Comparing multispectral and hyperspectral UAV data for detecting peatland vegetation patterns

被引:3
|
作者
Pang, Yuwen [1 ]
Rasanen, Aleksi [2 ,3 ]
Wolff, Franziska [4 ]
Tahvanainen, Teemu [5 ]
Mannikko, Milja [6 ]
Aurela, Mika [6 ]
Korpelainen, Pasi [4 ]
Kumpula, Timo [4 ]
Virtanen, Tarmo [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Helsinki, Fac Biol & Environm Sci, Ecosyst & Environm Res Program, Environm Change Res Unit ECRU, Helsinki, Finland
[2] Nat Resources Inst Finland Luke, Oulu, Finland
[3] Univ Oulu, Geog Res Unit, Oulu, Finland
[4] Univ Eastern Finland, Dept Geog & Hist Studies, Joensuu, Finland
[5] Univ Eastern Finland, Dept Environm & Biol Sci, Joensuu, Finland
[6] Finnish Meteorol Inst, Helsinki, Finland
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
Peatland vegetation mapping; Hyperspectral remote sensing; Geographic object-based image analysis; Random forest; IMAGE-ANALYSIS; CARBON STOCKS; R PACKAGE; SEGMENTATION; COMMUNITIES; SCALE; CLASSIFICATION; SELECTION; FOREST;
D O I
10.1016/j.jag.2024.104043
中图分类号
TP7 [遥感技术];
学科分类号
081102 ; 0816 ; 081602 ; 083002 ; 1404 ;
摘要
Northern peatland vegetation exhibits fine-scale spatial and spectral heterogeneity that can potentially be captured with uncrewed aerial vehicle (UAV) data due to their ultra-high spatial resolution (<10 cm). From this perspective, the contribution of different spectral sensors in mapping various vegetation characteristics has not been thoroughly investigated. We delineated spatial patterns of plant community clusters, plant functional types (PFTs), and selected plant species with UAV hyperspectral (HS), UAV multispectral (MS), and airborne LiDAR (light detection and ranging) topography (TP) data in two northern peatlands. We conducted random forest (RF) regressions in a geographic object-based image analysis (GEOBIA) framework and compared the relative contributions of the different datasets. In the best regression models, the percentage of explained variance was 24-74 % (RMSE:0.24-0.31), 40-90 % (RMSE:0.12-0.41), and 18-90 % (RMSE:0.03-0.40) for plant community clusters, PFTs, and plant species, respectively. The MS-TP combination had, in many cases, the highest performance, while HS-based models had better performance for some plant community clusters, PFTs, and plant species. TP features were useful only in certain situations. Overall, our results suggest that UAV MS imagery combined with TP data outperformed or performed at least almost as well as the models using UAV HS data and while all data combinations are capable for fine-scale detection of vegetation in northern peatlands. A more comprehensive investigations of data processing and methodology selection is needed to conclude if there is an added value of UAV HS data for peatland vegetation monitoring.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Hyperspectral image sharpening using multispectral data
    Winter, ME
    Winter, EM
    Beaven, SG
    Ratkowski, AJ
    ALGORITHMS AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR MULTISPECTRAL, HYPERSPECTRAL, AND ULTRASPECTRAL IMAGERY XI, 2005, 5806 : 794 - 803
  • [32] HYPERSPECTRAL AND MULTISPECTRAL DATA FUSION BY A REGULARIZATION CONSIDERING
    Takeyama, Saori
    Ono, Shunsuke
    Kumazawa, Itsuo
    2019 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ACOUSTICS, SPEECH AND SIGNAL PROCESSING (ICASSP), 2019, : 2152 - 2156
  • [33] Hyperspectral image sharpening using multispectral data
    Winter, Michael E.
    Winter, Edwin M.
    Beaven, Scott G.
    Ratkowski, Anthony J.
    2007 IEEE AEROSPACE CONFERENCE, VOLS 1-9, 2007, : 2079 - 2087
  • [34] Criteria Comparison for Classifying Peatland Vegetation Types Using In Situ Hyperspectral Measurements
    Erudel, Thierry
    Fabre, Sophie
    Houet, Thomas
    Mazier, Florence
    Briottet, Xavier
    REMOTE SENSING, 2017, 9 (07)
  • [35] Estimation of Winter Wheat Yield Using Multiple Temporal Vegetation Indices Derived from UAV-Based Multispectral and Hyperspectral Imagery
    Liu, Yu
    Sun, Liang
    Liu, Binhui
    Wu, Yongfeng
    Ma, Juncheng
    Zhang, Wenying
    Wang, Bianyin
    Chen, Zhaoyang
    REMOTE SENSING, 2023, 15 (19)
  • [36] UAV BASED HYPERSPECTRAL REMOTE SENSING AND CNN FOR VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION
    Sankararao, Adduru U. G.
    Rajalakshmi, P.
    2022 IEEE INTERNATIONAL GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING SYMPOSIUM (IGARSS 2022), 2022, : 7737 - 7740
  • [37] WETLAND VEGETATION INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT WITH LOW ALTITUDE MULTISPECTRAL UAV IMAGERY
    Boon, M. A.
    Tesfamichael, S.
    INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES IN GEOMATICS (VOLUME XLII-2/W6), 2017, 42-2 (W6): : 55 - 62
  • [38] Estimation of vegetation fraction using RGB and multispectral images from UAV
    de Jesus Marcial-Pablo, Mariana
    Gonzalez-Sanchez, Alberto
    Ivan Jimenez-Jimenez, Sergio
    Ernesto Ontiveros-Capurata, Ronald
    Ojeda-Bustamante, Waldo
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING, 2019, 40 (02) : 420 - 438
  • [39] Multispectral and hyperspectral remote sensing for identification and mapping of wetland vegetation: a review
    Elhadi Adam
    Onisimo Mutanga
    Denis Rugege
    Wetlands Ecology and Management, 2010, 18 : 281 - 296
  • [40] Limitations of a Multispectral UAV Sensor for Satellite Validation and Mapping Complex Vegetation
    Cottrell, Brendan
    Kalacska, Margaret
    Arroyo-Mora, Juan-Pablo
    Lucanus, Oliver
    Inamdar, Deep
    Loke, Trond
    Soffer, Raymond J.
    REMOTE SENSING, 2024, 16 (13)