination of variables (a) M1 – Open spaces and Agricultural area (OA with cross); (b) M2 – Open spaces and Forest cover (OF with minus); (c) M3 – Open spaces, Agricultural area, Forest cover area and Temperature data (OAFT with plus); (d) M4 – Open spaces, Agricultural area, Forest cover area, Temperature and Road density data (OAFTR with dots).

Figure 5. Scatterplot showing the measured and estimated PM2.5 (μgm/m3) using spatiotemporally modified MEM with the combination of variables (a) M1 – Open spaces and Agricultural area (OA with cross); (b) M2 – Open spaces and Forest cover (OF with minus); (c) M3 – Open spaces, Agricultural area, Forest cover area and Temperature data (OAFT with plus); (d) M4 – Open spaces, Agricultural area, Forest cover area, Temperature and Road density data (OAFTR with dots).

Figure 6. Validation of LMEM and STMEM outputs against observed PM2.5 levels across 33 stations between January and August 2017.

Figure 6. Validation of LMEM and STMEM outputs against observed PM2.5 levels across 33 stations between January and August 2017.

Table 2. Values of fixed effect coefficients of the spatiotemporal mixed effects model including road density (γ1), open spaces (γ2), agricultural area (γ3), and forest cover (γ4).

Figure 7. Estimated PM2.5 concentrations (μg/m3) during January – August 2017 (a – h), Minimum (i) and Maximum (j) for Indian subcontinent using spatiotemporal mixed effects model including open spaces, forest cover, agricultural areas, road density, and temperature.

Figure 7. Estimated PM2.5 concentrations (μg/m3) during January – August 2017 (a – h), Minimum (i) and Maximum (j) for Indian subcontinent using spatiotemporal mixed effects model including open spaces, forest cover, agricultural areas, road density, and temperature.

Figure 8. (a) PM2.5 concentrations for April 2017 (b) Gap – filled spatiotemporal interpolation by mixed effects model implemented using spline interpolation (c) using ordinary kriging (d) using the IDW method of Tamil Nadu.

Figure 8. (a) PM2.5 concentrations for April 2017 (b) Gap – filled spatiotemporal interpolation by mixed effects model implemented using spline interpolation (c) using ordinary kriging (d) using the IDW method of Tamil Nadu.

Figure 9. (a) PM2.5 concentrations for April 2017 (b) Gap – filled spatiotemporal interpolation by mixed effects model implemented using spline interpolation (c) using Ordinary Kriging (d) using the IDW method for Punjab.

Figure 9. (a) PM2.5 concentrations for April 2017 (b) Gap – filled spatiotemporal interpolation by mixed effects model implemented using spline interpolation (c) using Ordinary Kriging (d) using the IDW method for Punjab.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.