[go: up one dir, main page]

 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Search Results (394)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = Landsat 7

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
19 pages, 57236 KiB  
Article
Global Landslide Finder: Detecting the Time and Place of Landslides with Dense Earth Observation Time Series
by Muhammad Aufaristama, Harald van der Werff, Andries E. J. Botha and Mark van der Meijde
GeoHazards 2024, 5(3), 780-798; https://doi.org/10.3390/geohazards5030039 - 3 Aug 2024
Viewed by 611
Abstract
This paper presents a remote sensing approach for rapidly and automatically generating maps of surface disturbances caused by landslides on the global scale. Our approach not only identifies the locations of these disturbances but also pinpoints the estimated time of their occurrence. Using [...] Read more.
This paper presents a remote sensing approach for rapidly and automatically generating maps of surface disturbances caused by landslides on the global scale. Our approach not only identifies the locations of these disturbances but also pinpoints the estimated time of their occurrence. Using the Continuous Change Detection and Classification (CCDC) algorithm within the Google Earth Engine (GEE) platform, we analyzed two decades of Landsat 5, 7, and 8 surface reflectance data. We tested this approach in five landslide-prone regions: Iburi (Japan), Kashmir (Pakistan), Karnataka (India), Porgera (Papua New Guinea), and Pasang Lhamu (Nepal). The results were promising, with R2 values ranging up to 0.85, indicating a robust correlation between detected disturbances and actual landslide events compared to manually made inventories. The accuracy metrics further validated our method, with a producer’s accuracy of 75%, a user’s accuracy of 73%, and an F1 score of 75%. Furthermore, the method proved well transferable across different locations. These findings demonstrate the method’s potential as a valuable tool for near real-time and historical analysis of landslide activity, thereby contributing to global disaster management and mitigation efforts. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Locations of five study areas prone to landslides with historical landslide events from 2000 to 2020. This map highlights Iburi (Japan), Kashmir (Pakistan), Karnataka (India), Porgera (Papua New Guinea), and Pasang Lhamu (Nepal). (The base map is from Esri World Imagery).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>NDVI time series of selected pixels in the Iburi region, Japan. The first chart shows a deviation from the typical NDVI pattern toward the end of 2018. The second chart shows a stable NDVI without significant disturbances. The third chart reveals deviations from the expected NDVI trajectory, corresponding to disturbances occurring around 2006 and 2010 (The base map is from Esri World Imagery).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The cumulative map of land disturbances from 1 January 2000 to 1 January 2020, in the Iburi region, with the color gradient representing the timing of disturbances. (The base map is from Esri World Imagery).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison of areal coverage of landslides mapped per SU between the proposed method and reference inventory: (<b>a</b>) Iburi; (<b>b</b>) Kashmir; (<b>c</b>) Karnataka; (<b>d</b>) Papua New Guinea.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4 Cont.
<p>Comparison of areal coverage of landslides mapped per SU between the proposed method and reference inventory: (<b>a</b>) Iburi; (<b>b</b>) Kashmir; (<b>c</b>) Karnataka; (<b>d</b>) Papua New Guinea.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4 Cont.
<p>Comparison of areal coverage of landslides mapped per SU between the proposed method and reference inventory: (<b>a</b>) Iburi; (<b>b</b>) Kashmir; (<b>c</b>) Karnataka; (<b>d</b>) Papua New Guinea.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Scatter plot of landslide areas mapped for each SU between the proposed method and reference inventory: (<b>a</b>) Iburi; (<b>b</b>) Kashmir; (<b>c</b>) Karnataka; (<b>d</b>) Papua New Guinea.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to 1 January 2020, in the Iburi region, with the color gradient representing the timing of disturbances. Superimposed are polygons that outline the reference inventory of landslides that occurred in 2018, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Omission and commission errors with the chi-square probability threshold changing from 0.80 to 0.99.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>The process for intersecting the polygons of a landslide inventory with slope units to create a landslide density map. The density map shows, in percentage, the landslide coverage within each slope unit.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to 1 January 2020, in the Kashmir region, with the color gradient representing the timing of each disturbance. Superimposed on this map are polygons that outline the reference inventory of landslides that occurred in 2005, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. Star symbols pinpoint activities that resulted in numbers of changed pixel spikes but are not associated with landslides. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A2 Cont.
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to 1 January 2020, in the Kashmir region, with the color gradient representing the timing of each disturbance. Superimposed on this map are polygons that outline the reference inventory of landslides that occurred in 2005, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. Star symbols pinpoint activities that resulted in numbers of changed pixel spikes but are not associated with landslides. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to 1 January 2020, in the Karnataka region, with the color gradient representing the timing of each disturbance. Superimposed on this map are polygons that outline the reference inventory of landslides that occurred in 2018, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A3 Cont.
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to 1 January 2020, in the Karnataka region, with the color gradient representing the timing of each disturbance. Superimposed on this map are polygons that outline the reference inventory of landslides that occurred in 2018, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A4
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to 1 January 2020, in the Papua New Guinea region, with the color gradient representing the timing of each disturbance. Superimposed on this map are polygons that outline the reference inventory of landslides that occurred in 2018, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A4 Cont.
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to 1 January 2020, in the Papua New Guinea region, with the color gradient representing the timing of each disturbance. Superimposed on this map are polygons that outline the reference inventory of landslides that occurred in 2018, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A5
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to January 1, 2020, in the Karnataka region, with the color gradient representing the timing of each disturbance. Superimposed on this map are points that outline the reference initiation points of landslides that occurred between 2009 and 2018, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure A5 Cont.
<p>Panel (<b>a</b>) illustrates the cumulative map of land disturbances from 2000 to January 1, 2020, in the Karnataka region, with the color gradient representing the timing of each disturbance. Superimposed on this map are points that outline the reference initiation points of landslides that occurred between 2009 and 2018, providing a spatial context for the disturbances depicted. Panel (<b>b</b>) depicts the time series of the number of changed pixels; notable spikes in the graph reflect increased detection of changes, the dashed line corresponds with a specific disturbance event. The number of changed pixels is calculated based on the entire area of the region in the <b>left panel</b> in Figure (<b>a</b>).</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 7207 KiB  
Article
Multi-Source Remote Sensing Analysis of Yilong Lake’s Surface Water Dynamics (1965–2022): A Temporal and Spatial Investigation
by Ningying Bao, Weifeng Song, Jiangang Ma and Ya Chu
Water 2024, 16(14), 2058; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16142058 - 20 Jul 2024
Viewed by 514
Abstract
With the acceleration of global warming and the intensification of anthropogenic activities, numerous lakes worldwide are experiencing reductions in their water surface areas. Yilong Lake, a typical shallow plateau lake located on the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau in China, serves as a crucial water resource [...] Read more.
With the acceleration of global warming and the intensification of anthropogenic activities, numerous lakes worldwide are experiencing reductions in their water surface areas. Yilong Lake, a typical shallow plateau lake located on the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau in China, serves as a crucial water resource for local human production, daily life, and ecosystem services. Hence, long-term comprehensive monitoring of its dynamic changes is essential for its effective protection. However, previous studies have predominantly utilized remote sensing data with limited temporal resolution, thus failing to reflect the long-term variations in Yilong Lake’s water body. This study employs high temporal resolution monitoring, utilizing multi-source satellite data (e.g., KeyHole, Landsat, HJ-1 A/B) images spanning from 1965 to 2022 to investigate the changes in Yilong Lake’s surface area, analyzing the influencing factors and ecological impacts of these changes. The results indicate that from 1965 to 2022, Yilong Lake’s water surface area decreased by 8.33 km2, with a maximum surface area of 40.49 km2 on 7 January 1986, and a minimum surface area of 10.64 km2 on 20 April 2013. These changes are characterized by three significant phases: (1) a rapid shrinking phase (1965–1979); (2) a fluctuating shrinking period (1986–2016); and (3) an expanding recovery phase (2016–2022). Spatially, the most significant shrinkage was observed along the southern and southwestern shores of the lake. The driving factors varied across different periods: sunshine duration was the dominant influence during the rapid shrinking phase (1965–1979), accounting for 82% of the changes; population and cropland area were the main drive factors during the fluctuating shrinking period (1986–2016), accounting for 56% of the changes; and during the expanding recovery phase (2016–2022), the population accounted for 75% of the changes in the lake’s surface area. Currently, the protection of Yilong Lake depends on water supplementation and strict regulation of outflow, resulting in the lake exhibiting characteristics similar to a reservoir. This long-term investigation provides baseline information for future lake monitoring. Our research findings can also guide decision-makers in urban water resource management and environmental protection, ensuring the scientific and rational use of watershed water resources, effectively curbing the shrinkage of Yilong Lake, and achieving long-term sustainable restoration of the lake’s ecology. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Hydrology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Geographic location of Yilong Lake Basin in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Temporal distributions of remote sensing images used in this study: (<b>a</b>) annual distributions of remote sensing images; (<b>b</b>) monthly distributions of remote sensing images.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Method flowchart illustrating analytical process.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Lake’s surface area changes (1965–2022): (<b>a</b>) annual maximum extent; (<b>b</b>) annual minimum extent; (<b>c</b>) annual average extent. (Note: The red dotted lines represents the linear trends).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Seasonal changes in lake’s surface area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Inter-annual variations in the spatial extent of Yilong Lake (1965–2022). (Note: red rectangle represents the permanently disappearing lake’s surface area).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Trends in meteorological factors influencing Yilong Lake (1965–2022): (<b>a</b>) annual average air temperature; (<b>b</b>) monthly average air temperature; (<b>c</b>) annual precipitation; (<b>d</b>) monthly average precipitation; (<b>e</b>) annual evaporation; (<b>f</b>) monthly average evaporation; (<b>g</b>) annual sunshine duration; (<b>h</b>) monthly average sunshine duration. (Note: The red dotted lines represents the linear trends).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Anthropogenic impacts on the Yilong Lake Basin (1965–2022): (<b>a</b>) GDP trends; (<b>b</b>) population growth; (<b>c</b>) changes in cropland area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Distribution and temporal changes in dikes and tunnels in the Yilong Lake Basin: (<b>a</b>) spatial distribution of dikes; (<b>b</b>) original period; (<b>c</b>) dikes in 1970; (<b>d</b>) dikes in 1975; (<b>e</b>) dikes in 1977; (<b>f</b>) permanent drought areas in 1987; (<b>g</b>) permanent drought areas in 1990.</p>
Full article ">
11 pages, 4435 KiB  
Communication
Dynamic Monitoring of Poyang Lake Water Area and Storage Changes from 2002 to 2022 via Remote Sensing and Satellite Gravimetry Techniques
by Fengwei Wang, Qing Zhou, Haipeng Gao, Yanlin Wen and Shijian Zhou
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(13), 2408; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16132408 - 30 Jun 2024
Viewed by 681
Abstract
The monitoring of Poyang Lake water area and storage changes using remote sensing and satellite gravimetry techniques is valuable for maintaining regional water resource security and addressing the challenges of global climate change. In this study, remote sensing datasets from Landsat images (Landsat [...] Read more.
The monitoring of Poyang Lake water area and storage changes using remote sensing and satellite gravimetry techniques is valuable for maintaining regional water resource security and addressing the challenges of global climate change. In this study, remote sensing datasets from Landsat images (Landsat 5, 7, 8 and 9) and three Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and Gravity Follow-on (GRACE-FO) mascon solutions were jointly used to evaluate the water area and storage changes in response to global and regional climate changes. The results showed that seasonal characteristics existed in the terrestrial water storage (TWS) and water area changes of Poyang Lake, with nearly no significant long-term trend, for the period from April 2002 to December 2022. Poyang Lake exhibited the largest water area in June and July every year and then demonstrated a downward trend, with relatively smaller water areas in January and November, confirmed by the estimated TWS changes. For the flood (August 2010) and drought (September 2022) events, the water area changes are 3032 km2 and 813.18 km2, with those estimated TWS changes 17.37 cm and −17.46 cm, respectively. The maximum and minimum Poyang Lake area differences exceeded 2700 km2. The estimated terrestrial water storage changes in Poyang Lake derived from the three GRACE/GRACE-FO mascon solutions agreed well, with all correlation coefficients higher than 0.92. There was a significant positive correlation higher than 0.75 between the area and TWS changes derived from the two independent monitoring techniques. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that combined remote sensing with satellite gravimetric techniques can better interpret the response of Poyang Lake to climate change from the aspects of water area and TWS changes more efficiently. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Geophysical Applications of GOCE and GRACE Measurements)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study region of Poyang Lake (revised from Huan et al. [<a href="#B20-remotesensing-16-02408" class="html-bibr">20</a>]).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Changes in the water area of Poyang Lake from April 2002 to December 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Water area of Poyang Lake extracted by the decision tree method for 2017.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3 Cont.
<p>Water area of Poyang Lake extracted by the decision tree method for 2017.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>TWS changes estimated from the three GRACE/GRACE-FO mascon solutions and the water area changes derived from Landsat images for the overlapped months over the period from April 2002 to December 2022. Note: water area changes derived from Landsat images; TWS changes derived from the three GRACE/GRACE-FO mascon solutions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Water area changes (<b>a</b>) and (<b>b</b>) in Poyang Lake and the corresponding TWS changes (<b>c</b>) and (<b>d</b>) for August 2010 and September 2022 derived from Landsat images and GRACE/GRACE-FO solutions. Note that the dashed box represents Poyang Lake when estimating TWS changes from the GRACE/GRACE-FO mascon solutions.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 25577 KiB  
Article
Application of Remote Sensing for Identifying Soil Erosion Processes on a Regional Scale: An Innovative Approach to Enhance the Erosion Potential Model
by Siniša Polovina, Boris Radić, Ratko Ristić and Vukašin Milčanović
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(13), 2390; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16132390 - 28 Jun 2024
Viewed by 775
Abstract
Soil erosion represents a complex ecological issue that is present on a global level, with negative consequences for environmental quality, the conservation and availability of natural resources, population safety, and material security, both in rural and urban areas. To mitigate the harmful effects [...] Read more.
Soil erosion represents a complex ecological issue that is present on a global level, with negative consequences for environmental quality, the conservation and availability of natural resources, population safety, and material security, both in rural and urban areas. To mitigate the harmful effects of soil erosion, a soil erosion map can be created. Broadly applied in the Balkan Peninsula region (Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Greece), the Erosion Potential Method (EPM) is an empirical erosion model that is widely applied in the process of creating soil erosion maps. In this study, an innovation in the process of the identification and mapping of erosion processes was made, creating a coefficient of the types and extent of erosion and slumps (φ), representing one of the most sensitive parameters in the EPM. The process of creating the coefficient (φ) consisted of applying remote sensing methods and satellite images from a Landsat mission. The research area for which the satellite images were obtained and thematic maps of erosion processes (coefficient φ) were created is the area of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Brčko District (situated in Bosnia and Herzegovina). The Google Earth Engine (GEE) platform was employed to process and retrieve Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper plus (ETM+) and Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager and Thermal Infrared Sensor (OLI/TIRS) satellite imagery over a period of ten years (from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020). The mapping and identification of erosion processes were performed based on the Bare Soil Index (BSI) and by applying the equation for fractional bare soil cover. The spatial–temporal distribution of fractional bare soil cover enabled the definition of coefficient (φ) values in the field. An accuracy assessment was conducted based on 190 reference samples from the field using a confusion matrix, overall accuracy (OA), user accuracy (UA), producer accuracy (PA), and the Kappa statistic. Using the confusion matrix, an OA of 85.79% was obtained, while UA ranged from 33% to 100%, and PA ranged from 50% to 100%. Applying the Kappa statistic, an accuracy of 0.82 was obtained, indicating a high level of accuracy. The availability of a time series of multispectral satellite images for each month is a crucial element in monitoring the occurrence of erosion processes of various types (surface, mixed, and deep) in the field. Additionally, it contributes significantly to decision-making, strategies, and plans in the domain of erosion control work, the development of plans for identifying erosion-prone areas, plans for defense against torrential floods, and the creation of soil erosion maps at local, regional, and national levels. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Remote Sensing of Soil Science)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study area: 1—the Federation of Bosnia and Hercegovina (FBiH); 2—the Brčko District (BD); 3—the Republic of Srpska (RSR); BiH—Bosnia and Hercegovina; SRB—Serbia; MNE—Montenegro; HR—Croatia.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Workflow using remote sensing in the calculation of the coefficient of type and extent of erosion and slumps (φ). Note: Z—Erosion coefficient; Y—soil erodibility coefficient; X—land cover coefficient; a—soil protection measures coefficient; Imean—the mean slope of the terrain; BSI—the bare soil index.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Flowchart of downloading multi-temporal satellite images and the spectral BSI using the GEE platform.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The spatial distribution of the average BSI from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The histogram distribution of the average BSI from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The spatial distribution of the coefficient φ from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The histogram distribution of the coefficient φ from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The categories of the coefficient of type and extent of erosion and slumps (φ) from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The spatial distribution of reference samples for validating the coefficient φ values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Coefficient φ obtained based on the BSI (sample 157 with φ = 0.81; sample 176 with φ = 0.75; sample 177 with φ = 0.75; sample 178 with φ = 0.78; sample 179 with φ = 0.52; sample 180 with φ = 0.69).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>A satellite image with samples 157, 176, 177, 178, 179, and 180.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Samples 157, 176, 177, 178, 179, and 180 after field investigations.</p>
Full article ">
36 pages, 16735 KiB  
Article
Scenario Analysis of Shorelines, Coastal Erosion, and Land Use/Land Cover Changes and Their Implication for Climate Migration in East and West Africa
by Oye Ideki and Osinachi Ajoku
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2024, 12(7), 1081; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071081 - 26 Jun 2024
Viewed by 800
Abstract
Climate change-induced sea level rise, shoreline changes, and coastal erosion are projected to drive massive population displacement and mobility in Africa. This study was conducted to examine the pattern of shoreline changes, coastal erosion, land use/land cover dynamics, projections, and their implications on [...] Read more.
Climate change-induced sea level rise, shoreline changes, and coastal erosion are projected to drive massive population displacement and mobility in Africa. This study was conducted to examine the pattern of shoreline changes, coastal erosion, land use/land cover dynamics, projections, and their implications on internal migration in Senegal, Kenya, and Tanzania, representing West and East Africa. The digitized shoreline was mapped into erosion, accretion, and trend analysis, which further explains the vulnerability and physical processes that could trigger human displacement within the context of environmental/climate migration. Analysis of land use and land cover dynamics was obtained from Landsat 5 TM of 1986, Landsat 7 ET of 2006, Landsat 8 OLI/TIRS of 2016, and Landsat 9 OLI/TIRS of 2022 and computed using ArcGIS 10.7 for land-use change and percentage change in square kilometers was conducted to examine land use/land cover dynamics and their contributions to the risk of coastal erosion in the study regions. The outcome of the shoreline analysis reveals that 972.03 sqkm of land has been lost to coastal erosion in Senegal from 1986 to 2022 with 2016–2022 described as the period with the highest in terms of land loss. In Kenya, −463.30 sqkm of land has also been lost to coastal erosion and agents of wave processes, with 1986–2006 recording the highest share of −87.74% loss of valuable land, while in Tanzania, −1033.35 sqkm of valuable land has been lost from 1986 to 2022 to coastal erosion, with 2006–2016 alone recording −10.4634% of land loss. The result of the land use/land cover percentage change analysis indicates a massive loss of vegetation cover with a significant increase in settlement representing urbanization. The scenario analysis of the shoreline at 10, 20, and 30 m indicates that 567 persons per sqkm at 10 m, 25,904.6 persons per sqkm at 20 m, and 25,904.5 persons per sqkm will be displaced in Senegal at 30 m. In Kenya, 57,746 persons per sqkm are projected to be displaced at 10 m while 1210.5 persons per sqkm will be displaced at 20 m and 7737.32 persons per sqkm will be displaced at 30 m. In Tanzania, the maximum population density projected to be displaced at 10, 20, and 30 m is 10,260.97 per sqkm. Structured questionnaires were administered to elicit responses from coastal dwellers on their perception of coastal erosion and climate migration as part of ground truthing and the result of the survey affirms that coastal erosion and its exposure are the major drivers of climate migration in the study area. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Coastal Engineering)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of Africa showing the study area: Senegal, Kenya and Tanzania.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Erosion along the shoreline in Senegal, Tanzania, and Kenya.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Accretion along the shoreline in Senegal, Tanzania, and Kenya.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Net change trend of land loss (sqkm).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Shoreline changes along Senegal’s coast from 1986 to 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>A section of the coastline of Senegal showing the shorelines of different years.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Shoreline changes along Kenya’s coast from 1986 to 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>A section of the coastline of Tanzania showing the shorelines of different years.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Shoreline scenario modeling on land use/land cover in Senegal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Land use/land cover change: (<b>a</b>) 1986, (<b>b</b>) 2006, (<b>c</b>) 2016, and (<b>d</b>) 2022 in Senegal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Graphical representation of land cover composition and change from 1986 to 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Land use/land cover changes in Kenya: 1986 (<b>a</b>) 1986, (<b>b</b>) 2006, (<b>c</b>) 2016, and (<b>d</b>) 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Composition of land use/land cover in Tanzania.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Land use/land cover change analysis in Tanzania: (<b>a</b>) 1986, (<b>b</b>) 2006, (<b>c</b>) 2016, and (<b>d</b>) 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14 Cont.
<p>Land use/land cover change analysis in Tanzania: (<b>a</b>) 1986, (<b>b</b>) 2006, (<b>c</b>) 2016, and (<b>d</b>) 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Shoreline scenario modeling on land use/land cover.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Communities and population displacement at 10 m shoreline shift in Senegal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Communities and population displacement at 20 m shoreline shift in Senegal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Communities and population displacement at 30 m shoreline shift in Senegal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Shoreline changes on land use/land cover.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Scenario analysis of Shoreline shift on land use in Tanzania.</p>
Full article ">Figure 21
<p>Effect of shoreline scenarios on population density (sq/km) in Kenya.</p>
Full article ">Figure 22
<p>Survey on major drivers of environmental migration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 23
<p>Degree of exposure to coastal erosion.</p>
Full article ">Figure 24
<p>Degree of impact of natural hazards.</p>
Full article ">Figure 25
<p>Gender dimensions of migration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 26
<p>Reflectiveness as a coping strategy.</p>
Full article ">Figure 27
<p>Changing jobs as a coping strategy.</p>
Full article ">Figure 28
<p>Protection of the shoreline/building of sea walls.</p>
Full article ">Figure 29
<p>Sharing and bearing as a coping strategy.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 9268 KiB  
Article
Coastal Dune Vegetation Dynamism and Anthropogenic-Induced Transitions in the Mexican Caribbean during the Last Decade
by Eloy Gayosso-Soto, Sergio Cohuo, Joan Alberto Sánchez-Sánchez, Carmen Amelia Villegas-Sánchez, José Manuel Castro-Pérez, Leopoldo Querubín Cutz-Pool and Laura Macario-González
Plants 2024, 13(13), 1734; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13131734 - 23 Jun 2024
Viewed by 1331
Abstract
In the Mexican Caribbean, environmental changes, hydrometeorological events, and anthropogenic activities promote dynamism in the coastal vegetation cover associated with the dune; however, their pace and magnitude remain uncertain. Using Landsat 7 imagery, spatial and temporal changes in coastal dune vegetation were estimated [...] Read more.
In the Mexican Caribbean, environmental changes, hydrometeorological events, and anthropogenic activities promote dynamism in the coastal vegetation cover associated with the dune; however, their pace and magnitude remain uncertain. Using Landsat 7 imagery, spatial and temporal changes in coastal dune vegetation were estimated for the 2011–2020 period in the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve. The SAVI index revealed cover changes at different magnitudes and paces at the biannual, seasonal, and monthly timeframes. Climatic seasons had a significant influence on vegetation cover, with increases in cover during northerlies (SAVI: p = 0.000), while the topographic profile of the dune was relevant for structure. Distance-based multiple regressions and redundancy analysis showed that temperature had a significant effect (p < 0.05) on SAVI patterns, whereas precipitation showed little influence (p > 0.05). The Mann–Kendall tendency test indicated high dynamism in vegetation loss and recovery with no defined patterns, mostly associated with anthropogenic disturbance. High-density vegetation such as mangroves, palm trees, and shrubs was the most drastically affected, although a reduction in bare soil was also recorded. This study demonstrated that hydrometeorological events and climate variability in the long term have little influence on vegetation dynamism. Lastly, it was observed that anthropogenic activities promoted vegetation loss and transitions; however, the latter were also linked to recoveries in areas with pristine environments, relevant for tourism. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Box and whisker plots for the SAVI values by (<b>a</b>) zone and (<b>b</b>) climatic season. Solid horizontal lines represent the median of each group. Extreme outliers are represented by black dots. SAVI showed higher values and was more homogeneous in the NZ than in the SZ. SAVI showed higher values during the northerlies than during other climatic seasons.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Distribution of the Mann–Kendall trend in the northern zone (NZ) of the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve estimated from SAVI for the period 2011–2020. Maps (<b>a</b>–<b>f</b>) represent sections of the NZ overall tendency map.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Distribution of the Mann–Kendall trend in the southern zone (SZ) of the Sian Ka’an Biosphere reserve estimated from SAVI for the period 2011–2020. Maps (<b>a</b>–<b>f</b>) represent a section of the overall tendency map of the SZ.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Percentage of vegetation cover density for biannual periods for the coastal dune ecosystem in the (<b>a</b>) northern zone and (<b>b</b>) southern zone of the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve. Abbreviations are as follows: Bare Soil (BG); Low-Density Vegetation (LDV); Medium–Low-Density Vegetation (MLDV); Medium–High-Density Vegetation (MHDV); and High-Density Vegetation (HDV).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Biannual differences in vegetation cover density (expressed in percentage) as per the SAVI index for the coastal dune ecosystem in the (<b>a</b>) northern and (<b>b</b>) southern zones of the SKBR. Abbreviations for the x-axis are as follows: Bia: biannual periods, Bia1: 2011–2012; Bia2: 2013–2014; Bia3: 2015–2016; Bia4: 2017–2018; Bia5: 2019–2020. Abbreviations in the symbology are the same as in <a href="#plants-13-01734-f004" class="html-fig">Figure 4</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Spatial representation of the variation exhibited by SAVI values in the NZ and SZ by the different climatic seasons (northerlies, dry, and rainy). The most significant environmental climatic variables were Tmx: maximum temperature (°C), Tmn: minimum temperature (°C), and Prep: precipitation (mm).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Map showing the northern zone of Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve. Drone images (<b>a</b>–<b>f</b>) showing the anthropogenic impact on the dune ecosystem and its vegetation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Map showing the southern zone of Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve. Drone images (<b>a</b>–<b>f</b>) showing the anthropogenic impact on the dune ecosystem and its vegetation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Map showing the geographic position of the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve within the Mexican Caribbean. The reserve is divided into a (<b>a</b>) northern zone and a (<b>b</b>) southern zone. Colored zones correspond to the land use classification by the Mexican National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI). Only those classification categories relevant to the study area were used. Abbreviations are as follows: AH: human settlement; H2O: water; VM: mangrove vegetation; VU: coastal dune vegetation. Other land use and vegetation categories can be accessed through <a href="https://www.inegi.org.mx/app/biblioteca/ficha.html?upc=889463842781" target="_blank">https://www.inegi.org.mx/app/biblioteca/ficha.html?upc=889463842781</a> (accessed on 29 April 2024).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Workflow for the yearly estimation of (<b>a</b>) SAVI-NDVI during the 2011–2020 period and (<b>b</b>) Mann–Kendall trend for vegetation density change in the Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve.</p>
Full article ">
27 pages, 35655 KiB  
Article
An Improved Gap-Filling Method for Reconstructing Dense Time-Series Images from LANDSAT 7 SLC-Off Data
by Yue Li, Qiang Liu, Shuang Chen and Xiaotong Zhang
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(12), 2064; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16122064 - 7 Jun 2024
Viewed by 558
Abstract
Over recent decades, Landsat satellite data has evolved into a highly valuable resource across diverse fields. Long-term satellite data records with integrity and consistency, such as the Landsat series, provide indispensable data for many applications. However, the malfunction of the Scan Line Corrector [...] Read more.
Over recent decades, Landsat satellite data has evolved into a highly valuable resource across diverse fields. Long-term satellite data records with integrity and consistency, such as the Landsat series, provide indispensable data for many applications. However, the malfunction of the Scan Line Corrector (SLC) on the Landsat 7 satellite in 2003 resulted in stripping in subsequent images, compromising the temporal consistency and data quality of Landsat time-series data. While various methods have been proposed to improve the quality of Landsat 7 SLC-off data, existing gap-filling methods fail to enhance the temporal resolution of reconstructed images, and spatiotemporal fusion methods encounter challenges in managing large-scale datasets. Therefore, we propose a method for reconstructing dense time series from SLC-off data. This method utilizes the Neighborhood Similar Pixel Interpolator to fill in missing values and leverages the time-series information to reconstruct high-resolution images. Taking the blue band as an example, the surface reflectance verification results show that the Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and BIAS reach minimum values of 0.0069 and 0.0014, respectively, with the Correlation Coefficient (CC) and Structural Similarity Index Metric (SSIM) reaching 0.93 and 0.94. The proposed method exhibits advantages in repairing SLC-off data and reconstructing dense time-series data, enabling enhanced remote sensing applications and reliable Earth’s surface reflectance data reconstruction. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Quantitative Remote Sensing of Vegetation and Its Applications)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Landsat 7 SLC-off images at the study area in 2011–2013.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The validation reference images. (<b>a</b>) Landsat 5 TM image from 31 January 2011. (<b>b</b>) Landsat 5 TM image from 7 May 2011. (<b>c</b>) Landsat 8 OLI image from 1 September 2013. (<b>d</b>) Landsat 8 OLI image from 4 November 2013.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Landsat 7 ETM+ image and reconstruction images on 20 September 2011. (<b>a</b>) Landsat 7 ETM+ image. (<b>b</b>) The reconstruction image of IROBOT method. (<b>c</b>) The reconstruction image of Linear-ROBOT method. (<b>d</b>) The reconstruction image of IDW-ROBOT method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The reference image and reconstruction images on 31 January 2011. (<b>a</b>) Landsat 5 TM image. (<b>b</b>) The reconstruction image of IROBOT method. (<b>c</b>) The reconstruction image of Linear-ROBOT method. (<b>d</b>) The reconstruction image of IDW-ROBOT method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The scatter density plots for reflectance in blue band for Landsat 5 images and reconstructed images on 31 January 2011 are as follows: (<b>a</b>) depicts the scatter density plot of IROBOT reconstruction result; (<b>b</b>) shows the scatter density plot of Linear-ROBOT reconstruction result; and (<b>c</b>) displays the scatter density plot of IDW-ROBOT reconstruction result.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The reference image and reconstruction images on 7 May 2011. (<b>a</b>) Landsat 5 TM image. (<b>b</b>) The reconstruction image of IROBOT method on 7 May 2011. (<b>c</b>) The reconstruction image of Linear-ROBOT method on 7 May 2011. (<b>d</b>) The reconstruction image of IDW-ROBOT method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The scatter density plots for reflectance in blue band for Landsat 5 images and reconstructed images on 7 May 2011 are as follows: (<b>a</b>) depicts the scatter density plot of IROBOT reconstruction result; (<b>b</b>) shows the scatter density plot of Linear-ROBOT reconstruction result; and (<b>c</b>) displays the scatter density plot of IDW-ROBOT reconstruction result.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Landsat 7 OLI image and reconstruction images on 25 September 2013. (<b>a</b>) Landsat 7 OLI image via RMA regression. (<b>b</b>) The reconstruction image of IROBOT method. (<b>c</b>) The reconstruction image of Linear-ROBOT method. (<b>d</b>) The reconstruction image of IDW-ROBOT method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The reference image and reconstruction images on 1 September 2013. (<b>a</b>) Landsat 8 OLI image. (<b>b</b>) The reconstruction image of IROBOT method. (<b>c</b>) The reconstruction image of Linear-ROBOT method. (<b>d</b>) The reconstruction image of IDW-ROBOT method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9 Cont.
<p>The reference image and reconstruction images on 1 September 2013. (<b>a</b>) Landsat 8 OLI image. (<b>b</b>) The reconstruction image of IROBOT method. (<b>c</b>) The reconstruction image of Linear-ROBOT method. (<b>d</b>) The reconstruction image of IDW-ROBOT method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The scatter density plots for reflectance in blue band for Landsat 8 images and reconstructed images 1 September 2013 are as follows: (<b>a</b>) depicts the scatter density plot of IROBOT reconstruction result; (<b>b</b>) shows the scatter density plot of Linear-ROBOT reconstruction result; and (<b>c</b>) displays the scatter density plot of IDW-ROBOT reconstruction result.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The reference image and reconstruction images on 4 November 2013. (<b>a</b>) Landsat 8 OLI image. (<b>b</b>) The reconstruction image of IROBOT method. (<b>c</b>) The reconstruction image of Linear-ROBOT method. (<b>d</b>) The reconstruction image of IDW-ROBOT method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The scatter density plots for reflectance in blue band for Landsat 8 images and reconstructed images 4 November 2013 are as follows: (<b>a</b>) depicts the scatter density plot of IROBOT reconstruction result; (<b>b</b>) shows the scatter density plot of Linear-ROBOT reconstruction result; and (<b>c</b>) displays the scatter density plot of IDW-ROBOT reconstruction result.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>The reconstructed images on the 1st of each month with three methods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>NDVI mean time-series curve of <a href="#remotesensing-16-02064-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a>c within the red line.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The reconstruction results on 100th day of year 2012. (<b>a</b>) The image using the IROBOT method with 6 pairs of input images. (<b>b</b>) The image using the IROBOT method with 13 pairs of input images.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Images before and after gap-filling in Experiment I.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1 Cont.
<p>Images before and after gap-filling in Experiment I.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Images before and after gap-filling in Experiment Ⅱ.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2 Cont.
<p>Images before and after gap-filling in Experiment Ⅱ.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>The images reconstructed using the NSPI + ESTARFM method. (<b>a</b>) The reconstructed image on 31 January 2011. (<b>b</b>) The reconstructed image on 7 May 2011.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 11127 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of the Functional Connectivity between the Mangomarca Fog Oasis and the Adjacent Urban Area Using Landscape Graphs
by Pedro Amaya, Violeta Vega, Doris Esenarro, Oscar Cuya and Vanessa Raymundo
Forests 2024, 15(6), 1003; https://doi.org/10.3390/f15061003 - 7 Jun 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 591
Abstract
The present research aimed to measure the degree of connectivity and create a map of the ecological connectivity that highlights the real or potential presence of green, ecological, or ecotourism circuits integrating the green infrastructure of San Juan de Lurigancho and the Mangomarca [...] Read more.
The present research aimed to measure the degree of connectivity and create a map of the ecological connectivity that highlights the real or potential presence of green, ecological, or ecotourism circuits integrating the green infrastructure of San Juan de Lurigancho and the Mangomarca hills using graph theory applications implemented in the Graphab 2.8 software. Mangomarca and Huiracocha Park were selected for this study. In terms of the methodology, a simple approach based on landscape metrics, which are easy to interpret, was proposed to measure the connectivity of the mosaic of patches in the designated area. The IndiFrag software was used to obtain landscape metrics for the structural connectivity analysis. The Graphab software was employed for the functional connectivity analysis. Both tools proved effective in identifying vegetation gaps or the intensity of the greenery. Landsat 8 images from 8 July 2021 and 4 October 2021 were selected for this research due to the lower amount of cloud cover. Concerning the structural connectivity, the TMCl (patch size), NobCl (number of patches), and PerimCl (perimeter) metrics were effective in distinguishing the mosaic of urban landscape patches from the hill landscape. These indices confirm that the urban landscape patches have a higher number of fragments but are smaller in size compared to the hill landscape. Regarding the functional connectivity, it is evident that the patches are connected at lower-cost distances, averaging 7 cost units (210 m) during the wet season and 23 cost units (410 m) during the less humid season. However, these distances are too extensive and do not form ecological corridors. A survey of the population’s perception of the maximum separation distances between patches of vegetation cover that could still be considered a green corridor was included. The results indicate that a third of the sample (36%) prefer to walk down a hallway with a maximum separation distance of 10 m, while almost two-thirds (68%) would prefer a maximum separation distance of 50 m. Therefore, city planning should consider actions to reduce these distances and enable ecological connectivity in the area. It is recommended to continue researching the functional connectivity and determining the green corridors in the city to establish monitoring guidelines for the ecological connectivity of the city. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location of the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flowchart of the methodological procedure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>PCA of the landscape metrics by the NDVI threshold and image date.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>MDS of the landscape metrics by the NDVI threshold and image date.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Maximum cost or resistance distance for two NDVIs and two months.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Cost corridor 7 for the NDVI 0.05 image from 4 October 2021 showing the patches, Linkset, and the fragile ecosystem of the Mangomarca hills.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Cost corridor 10 for the NDVI 0.01 image from 4 October 2021, showing the patches of vegetation cover and the fragile ecosystem of Lomas de Mangomarca.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Cost corridor 22 for the NDVI 0.01 image from 4 October 2021, showing the patches of vegetation cover and the fragile ecosystem of Lomas de Mangomarca.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Cost corridor 8 for the NDVI 0.05 image from 7 August 2021, showing the patches of vegetation cover and the fragile ecosystem of the Mangomarca hills.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Cost corridor 23 for the NDVI 0.1 image from 7 August 2021, showing the patches of vegetation cover and the fragile ecosystem of the Mangomarca hills.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Links between patches of green areas 50 m apart.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Links between patches of green areas 100 m apart.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Links between patches of green areas 150 m apart.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Links between patches of green areas 500 m apart.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 9510 KiB  
Article
Retrieval of Crop Canopy Chlorophyll: Machine Learning vs. Radiative Transfer Model
by Mir Md Tasnim Alam, Anita Simic Milas, Mateo Gašparović and Henry Poku Osei
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(12), 2058; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16122058 - 7 Jun 2024
Viewed by 1221
Abstract
In recent years, the utilization of machine learning algorithms and advancements in unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technology have caused significant shifts in remote sensing practices. In particular, the integration of machine learning with physical models and their application in UAV–satellite data fusion have [...] Read more.
In recent years, the utilization of machine learning algorithms and advancements in unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technology have caused significant shifts in remote sensing practices. In particular, the integration of machine learning with physical models and their application in UAV–satellite data fusion have emerged as two prominent approaches for the estimation of vegetation biochemistry. This study evaluates the performance of five machine learning regression algorithms (MLRAs) for the mapping of crop canopy chlorophyll at the Kellogg Biological Station (KBS) in Michigan, USA, across three scenarios: (1) application to Landsat 7, RapidEye, and PlanetScope satellite images; (2) application to UAV–satellite data fusion; and (3) integration with the PROSAIL radiative transfer model (hybrid methods PROSAIL + MLRAs). The results indicate that the majority of the five MLRAs utilized in UAV–satellite data fusion perform better than the five PROSAIL + MLRAs. The general trend suggests that the integration of satellite data with UAV-derived information, including the normalized difference red-edge index (NDRE), canopy height model, and leaf area index (LAI), significantly enhances the performance of MLRAs. The UAV–RapidEye dataset exhibits the highest coefficient of determination (R2) and the lowest root mean square errors (RMSE) when employing kernel ridge regression (KRR) and Gaussian process regression (GPR) (R2 = 0.89 and 0.89 and RMSE = 8.99 µg/cm2 and 9.65 µg/cm2, respectively). Similar performance is observed for the UAV–Landsat and UAV–PlanetScope datasets (R2 = 0.86 and 0.87 for KRR, respectively). For the hybrid models, the maximum performance is attained with the Landsat data using KRR and GPR (R2 = 0.77 and 0.51 and RMSE = 33.10 µg/cm2 and 42.91 µg/cm2, respectively), followed by R2 = 0.75 and RMSE = 39.78 µg/cm2 for the PlanetScope data upon integrating partial least squares regression (PLSR) into the hybrid model. Across all hybrid models, the RapidEye data yield the most stable performance, with the R2 ranging from 0.45 to 0.71 and RMSE ranging from 19.16 µg/cm2 to 33.07 µg/cm2. The study highlights the importance of synergizing UAV and satellite data, which enables the effective monitoring of canopy chlorophyll in small agricultural lands. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Application of Satellite and UAV Data in Precision Agriculture)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study site (42°24′32.3″N, 85°22′23.8″W) with 24 parcels of corn grown under four chemical and management treatments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Images acquired in 2017 for the study site by Landsat 7 (8 August), RapidEye (9 August), PlanetScope (8 August), and UAV (11 August).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The flowchart illustrates the methods employed to derive the canopy chlorophyll content (CCC) across the study area. Note that MLRA stands for ‘machine learning regression algorithm’, which includes kernel ridge regression (KRR), least squares linear regression (LSLR), partial least squares regression (PLSR), Gaussian process regression (GPR), and neural networks (NN); NV signifies non-vegetated spectra.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Canopy chlorophyl content (CCC) maps generated from (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) Landsat 7, (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) RapidEye, and (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>) PlanetScope satellite images using the best-performing MLRA applied to satellite images, applied to fused UAV–satellite imagery, and integrated within the hybrid model (PROSAIL + MLRA) for each satellite dataset, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Relationship between measured and estimated canopy chlorophyll content (CCC) values for maps generated from (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) Landsat 7, (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) RapidEye, and (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>) PlanetScope satellite images using the best-performing MLRA applied to satellite images, applied to fused UAV–satellite imagery, and integrated within the hybrid model (PROSAIL + MLRA) for each satellite dataset, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Canopy chlorophyl content (CCC) maps generated from (<b>a</b>) UAV image; (<b>b</b>) UAV image including UAV-derived NDRE, LAI, and canopy height model; (<b>c</b>) hybrid (PROSAIL + MLRA) model applied to UAV image—all using the best-performing MLRA for each scenario—followed by graphs showing the relationship between the measured and estimated CCC.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 9781 KiB  
Article
Inner Niger Delta Inundation Extent (2010–2022) Based on Landsat Imagery and the Google Earth Engine
by Benjamin Bonkoungou, Aymar Yaovi Bossa, Johannes van der Kwast, Marloes Mul and Luc Ollivier Sintondji
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(11), 1853; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16111853 - 22 May 2024
Viewed by 608
Abstract
The Inner Niger Delta (IND), one of the largest floodplain systems in Africa, sustains the livelihoods of more than three million people and is a driver of the rural economy of Mali as far as agriculture, fish production, and livestock are concerned. Because [...] Read more.
The Inner Niger Delta (IND), one of the largest floodplain systems in Africa, sustains the livelihoods of more than three million people and is a driver of the rural economy of Mali as far as agriculture, fish production, and livestock are concerned. Because the IND ecosystem and economy are flood-dependent, it is important to monitor seasonal flooding variations. Many attempts to accomplish this task have relied on detailed datasets, such as daily discharge, daily rainfall, and evapotranspiration, which are not easily accessible for data-sparse areas. Additionally, because the area is large, this remains a challenging task. In this study, the interannual variability of seasonal inundation in the IND was investigated by leveraging the computing power of the Google Earth Engine and its large catalogue of open datasets. The main objective was to analyse the temporal and spatial distributions of the inundation extent during the last 13 years. A collection of Landsat 5, 7, 8, and 9 images were composited and different bands were used with various water and vegetation indices in a pixel-based supervised classification to detect the flood extent between 2010 and 2022. A significant improvement in classification accuracy was observed thanks to the different indices. The results suggest a general increasing trend in the maximum annual inundation extent. Throughout the study period, the maximum inundated area varied between 15,209 km2 in autumn 2011 and 21,536 km2 in autumn 2022. The upstream water intake led to a decrease of about 6–10% of the inundated area. Similar fluctuations in the inundated area, precipitation, and river discharge were observed. The proposed approach demonstrates a great potential for monitoring annual inundation, especially for large areas such as the IND, where in situ measurements are sparse. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Location of the study area in the Upper Niger Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>RGB (natural colour) composites of the Inner Niger Delta (13–16°N and 3–7°W) during the (<b>a</b>) dry season and (<b>b</b>) wet season.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Collected Landsat images of the study area: (<b>a</b>) Indicates the temporal distribution and (<b>b</b>) the seasonal distribution of the collected images. The cloud-cover threshold was set to a maximum of 5% for the collection.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Flow chart of major steps taken to generate the inundated area extent.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Results of surface water extraction using RF classification. The shaded areas in the maps of 2011 and 2012 represent the stripes present in Landsat 7 images caused by the failure of the Scan Line Corrector on 31 May 2003.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>Results of surface water extraction using RF classification. The shaded areas in the maps of 2011 and 2012 represent the stripes present in Landsat 7 images caused by the failure of the Scan Line Corrector on 31 May 2003.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Annual maximum flooded area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Annual rainfall of the Upper Niger and the inundated area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) Annual trend in the flood extent and peak discharge (November) at Mopti station. (<b>b</b>) Correlation between the flood extent and peak discharge.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Comparison between this study and the empirical method of Zwarts et al. [<a href="#B31-remotesensing-16-01853" class="html-bibr">31</a>] including an evaluation of the impact of water withdrawals. The daily discharge collected from DNH was only available up to 2020.</p>
Full article ">
36 pages, 6112 KiB  
Article
Greenness and Actual Evapotranspiration in the Unrestored Riparian Corridor of the Colorado River Delta in Response to In-Channel Water Deliveries in 2021 and 2022
by Pamela L. Nagler, Ibrahima Sall, Martha Gomez-Sapiens, Armando Barreto-Muñoz, Christopher J. Jarchow, Karl Flessa and Kamel Didan
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(10), 1801; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16101801 - 18 May 2024
Viewed by 953
Abstract
Natural resource managers may utilize remotely sensed data to monitor vegetation within their decision-making frameworks for improving habitats. Under binational agreements between the United States and Mexico, seven reaches were targeted for riparian habitat enhancement. Monitoring was carried out using Landsat 8 16-day [...] Read more.
Natural resource managers may utilize remotely sensed data to monitor vegetation within their decision-making frameworks for improving habitats. Under binational agreements between the United States and Mexico, seven reaches were targeted for riparian habitat enhancement. Monitoring was carried out using Landsat 8 16-day intervals of the two-band enhanced vegetation index 2 (EVI2) for greenness and actual evapotranspiration (ETa). In-channel water was delivered in 2021 and 2022 at four places in Reach 4. Three reaches (Reaches 4, 5 and 7) showed no discernable difference in EVI2 from reaches that did not receive in-channel water (Reaches 1, 2, 3 and 6). EVI2 in 2021 was higher than 2020 in all reaches except Reach 3, and EVI2 in 2022 was lower than 2021 in all reaches except Reach 7. ET(EVI2) was higher in 2020 than in 2021 and 2022 in all seven reaches; it was highest in Reach 4 (containing restoration sites) in all years. Excluding restoration sites, compared with 2020, unrestored reaches showed that EVI2 minimally increased in 2021 and 2022, while ET(EVI2) minimally decreased despite added water in 2021–2022. Difference maps comparing 2020 (no-flow year) to 2021 and 2022 (in-channel flows) reveal areas in Reaches 5 and 7 where the in-channel flows increased greenness and ET(EVI2). Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Biogeosciences Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Colorado River and Delta depicting Reaches 1–7 as defined under Minute 319 and four water delivery sites used during the 2021 and 2022 in-channel water deliveries. The water delivery sites from north to south are Chausse, Km 18, Km 21, and Cori. The Yuma Valley AZMET [<a href="#B70-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">70</a>] station is not shown; it is located north of the Northerly International Border (NIB) in Yuma, Arizona.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 (greenness) from Landsat 8 OLI imagery (30 m/98 ft resolution) for years 2014–2022 for the riparian corridor by river reach (Reach 1–7 includes restored areas in Reaches 2 and 4) and the weighted average by area of these seven reaches for all reaches (all) ((<b>a</b>) top bar plot) and the detrended EVI2 data ((<b>b</b>) bottom bar plot). Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Monthly variation in EVI2 (greenness) from Landsat 8 OLI (30 m/98 ft resolution) in Reach 4 (blue line) (excluding restorations sites) and in the unrestored reaches, (5, 6, and 7, green, red, and yellow lines, respectively), and the average of the unrestored Reaches 4–7 (dashed black line) for years 2014–2022. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) (mm/day) from Landsat 8 OLI imagery (30 m/98 ft resolution) for years 2014–2022 for the riparian corridor for the seven Colorado River Delta reaches and the average of all reaches (all) with ET(EVI2) calculated with ETo calculated from AZMET [<a href="#B70-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">70</a>] ((<b>a</b>) top bar plot) and detrended ET(EVI2) data ((<b>b</b>) bottom bar plot). Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Monthly variation in ET(EVI2) (mm/day) in unrestored reaches for years 2014–2022. The data correspond with Reach 4, which excludes restoration sites (blue line), Reaches 5, 6, and 7 (green, red, and yellow lines, respectively) and the average of Reaches 4–7 (dashed black line). Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over one year (2021–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Change maps show differences between 2021 (first in-channel flow year) and 2020 (non-flow year). Boxes show histograms based on the frequency distribution of pixels demonstrating EVI2 change in the reaches that received in-channel water deliveries (Reach 4, 5 and 7) and values less than zero indicate a decrease in EVI2. (<b>b</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over two years (2021–2019) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>c</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over two years (2022–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>d</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over one year (2022–2021) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over one year (2021–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Change maps show differences between 2021 (first in-channel flow year) and 2020 (non-flow year). Boxes show histograms based on the frequency distribution of pixels demonstrating EVI2 change in the reaches that received in-channel water deliveries (Reach 4, 5 and 7) and values less than zero indicate a decrease in EVI2. (<b>b</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over two years (2021–2019) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>c</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over two years (2022–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>d</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over one year (2022–2021) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over one year (2021–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Change maps show differences between 2021 (first in-channel flow year) and 2020 (non-flow year). Boxes show histograms based on the frequency distribution of pixels demonstrating EVI2 change in the reaches that received in-channel water deliveries (Reach 4, 5 and 7) and values less than zero indicate a decrease in EVI2. (<b>b</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over two years (2021–2019) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>c</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over two years (2022–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>d</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over one year (2022–2021) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over one year (2021–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Change maps show differences between 2021 (first in-channel flow year) and 2020 (non-flow year). Boxes show histograms based on the frequency distribution of pixels demonstrating EVI2 change in the reaches that received in-channel water deliveries (Reach 4, 5 and 7) and values less than zero indicate a decrease in EVI2. (<b>b</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over two years (2021–2019) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>c</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over two years (2022–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>d</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) EVI2 change over one year (2022–2021) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over one year (2021–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>b</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over two years (2021–2019) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>c</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over two years (2022–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>d</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over one year (2022–2021) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over one year (2021–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>b</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over two years (2021–2019) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>c</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over two years (2022–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>d</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over one year (2022–2021) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over one year (2021–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>b</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over two years (2021–2019) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>c</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over two years (2022–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>d</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over one year (2022–2021) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over one year (2021–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>b</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over two years (2021–2019) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>c</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over two years (2022–2020) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. (<b>d</b>) Peak growing season (1 May to 30 October) ET(EVI2) change over one year (2022–2021) in Reaches 4–7 of the Colorado River Delta. Note: map legend and descriptions are the same as in the heading of <a href="#remotesensing-16-01801-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>a. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Nine years (2014–2022) of weighted average vegetation greenness (EVI2) and water use (Nagler ETa) for both restored sites in Reaches 2 and 4 and unrestored reaches (Reaches 1–7) in the Colorado River Delta. Data generated during this study are published and available [<a href="#B26-remotesensing-16-01801" class="html-bibr">26</a>].</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 3737 KiB  
Article
Assessing the Impacts of Landuse-Landcover (LULC) Dynamics on Groundwater Depletion in Kabul, Afghanistan’s Capital (2000–2022): A Geospatial Technology-Driven Investigation
by Hemayatullah Ahmadi, Anayatullah Popalzai, Alma Bekbotayeva, Gulnara Omarova, Saltanat Assubayeva, Yalkunzhan Arshamov and Emrah Pekkan
Geosciences 2024, 14(5), 132; https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences14050132 - 12 May 2024
Viewed by 1654
Abstract
Land use/land cover (LULC) changes significantly impact spatiotemporal groundwater levels, posing a challenge for sustainable water resource management. This study investigates the long-term (2000–2022) influence of LULC dynamics, particularly urbanization, on groundwater depletion in Kabul, Afghanistan, using geospatial techniques. A time series of [...] Read more.
Land use/land cover (LULC) changes significantly impact spatiotemporal groundwater levels, posing a challenge for sustainable water resource management. This study investigates the long-term (2000–2022) influence of LULC dynamics, particularly urbanization, on groundwater depletion in Kabul, Afghanistan, using geospatial techniques. A time series of Landsat imagery (Landsat 5, 7 ETM+, and 8 OLI/TIRS) was employed to generate LULC maps for five key years (2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2022) using a supervised classification algorithm based on Support Vector Machines (SVMs). Our analysis revealed a significant expansion of urban areas (70%) across Kabul City between 2000 and 2022, particularly concentrated in Districts 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17, and 22. Urbanization likely contributes to groundwater depletion through increased population growth, reduced infiltration of precipitation, and potential overexploitation of groundwater resources. The CA-Markov model further predicts continued expansion in built-up areas over the next two decades (2030s and 2040s), potentially leading to water scarcity, land subsidence, and environmental degradation in Kabul City. The periodic assessment of urbanization dynamics and prediction of future trends are considered the novelty of this study. The accuracy of the generated LULC maps was assessed for each year (2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2022), achieving overall accuracy values of 95%, 93.8%, 85%, 95.6%, and 93%, respectively. These findings provide a valuable foundation for the development of sustainable management strategies for Kabul’s surface water and groundwater resources, while also guiding future research efforts. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>General sketch of Kabul city location: (<b>A</b>) hydrological setting of Afghanistan and related major basins and the extend of study area, (<b>B</b>) geographical location of Kabul and surrounding districts, and (<b>C</b>) simplified geological map of Kabul modified from [<a href="#B50-geosciences-14-00132" class="html-bibr">50</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flowchart of methodology.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The spatial pattern of LULC and groundwater fluctuation over Kabul city (<b>a</b>) LULC in 2000, (<b>b</b>) groundwater level in 2000, (<b>c</b>) LULC in 2005, and (<b>d</b>) groundwater level in 2005.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Spatial pattern and groundwater changes within the extent of Kabul city. (<b>a</b>) LULC in 2010, (<b>b</b>) groundwater level in 2010, (<b>c</b>) LULC in 2015, (<b>d</b>) groundwater level in 2015, (<b>e</b>) LULC in 2022, and (<b>f</b>) groundwater level in 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Prediction of LULC pattern over Kabul city using CA-Markov model. (<b>a</b>) LULC prediction in 2030 and (<b>b</b>) LULC prediction in 2040.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Average groundwater fluctuations between 2000 and 2022 over Kabul city.</p>
Full article ">
26 pages, 6289 KiB  
Article
Comparative Evaluation of Semi-Empirical Approaches to Retrieve Satellite-Derived Chlorophyll-a Concentrations from Nearshore and Offshore Waters of a Large Lake (Lake Ontario)
by Ali Reza Shahvaran, Homa Kheyrollah Pour and Philippe Van Cappellen
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(9), 1595; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16091595 - 30 Apr 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 996
Abstract
Chlorophyll-a concentration (Chl-a) is commonly used as a proxy for phytoplankton abundance in surface waters of large lakes. Mapping spatial and temporal Chl-a distributions derived from multispectral satellite data is therefore increasingly popular for monitoring trends in trophic state [...] Read more.
Chlorophyll-a concentration (Chl-a) is commonly used as a proxy for phytoplankton abundance in surface waters of large lakes. Mapping spatial and temporal Chl-a distributions derived from multispectral satellite data is therefore increasingly popular for monitoring trends in trophic state of these important ecosystems. We evaluated products of eleven atmospheric correction processors (LEDAPS, LaSRC, Sen2Cor, ACOLITE, ATCOR, C2RCC, DOS 1, FLAASH, iCOR, Polymer, and QUAC) and 27 reflectance indexes (including band-ratio, three-band, and four-band algorithms) recommended for Chl-a concentration retrieval. These were applied to the western basin of Lake Ontario by pairing 236 satellite scenes from Landsat 5, 7, 8, and Sentinel-2 acquired between 2000 and 2022 to 600 near-synchronous and co-located in situ-measured Chl-a concentrations. The in situ data were categorized based on location, seasonality, and Carlson’s Trophic State Index (TSI). Linear regression Chl-a models were calibrated for each processing scheme plus data category. The models were compared using a range of performance metrics. Categorization of data based on trophic state yielded improved outcomes. Furthermore, Sentinel-2 and Landsat 8 data provided the best results, while Landsat 5 and 7 underperformed. A total of 28 Chl-a models were developed across the different data categorization schemes, with RMSEs ranging from 1.1 to 14.1 μg/L. ACOLITE-corrected images paired with the blue-to-green band ratio emerged as the generally best performing scheme. However, model performance was dependent on the data filtration practices and varied between satellites. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remote Sensing Band Ratios for the Assessment of Water Quality)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Map of the study area showing in situ measurement locations of matchup data. Diamond and square markers represent Hamilton Harbour (HH) and Western Lake Ontario (WLO) measurements, respectively. Each marker is colour-coded according to the respective trophic state.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Boxplots of in situ data, categorized by location, seasonality, and Carlson’s Trophic State Index (TSI). The green background represents oligotrophic/mesotrophic (light green) and eutrophic/hypereutrophic (dark green) classes based on Carlson’s TSI. The plus markers indicate outliers.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Flowchart of this study’s methodology. AC = Atmospheric Correction, Chl-<span class="html-italic">a</span> = Chlorophyll-<span class="html-italic">a</span>, ECCC = Environment and Climate Change Canada, MECP = Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (Province of Ontario), RF = Random Forest, RPAS = Remotely Piloted Aircraft System, RS = Remote Sensing, TSS = Total Suspended Solids.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Random Forest feature importance analysis with colour-coded atmospheric corrections processors. The x-axis denotes the retrieval index (feature), and the y-axis shows the importance score (unitless). For each scenario, the most significant scheme is marked with an asterisk.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Evaluation of schemes across different scenarios based on correlation analysis. Marker colours denote different atmospheric corrections, shapes represent satellites, and sizes signify the number of matchups.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Plots comparing modeled vs. measured Chl-<span class="html-italic">a</span> concentrations across satellites (columns) and data categories (rows), demonstrating the regression models’ performance.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 11968 KiB  
Article
Validation of Remotely Sensed Land Surface Temperature at Lake Baikal’s Surroundings Using In Situ Observations
by Egor Dyukarev, Nadezhda Voropay, Oksana Vasilenko and Elena Rasputina
Land 2024, 13(4), 555; https://doi.org/10.3390/land13040555 - 21 Apr 2024
Viewed by 708
Abstract
The accuracy of Land Surface Temperature (LST) products retrieved from satellite data in mountainous-coastal areas is not well understood. This study presents an analysis of the spatial and temporal variability of the differences between the LST and in situ observed air and surface [...] Read more.
The accuracy of Land Surface Temperature (LST) products retrieved from satellite data in mountainous-coastal areas is not well understood. This study presents an analysis of the spatial and temporal variability of the differences between the LST and in situ observed air and surface temperatures (ISTs) for the southeastern slope of Lake Baikal’s surroundings. The IST was measured at 12 ground observation sites located on the southeastern macro-slope of the Primorskiy Ridge (Baikal, Russia) within an elevation range of 460–1656 m above sea level from 2009 to 2021. LST was estimated using 617 Landsat (7 and 8) images from 2009–2021, taking into account brightness temperature, surface emissivity and vegetation cover fraction. The comparison of the LST from satellite data and the IST from ground observation showed relatively high differences, which varied depending on the season and site type. A neural network was suggested and calibrated to improve the LST data. The corrected remote-sensed temperature was found to reproduce the IST very well, with mean differences of about 0.03 °C and linear correlation coefficients of 0.98 and 0.95 for the air and surface IST. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Digital Mapping for Ecological Land)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>The study area (red box at top-left panel) and observation sites (black dots (top-right panel); yellow dots (bottom panel)). Observation site numbers correspond to site ID in <a href="#land-13-00555-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Daily average temperatures from in situ observations at 12 study sites. 1—Air IST, 2—Surface IST. Vertical axis—IST temperature (°C) for observation site, horizontal axis—time.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>LST derived from Landsat 8 image 13 June 2019. Dots—observation sites 1–12.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>LST derived from remote data for 12 observation sites. Vertical axis—LST temperature (°C) for observation site, horizontal axis—time.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Median difference (MD) between air IST (<b>a</b>) and surface IST (<b>b</b>) or LST during different months in 2009–2021. Boxes—median ± standard deviation, whiskers—1/99 percentile, dots—outliers.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Annual course of statistical parameters of validation for air temperature (<b>left</b>) or soil surface temperature (<b>right</b>) from 2009–2021. MD—median difference, MAR—mean absolute residuals, RMSD—root mean squared difference, R—correlation coefficient. 1—all sites, 2—open sites, 3—semi-closed sites, 4—closed sites. Black horizontal line is zero line.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Scatter plots for air temperature (<b>left</b>) or soil surface temperature (<b>right</b>) and differences versus LST from 2009–2021. Lines: top panels—1:1 line, bottom panels—zero lines. 1—open sites, 2—semi-closed sites, 3—closed sites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Median difference (MD) between air IST (<b>a</b>) or surface IST (<b>b</b>) and CRT for different months from 2009–2021. Boxes—median ± standard deviation, whiskers—1/99 percentile, dots—outliers.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Scatter plots for CRT for air (<b>left</b>) and soil (<b>right</b>) and differences CRT–IST versus IST from 2009–2021. Lines: top panels—1:1 line, bottom panels—zero lines. 1—open sites, 2—semi-closed sites and 3—closed sites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Median and quartile (25, 75%) values of LST, in situ temperatures (TA, TS) and corrected temperatures (CTA, CTS). Whiskers show 1% and 99% percentiles.</p>
Full article ">
25 pages, 4590 KiB  
Article
Intercomparison of Same-Day Remote Sensing Data for Measuring Winter Cover Crop Biophysical Traits
by Alison Thieme, Kusuma Prabhakara, Jyoti Jennewein, Brian T. Lamb, Greg W. McCarty and Wells Dean Hively
Sensors 2024, 24(7), 2339; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24072339 - 6 Apr 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1717
Abstract
Winter cover crops are planted during the fall to reduce nitrogen losses and soil erosion and improve soil health. Accurate estimations of winter cover crop performance and biophysical traits including biomass and fractional vegetative groundcover support accurate assessment of environmental benefits. We examined [...] Read more.
Winter cover crops are planted during the fall to reduce nitrogen losses and soil erosion and improve soil health. Accurate estimations of winter cover crop performance and biophysical traits including biomass and fractional vegetative groundcover support accurate assessment of environmental benefits. We examined the comparability of measurements between ground-based and spaceborne sensors as well as between processing levels (e.g., surface vs. top-of-atmosphere reflectance) in estimating cover crop biophysical traits. This research examined the relationships between SPOT 5, Landsat 7, and WorldView-2 same-day paired satellite imagery and handheld multispectral proximal sensors on two days during the 2012–2013 winter cover crop season. We compared two processing levels from three satellites with spatially aggregated proximal data for red and green spectral bands as well as the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI). We then compared NDVI estimated fractional green cover to in-situ photographs, and we derived cover crop biomass estimates from NDVI using existing calibration equations. We used slope and intercept contrasts to test whether estimates of biomass and fractional green cover differed statistically between sensors and processing levels. Compared to top-of-atmosphere imagery, surface reflectance imagery were more closely correlated with proximal sensors, with intercepts closer to zero, regression slopes nearer to the 1:1 line, and less variance between measured values. Additionally, surface reflectance NDVI derived from satellites showed strong agreement with passive handheld multispectral proximal sensor-sensor estimated fractional green cover and biomass (adj. R2 = 0.96 and 0.95; RMSE = 4.76% and 259 kg ha−1, respectively). Although active handheld multispectral proximal sensor-sensor derived fractional green cover and biomass estimates showed high accuracies (R2 = 0.96 and 0.96, respectively), they also demonstrated large intercept offsets (−25.5 and 4.51, respectively). Our results suggest that many passive multispectral remote sensing platforms may be used interchangeably to assess cover crop biophysical traits whereas SPOT 5 required an adjustment in NDVI intercept. Active sensors may require separate calibrations or intercept correction prior to combination with passive sensor data. Although surface reflectance products were highly correlated with proximal sensors, the standardized cloud mask failed to completely capture cloud shadows in Landsat 7, which dampened the signal of NIR and red bands in shadowed pixels. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Environmental Sensing)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The study area consisted of five fields at the USDA-ARS Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (BARC) shown as the colored polygons on inset map. The proximal sensor transects overlay the white (multi-sensor) and green (multi-sensor and biomass) sampling points. Field locations and sampling points are shown on top of a WorldView-2 natural color image from 6 December 2012.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Diagram displaying the data types, collection, and processing for each sensor used in this study. For each of the three passive multispectral satellites (SPOT 5, Landsat 7, and WorldView-2), original and aggregated (Landsat 7) pixel sizes are represented, the biophysical sampling with both in situ samples and photos taken near the centroid of the Landsat 7 pixel, and the proximal data (active-Crop Circle, passive-CROPSCAN) collected inside of each Landsat 7 pixel buffered 5 m inwards.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The study area is shown with four panels: 6 December 2012 Landsat imagery (collected at 15:42:25) in the upper left, 6 December 2012 WorldView-2 imagery (collected at 16:03:03, copyright 2012 Maxar) in the upper right, 23 January 2013 Landsat 7 imagery (collected at 15:42:38) in the lower left, and 23 January 2013 SPOT 5 imagery (collected at 16:05:22) in the lower right presented as a false color composite (near-infrared, red, green) with an overlay of white (multi-sensor) and green (multi-sensor and biomass) sampling points. The 23 January 2013, Landsat 7 inset shows sampling points obscured by cloud shadow. The pink arrows point out the location of clouds and their associated shadows. These areas were not detected using the cloud shadow and clouds mask that were included with the Landsat 7 Level-1 or the Landsat 7 Level-2 data products. The dark and light blue areas indicated in the legend are cloud and cloud shadows that were present in the Landsat 7 mask products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Climatic data for the study period show that there were approximately 70 accumulated growing degree days (dark gray) between the two satellite acquisition dates (vertical dotted lines), implying some minimal cover crop growth. The lighter gray represents accumulated growing degree days since 15 November, indicating the relative warmth of the cover crop growing season. The minimum temperatures (solid dark blue line) were slightly above climate normals (blue dotted line). Dotted horizontal line represents 0 °C. Data from a U.S. Department of Agriculture weather station at the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, Beltsville, MD, USA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Linear regression of NDVI measurements from proximal sensors CROPSCAN (orange) and Crop Circle (teal) with satellite sensors Landsat 7 (<b>A</b>,<b>B</b>), SPOT 5 (<b>C</b>,<b>D</b>), and Worldview-2 (<b>E</b>,<b>F</b>) at two processing levels (surface reflectance [SR, (<b>A</b>,<b>C</b>,<b>E</b>)], top-of-atmosphere reflectance [TOAR, (<b>B</b>,<b>D</b>,<b>F</b>)]) on 6 December 2012 (circles) and 23 January 2013 (diamonds). The dashed line represents a 1:1 relationship with an intercept of zero. Panel (<b>G</b>) represents NDVI values from CROPSCAN and Crop Circle on both dates. The solid circles and diamonds are data points that were free of clouds. The hollow diamonds represent areas that are covered by cloud shadow in the 23 January 2013, Landsat 7 image and were excluded from the linear regression analysis. Linear regression and <span class="html-italic">R</span><sup>2</sup> values can also be found in <a href="#sensors-24-02339-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Boxplots showing the deviation in normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) values from the passive proximal sensor. Statistical absolute value differences between groups (alpha &lt; 0.05) are represented by letters above each sensor group. SR—surface reflectance, TOAR—top-of-atmosphere reflectance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Linear regression of CROPSCAN fractional green cover and sensor-derived fractional green cover estimates. Sensors include Crop Circle (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 70), Landsat 7 surface reflectance (SR) (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 70), WorldView-2 (WV2) SR (6 December; <span class="html-italic">n</span> = 35) and SPOT 5 SR (23 January; <span class="html-italic">n</span> = 35). Sensor estimated fractional green cover was derived from the winter equation %GVC = −21.904 + 116.305 × NDVI described in Thieme et al. (2020) [<a href="#B18-sensors-24-02339" class="html-bibr">18</a>]. The dashed line represents a 1:1 relationship with an intercept of zero. Cloudy observations (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 17) present in the Landsat 7 SR values (represented with a <span class="html-fig-inline" id="sensors-24-02339-i001"><img alt="Sensors 24 02339 i001" src="/sensors/sensors-24-02339/article_deploy/html/images/sensors-24-02339-i001.png"/></span>) are excluded from reported statistics on the left.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>CROPSCAN-derived biomass compared to biomass derived from multiple sensors on 6 December 2012 and 23 January 2013. Sensors included are Crop Circle, Landsat 7 surface reflectance (SR), WorldView-2 SR (6 December) and SPOT 5 SR (23 January). Biomass was sampled on 14 December 2012 and 10 January 2013. Linear regressions were performed using estimated biomass derived from the following equation: ln(biomass) = 3.2022 + 5.3740 × NDVI for winter biomass described in Thieme et al. (2020) then delogged for the equations shown here [<a href="#B18-sensors-24-02339" class="html-bibr">18</a>]. The dashed line represents a 1:1 relationship with an intercept of zero.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop