Research

RESEARCH VISION

How do climate change and human disturbance reshape ecosystem function?

I investigate plant functional traits and diversity, the ecological consequences of forest fragmentation, and the role of dryland biocrusts in ecosystem processes and climate feedbacks.

Representative mixed forest canopy with diverse autumn foliage
Direction 01 — Traits & Diversity

Plant Functional Traits & Diversity

What drives plant trait variation across space and time, and how does functional diversity shape ecosystem function?

1

Tracking seasonal variability in plant traits from spaceborne PRISMA and NEON AOP across forest types and ecoregions

Remote Sensing of Environment 2026 PRISMA NEON AOP Seasonal Variability Plant Traits

Select a figure to enlarge it. Use 100% to read it at its original size.

Plant traits serve as critical indicators of how plants adapt to environmental changes and influence ecosystem functions. While airborne hyperspectral remote sensing effectively maps plant traits through detailed reflectance properties, it is limited by cost and scale, making large-scale and temporal studies challenging. The recently launched spaceborne hyperspectral imager PRISMA offers frequent, large-scale and high-fidelity observations at 30 m spatial resolution with a revisit time of ~29 days — making it suitable for large-scale seasonal trait mapping.

This study developed a multi-stage framework by leveraging PRISMA spaceborne hyperspectral data and NEON Airborne Observation Platform (AOP) hyperspectral data to investigate the seasonal dynamics of four key plant traits — chlorophyll content (Chla+b), carotenoid content (Ccar), equivalent water thickness (EWT), and nitrogen content — across 11 NEON sites representing diverse forest types and ecoregions in the contiguous U.S.

  1. Research Questions:
    1. What are the capabilities of PRISMA data in quantifying seasonal variations of plant traits at large scales?
    2. How do plant traits vary within the growing season for different forest types and ecoregions, using NEON sites as representative examples?
    3. What factors control the spatial and seasonal variability of plant traits?
  1. Four-step framework:
    1. Processing the PRISMA hyperspectral data (BRDF correction, geo-referencing, cloud and non-vegetation removal).
    2. Generating NEON 1 m high-resolution trait maps using plot-level PLSR models applied to NEON AOP reflectance.
    3. Site-level PLSR modeling using upscaled NEON AOP trait maps and PRISMA reflectance + LAI as predictors to produce 30 m time-series trait maps.
    4. Analyzing seasonal variation of plant traits across NEON sites and identifying environmental drivers via random forest models.
  1. Key Findings:
    1. PRISMA reliably tracked seasonal variability in plant traits, achieving overall R2 = 0.78–0.88 and NRMSE = 5.4–8.4 % for all four traits.
    2. Seasonal patterns revealed bell-shaped trajectories for chlorophyll and carotenoids, driven by structural changes during leaf maturation and senescence. EWT decreased steadily across most sites. Nitrogen showed less pronounced seasonal variation, reflecting nutrient resorption patterns.
    3. Seasonal variability drivers: solar radiation and day length (northern sites); vapor pressure (semi-arid regions); temperature (mid-southeastern sites).
    4. Spatial variability was primarily driven by soil properties during the peak growing season, with climatic factors becoming more prominent toward the end of the season.
Fig. 1 — Eleven selected NEON sites across the contiguous U.S., spanning 9 NEON-defined ecological functional domains. Inset photos show representative vegetation at each site.
Fig. 2 — Summarized four-step workflow: (1) PRISMA preprocessing, (2) NEON AOP 1 m trait map generation, (3) site-level PLSR modeling to produce 30 m time-series trait maps, and (4) seasonal analysis with environmental drivers.
Fig. 3 — Correlation between PRISMA-derived traits and NEON AOP traits using the independent 20 % validation datasets for (a) Chla+b (R2 = 0.813, NRMSE = 5.4 %), (b) Ccar (R2 = 0.845, NRMSE = 6.3 %), (c) EWT (R2 = 0.88, NRMSE = 7.3 %), and (d) Nitrogen (R2 = 0.781, NRMSE = 8.4 %).
Fig. 4 — PRISMA-derived plant trait maps at the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute (SCBI) site for three representative months (May, August, October), showing seasonal dynamics of Chla+b, Ccar, EWT, and Nitrogen.

These findings highlight the capability of PRISMA for large-scale, time-series plant functional trait mapping and provide valuable insights into the interactions between plant traits and environmental factors, contributing to our understanding of plant functional ecology and improving predictions of ecosystem responses to environmental changes.

2

Leveraging transfer learning and leaf spectroscopy for leaf trait prediction with broad spatial, species, and temporal applicability

Remote Sensing of Environment 2025 Transfer Learning Leaf Traits Deep Neural Network

Select a figure to enlarge it. Use 100% to read it at its original size.

Accurate and reliable prediction of leaf traits is crucial for understanding plant adaptations to environmental variation, monitoring terrestrial ecosystems, and enhancing comprehension of functional diversity and ecosystem functioning.

Various approaches (e.g., statistical, physical models) have been developed to estimate leaf traits through hyperspectral remote sensing and leaf spectroscopy. However, the absence of high-performing, transferable, and stable models across various domains of space, plant functional types (PFTs) and seasons hinder our ability to quantify and comprehend spatiotemporal variations in leaf traits.

This study proposes robust and highly transferable models for better predicting leaf traits with hyperspectral reflectance. Three datasets were assembled, pairing common leaf traits — chlorophyll (Chla+b, µg/cm2), carotenoids (Ccar, µg/cm2), leaf mass per area (LMA, g/m2), equivalent water thickness (EWT, g/m2) — with leaf spectra measurements collected across diverse geographic locations in the U.S. and Europe, PFTs, and seasons.

  1. Research Questions:
    1. Do our proposed transfer learning models have better performance than PLSR, GPR, and pure RTMs?
    2. Are the transfer learning models more transferable across different geographic locations, PFTs, and seasons?
    3. How do inconsistency and quantity of real observations used for fine-tuning influence model performance?
Left: Overall workflow for estimating leaf traits based on various models.  Right: Pre-training processes using the synthetic data of RTMs (PROSPECT and Leaf-SIP).
  1. Framework — four steps:
    1. Pure radiative transfer modeling.
    2. Transfer learning modeling.
    3. Statistical modeling.
    4. Model performance assessment.
Left: Spatial distribution of leaf trait samples in the spatial dataset.  Right: Mean leaf traits, reflectance and variability (CV) among sites, PFTs and growing season.

Through comparison with PLSR, GPR, and pure physical models, the proposed transfer learning models achieved better predictive performance and higher transferability.

Left: Performance of different models incorporating varying proportions of observations for training/fine-tuning.  Right: Out-of-domain performance of different models.
3

Unveiling the transferability of PLSR models for leaf trait estimation: lessons from a comprehensive analysis with a novel global dataset

New Phytologist 2024 PLSR Transferability Global Dataset

Select a figure to enlarge it. Use 100% to read it at its original size.

Leaf traits are essential for understanding many physiological and ecological processes. PLSR models with leaf spectroscopy are widely applied for trait estimation, but their transferability across space, time and plant functional types (PFTs) remains unclear.

  1. Research Questions:
    1. How well do PLSR models transfer to new domains (new sites, PFTs and time)?
    2. What are the potential factors influencing the transferability of PLSR?
  2. Hypotheses:
    1. Models can expect accurate predictions within the training data range; performance declines when extrapolating to new domains.
    2. Greater spectral diversity in training yields better PLSR transferability.

We compiled a novel dataset of paired leaf traits and spectra, with 47,393 records for >700 species and eight PFTs at 101 globally-distributed locations across multiple seasons.

The distribution of leaf samples in (a) climate zones (Whittaker, 1970) and (b) geographic locations.
The framework for testing the transferability of PLSR modeling across sites, PFTs and time.
  1. Leaf spectra: 450–2400 nm, 10 nm interval.
  2. Total chlorophyll (Chla+b, µg/cm2): 6,840 samples.
  3. Total carotenoid (Ccar, µg/cm2): 4,233 samples.
  4. Equivalent water thickness (EWT, g/m2): 3,581 samples.
  5. Leaf mass per area (LMA, g/m2): 45,417 samples.
  6. 8 PFTs: ENF, EBF, DNF, DBF, SHR, GRA, CRP, Vine.

While PLSR models demonstrate commendable performance within their training data space, their efficacy diminishes when extrapolating to new contexts. Extrapolating to locations, seasons, and PFTs beyond training data leads to reduced R2 (0.12–0.49) and increased NRMSE (3.58–18.24%) compared to nonspatial random cross-validation (NRCV).

The relationship between predicted and observed leaf traits. Left: random 10-fold CV vs. spatial 10-fold CV. Upper Right: cross-PFTs validation. Bottom Right: random vs. temporal 5-fold CV.

Alpha and beta spectral diversity exhibited positive relationships — greater similarity of spectral diversity yielded greater PLSR transferability.

Alpha and beta spectral diversity to explain PLSR transferability. (a–b) relationships between alpha spectral diversity (aSD) and PLSR transferability across sites and PFTs. (c–d) relationships between beta spectral diversity (BSD) and PLSR transferability across sites and PFTs.
4

Robust hyperspectral reconstruction from satellite and airborne observations via a deep hierarchical fusion network across heterogeneous scenarios

Remote Sensing of Environment 2026 Hyperspectral Fusion EMIT PlanetScope Deep Learning

Select a figure to enlarge it. Use 100% to read it at its original size.

High spatial resolution hyperspectral imagery (HR-HSI) is essential for fine-scale ecological and environmental monitoring, yet current spaceborne sensors are constrained by a trade-off between spectral and spatial resolution. Hyperspectral reconstruction through data fusion offers a promising pathway to generate HR-HSI, but most existing approaches are trained on synthetic, perfectly aligned datasets and their performance under real cross-sensor conditions remains uncertain.

This study develops a deep learning fusion framework that reconstructs HR-HSI by integrating low-resolution hyperspectral imagery from NASA's EMIT (60 m, 285 bands) with high-resolution multispectral imagery from PlanetScope (3–5 m, 8 bands). The model was evaluated across three ecologically distinct landscapes in the western United States using airborne AVIRIS-3 and SHIFT imagery as reference data.

Overview of the three experimental areas and multi-sensor datasets used for hyperspectral reconstruction. The upper-left panel shows the geographic locations across the western U.S. Subpanels display side-by-side comparisons of LR-HSI (EMIT), HR-MSI (PlanetScope), and HR-HSI (AVIRIS-3/SHIFT) for each region. Bottom panels show representative vegetation spectra from EMIT, AVIRIS/SHIFT, and PlanetScope.
  1. Research Questions:
    1. How do existing fusion models and the proposed architecture perform and generalize when applied to real, cross-platform remote sensing data?
    2. How does model complexity affect the accuracy and effectiveness of hyperspectral reconstruction?
Architecture of the data fusion framework (MSAHFNet). The network takes co-registered EMIT (LR-HSI) and PlanetScope (HR-MSI) patches as input. A multi-scale residual backbone with parallel 1×1, 3×3, and 5×5 convolutional branches captures features at varying spatial scales. Channel-wise spectral attention and spatial attention modules adaptively enhance informative features. The composite loss combines MSE, SAM, and SmoothL1 terms.
Quantitative performance of hyperspectral reconstruction models across three experimental areas, evaluated using SAM, RMSE, MAE, MRE, PSNR, and ERGAS. The best-performing model for each metric is highlighted in red circle, and the second-best in blue. MSHFNet and MSAHFNet consistently outperform seven state-of-the-art baselines.
Visual comparison of reconstructed hyperspectral outputs across three experimental areas. Each panel shows false-color composites (760, 670, 550 nm) together with per-pixel cumulative RMSE maps across all spectral bands relative to the reference imagery. MSHFNet and MSAHFNet preserve fine-grained spatial details and maintain low reconstruction errors across diverse landscapes.
  1. The proposed framework consistently outperformed seven peer state-of-the-art fusion models, achieving a best SAM of 2.64 and RMSE of 0.0267.
  2. Stratified analyses across vegetation density gradients, spectral subregions (VIS, NIR, SWIR), and pixel-level distributions demonstrated strong robustness in heterogeneous landscapes.
  3. A sensor inter-calibration pipeline ensured radiometric consistency between EMIT and PlanetScope, improving the reliability of the fusion inputs.
  4. The proposed models (1.5M parameters) outperform much larger models like DSSFNet (313M parameters), demonstrating that architectural efficiency matters more than brute-force complexity.
5

Plant functional trait estimation from PlanetScope–EMIT reconstructed high-resolution hyperspectral imagery reveals spectral-spatial fidelity trade-offs

Under Review Remote Sensing of Environment 2026 First Author Plant Traits Data Fusion

Research question: How well can reconstructed high-resolution hyperspectral imagery support plant functional trait estimation, and how does the balance between spectral fidelity and spatial detail affect the results?

Approach: This manuscript evaluates nine deep learning fusion models combining PlanetScope multispectral imagery with NASA EMIT hyperspectral observations to reconstruct 5 m imagery and estimate 13 plant functional traits. Independent airborne AVIRIS-NG trait maps from the NASA SHIFT campaign provide the reference for evaluation.

Findings reported in the manuscript: Fused hyperspectral imagery improves trait estimation over coarse-resolution inputs, while spectral-spatial fidelity trade-offs influence its suitability for quantitative trait mapping.

Status: Under review at Remote Sensing of Environment. First author.

Representative overhead view of a road dividing a forest canopy
Direction 02 — Forest Fragmentation

Forest Fragmentation & Ecosystem Function

How do forest edges and fragmentation alter plant traits, functional diversity, and ecosystem function across scales?

1

Episodic changes in global forest edges in the 21st century

Nature Communications 2026 Co-Author Forest Edges Global Change

Research question: How have forest edges changed globally, and how do land management and fragmentation contribute to these changes?

Approach: The study developed high-resolution global forest edge maps for 2000–2020 to examine temporal changes in edge length and contrasting patterns across biomes and countries.

Key findings: Global forest edge length declined by 24 million km (7%) between 2000 and 2020. These episodic changes closely tracked policy-driven land management, including logging bans, agricultural expansion, and reforestation. Patch merging and fragmentation produced different patterns across regions.

Ecological relevance: Forest edge dynamics matter for biodiversity, microclimate regulation, and the balance between conservation, carbon storage, and land use. This collaborative study provides context for investigating the functional consequences of forest fragmentation.

2

Forest edges impose a global syndrome on canopy function

In Preparation 2026 Co-First Author Co-Corresponding Author NASA EMIT Canopy Function

Research question: How does distance from a forest edge structure canopy functional traits and spectral diversity across global forests?

Approach: This ongoing analysis uses NASA EMIT imaging spectroscopy to examine 49 hyperspectral indices representing ten canopy functional groups across 2,371 peak-growing-season scenes worldwide. It connects forest edge gradients with canopy water status, pigments, structural and chemical properties, and spectral heterogeneity.

Research focus: The manuscript examines coordinated differences between forest edges and interiors and how the depth of edge influence varies among canopy functional properties. The aim is to connect global fragmentation patterns with ecosystem function.

Status: Manuscript in preparation. Co-first author and co-corresponding author.

Representative biocrust-covered soil in a dryland landscape
Direction 03 — Biocrusts & Climate

Dryland Biocrusts & Climate Feedbacks

How do climate change and disturbance reshape biocrust communities, ecosystem processes, and climate feedbacks?

1

Experimental evidence of a biological soil crust degradation climate warming amplification feedback

Communications Earth & Environment 2026 Co-Author Biocrusts Climate Feedbacks

Research question: How do climate-driven changes in biocrust community composition affect ecosystem processes and feed back to climate?

Approach: This collaborative study combines multiscale remote sensing with a two-decade climate manipulation experiment in Castle Valley, Utah, linking changes in cyanobacteria, lichens, and mosses with soil-surface properties.

Key findings: Sustained warming and altered rainfall shifted communities away from late-successional mosses toward early-successional, lightly-pigmented cyanobacteria. The shift was associated with lower photosynthetic potential and surface moisture, greater surface brightness, and higher daytime surface temperature.

Ecological relevance: The results provide experimental evidence of a biocrust degradation–warming amplification feedback and highlight the need to represent changing biocrust communities in process-based models.

2

Hyperspectral reflectance reveals climate change–driven successional regression in dryland biocrust communities

Under Review Global Change Biology 2026 First Author Co-Corresponding Author Spectral Unmixing

Research question: Can hyperspectral reflectance quantify changes in biocrust functional types under long-term warming and altered precipitation?

Approach: The manuscript combines spectral unmixing and deep learning to estimate the fractional cover of major biocrust functional types from mixed hyperspectral pixels. It evaluates these estimates against observations from a long-term climate manipulation experiment.

Findings reported in the manuscript: Hyperspectral estimates reproduce the observed decline in late-successional cover and increase in early-successional cover under combined warming and altered precipitation. Visible-range pigment absorption features are dominant predictors, with additional information from red-edge and shortwave-infrared wavelengths.

Status: Under review at Global Change Biology. First author and co-corresponding author. The work offers a pathway for extending biocrust monitoring from field plots to landscapes.

3

From biocrust organic constituents to spaceborne mapping: A transferable hyperspectral framework for drylands

Under Review ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2026 Co-Author EnMAP NASA EMIT

Research question: Can diagnostic spectral responses of biocrust organic constituents support transferable mapping across dryland regions?

Approach: Spectral measurements from eight dryland regions are analyzed using PLS regression and discriminant analysis. The framework targets photosynthetic and protective pigments, soil organic matter, and cellulose, and applies constituent-related indices to EnMAP and EMIT imagery.

Findings reported in the manuscript: Five consistent spectral regions are identified and combined into constituent-related indices, connecting ground spectroscopy with spaceborne mapping.

Status: Under review at ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. Co-author.

4

Reflectance spectroscopy enables robust classification of biocrust successional stages under dry and wet conditions

Under Review Environmental Research: Ecology 2026 Co-Author Reflectance Spectroscopy

Research question: Can reflectance spectroscopy distinguish biocrust successional stages under both dry and wet conditions?

Approach: The manuscript uses a 350–2500 nm spectroscopy library of more than 700 samples spanning dry and wet conditions. A hierarchical scheme separates biocrusts from bare soil and resolves lightly-pigmented cyanobacteria, darkly-pigmented cyanobacteria, nitrogen-fixing lichens, non-nitrogen-fixing lichens, and mosses.

Research focus: The work evaluates classification across the successional sequence and identifies informative wavelength regions to support monitoring with narrow-band imaging spectroscopy.

Status: Under review at Environmental Research: Ecology. Co-author.

5

New opportunities for global monitoring of vulnerable biological soil crust

In Preparation 2026 First Author Co-Corresponding Author Global Monitoring

Research question: How can emerging imaging spectroscopy missions make vulnerable biocrust communities observable from space?

Research focus: This perspective examines how diagnostic signals of pigments, hydration, organic matter, and mineral substrates can support estimates of biocrust cover, composition, and condition.

Proposed direction: The manuscript brings together spectral-spatial fusion, machine learning upscaling, and a coordinated ground observation network (CrustNet), with the goal of tracking degradation, recovery, and climate-driven community change.

Status: Manuscript in preparation. First author and co-corresponding author.

6

NASA Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) – Dryland Ecosystem Mapping with Multiscale Hyperspectral Remote Sensing

NASA-Funded Project 2026–Present Ongoing University of Arizona Dryland Mapping

Research focus: Mapping plant and soil community composition and functional diversity across the Colorado Plateau and global drylands.

My contribution: Integrating NASA EMIT with drone, airborne, and satellite observations to develop maps of biocrust cover, community composition, and function.

Approach: The project connects EMIT imaging spectroscopy with complementary drone observations, airborne GEMx data, and satellite datasets including EnMAP and PACE. It emphasizes biological soil crust communities of cyanobacteria, mosses, and lichens and their roles in soil stabilization, fertility, water cycling, and carbon exchange.

Collaboration: Working with Prof. William Smith at the University of Arizona, the NASA EMIT Science and Applications Team, and researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey. Postdoctoral Research Associate; January 2026–present.

Agricultural remote sensing across scales: cotton leaf, crop canopy, agricultural fields, and regional landscape
Earlier research & applications

Agricultural Remote Sensing & Crop Growth Modeling

My earlier work combined satellite observations, process-based crop models, and data assimilation to estimate crop growth and yield. This foundation informs my current research connecting remote sensing with ecosystem processes.

1

Crop Yield Estimation at Field Scales by Assimilating Time Series of Sentinel-2 Data into a Modified CASA-WOFOST Coupled Model

IEEE TGRS 2022 Data Assimilation Crop Yield Sentinel-2

Select a figure to enlarge it. Use 100% to read it at its original size.

Rapidly and accurately estimating yields at field scales is very significant. Each type of currently used yield estimation model has been well studied, yet all have certain limitations. Based on a coupled Carnegie-Ames-Stanford approach (CASA)–World Food Studies (WOFOST) model and time series Sentinel-2 imagery, we achieved daily crop simulations and crop yield estimations at two adjacent farms in China.

Left: Location of the study areas and the crop type distribution map.  Right: Distribution of sampling points during the growing season.
Left: Spatial distribution map of yield simulations by different models and the corresponding performance.  Right: Representative fields with sampling quadrats showing the relationship between yield distribution and DEM.
  1. Compared with the WOFOST model, the coupled CASA-WOFOST model provided a much faster running speed in yield simulations and similar accuracy.
  2. Compared with the CASA model, the coupled model provided higher simulation accuracy in mountainous areas and regions of uneven terrain.
2

Comparison of Machine Learning Regression Algorithms for Cotton Leaf Area Index Retrieval Using Sentinel-2 Spectral Bands

Applied Sciences 2019 LAI Retrieval Machine Learning Sentinel-2

Select a figure to enlarge it. Use 100% to read it at its original size.

Leaf area index (LAI) is a crucial crop biophysical parameter widely used in various fields. Five machine learning regression algorithms (MLRAs) — ANN, SVR, GPR, Random Forest, and Gradient Boosting Regression Tree (GBRT) — were used to retrieve cotton LAI with Sentinel-2 spectral bands. The performances of the five models are compared for better applications of MLRAs in remote sensing.

We conducted the comparison of five MLRAs in an agricultural area of Northwest China over three cotton seasons with corresponding field campaigns for modeling and validation. Results show that the GBRT model outperforms the other models with respect to model accuracy on average.

Upper: Location of study area and in-situ LAI quadrats from three field campaigns.  Bottom: Final cotton LAI map obtained using GBRT model, masked by cotton fields.
Upper: Sensitivity of ML models to training sample size.  Bottom: Performance of different ML models for estimating LAI.

A connected approach

From signals to understanding.

  1. Measure

    Field spectroscopy, plant traits, and ecological experiments reveal the biological meaning of spectral signals.

  2. Scale

    Radiative transfer, machine learning, and data fusion connect field observations with drone, airborne, and satellite measurements.

  3. Understand

    Functional observations and ecosystem models help explain responses to fragmentation, disturbance, and climate change.

Future directions

Making ecosystem function observable.

My next steps connect physical models, machine learning, and ecological experiments to reveal how ecosystem function changes and recovers across scales.

  • Transferable retrievals

    Combine physical models and machine learning to improve transferability and quantify uncertainty.

  • Finer-scale function

    Resolve functional heterogeneity from plants and patches to landscapes.

  • Change & recovery

    Link observations, experiments, and ecosystem models to study fragmentation, climate extremes, and biocrust vulnerability.