Anterior|Siguiente

Wetlands mapping in typical regions of South America with multi-source and multi-feature integration

  • role： First author第一作者
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Geography and Spatial Information Techniques, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China

  • Email：18339161167@163.com
  • Introduction：黄玉玲，研究方向为湿地遥感信息提取。E-mail：18339161167@163.com
HUANG Yuling1,  
  • role： Corresponding author通信作者
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Geography and Spatial Information Techniques, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China

  • Email：yanggang@nbu.edu.cn
  • Introduction：杨刚，研究方向为遥感影像数据质量改善与信息提取理论和方法、遥感滨海健康监测技术与应用。E-mail： yanggang@nbu.edu.cn
YANG Gang1*,  
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Geography and Spatial Information Techniques, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China

SUN Weiwei1,  
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Geography and Spatial Information Techniques, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China

ZHU Lin1,  
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Geography and Spatial Information Techniques, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China

HUANG Ke1,  
  • Affiliation：

    Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China

MENG Xiangchao2

resumen

Wetlands play an important role in maintaining ecological balance, conserving water resources, recharging groundwater, and controlling soil erosion. They are often called the “kidneys of the earth” because they help purify water by filtering out pollutants and sediments. South America has a vast area of wetlands, as well as a variety of wetlands types. While most of these wetlands were conserved in a relatively good condition until a few decades ago, pressures brought about by land use and climate change have threatened their integrity in recent years. However, no complete and uniform wetland map has provided adequate information on the location, distribution, size, and changing status of wetlands in South America. Remote sensing has been an effective tool for characterizing, mapping, and monitoring the complexity and dynamics of large areas of wetlands. Although fine wetland mapping may be done by combining data from many sources, the following two issues persist. On the one hand, given the complicated temporal dynamics and spectral heterogeneity of wetlands, large-scale wetland mapping remains a challenging task. On the other hand, supervised classification is a widely used technique for multi-category wetland mapping. However, selecting training samples is time consuming and labor intensive. Moreover, finer and more precise wetland information is currently unavailable for reference. In the study, we selected four study areas of typical wetlands in South America. First, an effective wetland sample collection process was proposed by using the existing land cover dataset to ensure the sample quality. Second, a multi-source feature set was constructed by combining Sentinel-1, Sentinel-2, and SRTM data. Then, feature selection is carried out on the basis of the random forest recursive feature elimination method (RF_RFE). We constructed a multi-feature combination scheme to compare the influence of multi-source features on wetlands classification. Finally, the random forest algorithm is used to classify wetlands in the study area. The research results show that the process facilitates the sample collection and improves the sample quality. The combination of Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 data can improve the accuracy of land cover mapping, and terrain features help greatly improve the overall classification accuracy and the accuracy of various types of objects. For wetland categories, the addition of multi-source data features can improve the separability of wetland categories. The feature selection based on RF_RFE can reduce the feature redundancy and improve the classification accuracy. The feature optimization results show that SAR polarization features and derived texture features can be used as an effective supplement to optical features. However, the dominant features account for less. The overall classification accuracy of the study area was 85.62%, and the Kappa coefficient was 0.8333. The study proposed an effective classification process and sample collection scheme to large-scale wetlands in South America. This study integrated Sentinel-1 synthetic aperture radar data, Sentinel-2 optical data, and terrain data to explore their importance to the extraction of different wetlands at a large scale. This work also verified the feasibility of feature selection based on random forest recursive feature elimination method. The research results reveal that the sample collection process facilitates sample collection and improves sample quality. The combination of Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 data can improve the accuracy of land cover mapping, and terrain features help greatly improve the overall classification accuracy and the accuracy of various types of objects. For wetland categories, the addition of multi-source data features can improve the separability of wetland categories. The feature selection based on RF_RFE can reduce the feature redundancy and improve the classification accuracy.

palabra clave

remote sensing;Sentinel-1;Sentinel-2;Google Earth Engine;wetlands classification;feature selection;South America

References

  1. 1.
    Adam E, Mutanga O and Rugege D. 2010. Multispectral and hyperspectral remote sensing for identification and mapping of wetland vegetation: a review. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 18(3): 281-296
  2. 2.
    Amani M, Brisco B, Afshar M, Mirmazloumi S M, Mahdavi S, Mirzadeh S M J, Huang W M and Granger J. 2019a. A generalized supervised classification scheme to produce provincial wetland inventory maps: an application of Google Earth Engine for big geo data processing. Big Earth Data, 3(4): 378-394
  3. 3.
    Amani M, Brisco B, Mahdavi S, Ghorbanian A, Moghimi A, DeLancey E R, Merchant M, Jahncke R, Fedorchuk L, Mui A, Fisette T, Kakooei M, Ahmadi S A, Leblon B and Larocque A. 2021. Evaluation of the landsat-based Canadian wetland inventory map using multiple sources: challenges of large-scale wetland classification using remote sensing. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 14: 32-52
  4. 4.
    Amani M, Mahdavi S, Afshar M, Brisco B, Huang W M, Mirzadeh S M J, White L, Banks S, Montgomery J and Hopkinson C. 2019b. Canadian wetland inventory using google earth engine: the first map and preliminary results. Remote Sensing, 11(7): 842
  5. 5.
    Amani M, Salehi B, Mahdavi S, Granger J and Brisco B. 2017. Wetland classification in Newfoundland and Labrador using multi-source SAR and optical data integration. GIScience and Remote Sensing, 54(6): 779-796
  6. 6.
    Borges J, Higginbottom T P, Symeonakis E and Jones M. 2020. Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 Data for savannah land cover mapping: optimising the combination of sensors and seasons. Remote Sensing, 12(23): 3862
  7. 7.
    Breiman L. 2001. Random forests. Machine Learning, 45(1): 5-32
  8. 8.
    Bunting P, Rosenqvist A, Lucas R M, Rebelo L M, Hilarides L, Thomas N, Hardy A, Itoh T, Shimada M and Finlayson C M. 2018. The global mangrove watch—a new 2010 global baseline of mangrove extent. Remote Sensing, 10(10): 1669
  9. 9.
    Cai Y T, Li X Y, Zhang M and Lin H. 2020. Mapping wetland using the object-based stacked generalization method based on multi-temporal optical and SAR data. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 92: 102164
  10. 10.
    Chang W T, Wang H, Ning X G and Zhang H C. 2020. Extraction of Zhalong wetlands information based on images of sentinel-2 red edge bands and Sentinel-1 radar bands. Wetland Science, 18(1): 10-19
  11. 11.
    Chen J and Chen J. 2018. GlobeLand30: operational global land cover mapping and big-data analysis. Science China Earth Sciences, 61(10): 1533-1534
  12. 12.
    Deering D W. 1978. Rangeland Reflectance Characteristics Measured by Aircraft and Spacecraft Sensors. College Station, TX: Texas A and M University
  13. 13.
    Demarchi L, Kania A, Ciężkowski W, Piórkowski H, Oświecimska-Piasko Z and Chormański J. 2020. Recursive feature elimination and random forest classification of natura 2000 grasslands in Lowland River Valleys of Poland based on airborne hyperspectral and LiDAR data fusion. Remote Sensing, 12(11): 1842
  14. 14.
    Dong T F, Liu J G, Shang J L, Qian B D, Ma B L, Kovacs J M, Walters D, Jiao X F, Geng X Y and Shi Y C. 2019. Assessment of red-edge vegetation indices for crop leaf area index estimation. Remote Sensing of Environment, 222: 133-143
  15. 15.
    Fernández-Manso A, Fernández-Manso O and Quintano C. 2016. SENTINEL-2A red-edge spectral indices suitability for discriminating burn severity. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 50: 170-175
  16. 16.
    Haralick R M, Shanmugam K and Dinstein I. 1973. Textural features for image classification. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-3(6): 610-621
  17. 17.
    Hu S J, Niu Z G, Chen Y F, Li L F and Zhang H Y. 2017. Global wetlands: potential distribution, wetland loss, and status. Science of the Total Environment, 586: 319-327
  18. 18.
    Junk W J. 1993. Wetlands of tropical South America//Whigham D F, Dykyjová D and Hejný S, eds. Wetlands of the World: Inventory, Ecology and Management Volume I. Dordrecht: Springer: 679-739
  19. 19.
    Junk W J, An S Q, Finlayson C M, Gopal B, Květ J, Mitchell S A, Mitsch W J and Robarts R D. 2013. Current state of knowledge regarding the world’s wetlands and their future under global climate change: a synthesis. Aquatic Sciences, 75(1): 151-167
  20. 20.
    Junk W J, Piedade M T F, Lourival R, Wittmann F, Kandus P, Lacerda L D, Bozelli R L, Esteves F A, Nunes Da cunha C, Maltchik L, Schöngart J, Schaeffer-Novelli Y and Agostinho A A. 2014. Brazilian wetlands: their definition, delineation, and classification for research, sustainable management, and protection. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 24(1): 5-22
  21. 21.
    Kandus P, Minotti P G, Morandeira N S, Grimson R, Trilla G G, González E B, San Martín L and Gayol M P. 2018. Remote sensing of wetlands in South America: status and challenges. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 39(4): 993-1016
  22. 22.
    Lehner B and Döll P. 2004. Development and validation of a global database of lakes, reservoirs and wetlands. Journal of Hydrology, 296(1/4): 1-22
  23. 23.
    Li J H and Chen W J. 2005. A rule-based method for mapping Canada’s wetlands using optical, radar and DEM data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 26(22): 5051-5069
  24. 24.
    Mahdavi S, Salehi B, Granger J, Amani M, Brisco B and Huang W M. 2018. Remote sensing for wetland classification: a comprehensive review. GIScience and Remote Sensing, 55(5): 623-658
  25. 25.
    Mahdianpari M, Brisco B, Granger J, Mohammadimanesh F, Salehi B, Homayouni S and Bourgeau-Chavez L. 2021. The third generation of pan-canadian wetland map at 10 m resolution using multisource earth observation data on cloud computing platform. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 14: 8789-8803
  26. 26.
    Mao D H, Wang Z M, Du B J, Li L, Tian Y L, Jia M M, Zeng Y, Song K S, Jiang M and Wang Y Q. 2020. National wetland mapping in China: a new product resulting from object-based and hierarchical classification of Landsat 8 OLI images. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 164: 11-25
  27. 27.
    McFeeters S K. 1996. The use of the Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) in the delineation of open water features. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 17(7): 1425-1432
  28. 28.
    Murray N J, Phinn S R, DeWitt M, Ferrari R, Johnston R, Lyons M B, Clinton N, Thau D and Fuller R A. 2019. The global distribution and trajectory of tidal flats. Nature, 565(7738): 222-225
  29. 29.
    Nembrini S, König I R and Wright M N. 2018. The revival of the Gini importance?. Bioinformatics, 34(21): 3711-3718
  30. 30.
    Rapinel S, Betbeder J, Denize J, Fabre E, Pottier É and Hubert-Moy L. 2020. SAR analysis of wetland ecosystems: effects of band frequency, polarization mode and acquisition dates. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 170: 103-113
  31. 31.
    Ruiz L F C, Guasselli L A, Simioni J P D, Belloli T F and Fernandes P C B. 2021. Object-based classification of vegetation species in a subtropical wetland using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2A images. Science of Remote Sensing, 3: 100017
  32. 32.
    Saah D, Johnson G, Ashmall B, Tondapu G, Tenneson K, Patterson M, Poortinga A, Markert K, Quyen N H, San Aung K, Schlichting L, Matin M, Uddin K, Aryal R R, Dilger J, Lee Ellenburg W, Flores-Anderson A I, Wiell D, Lindquist E, Goldstein J, Clinton N and Chishtie F. 2019. Collect Earth: an online tool for systematic reference data collection in land cover and use applications. Environmental Modelling and Software, 118: 166-171
  33. 33.
    Schratz P, Muenchow J, Iturritxa E, Cortés J, Bischl B and Brenning A. 2021. Monitoring forest health using hyperspectral imagery: does feature selection improve the performance of machine-learning techniques?. Remote Sensing, 13(23): 4832
  34. 34.
    Slagter B, Tsendbazar N E, Vollrath A and Reiche J. 2020. Mapping wetland characteristics using temporally dense Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 data: a case study in the St. Lucia wetlands, South Africa. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 86: 102009
  35. 35.
    Tamiminia H, Salehi B, Mahdianpari M, Quackenbush L, Adeli S and Brisco B. 2020. Google Earth Engine for geo-big data applications: a meta-analysis and systematic review. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 164: 152-170
  36. 36.
    Wang J, Shang J, Brisco B and Brown R J. 1998. Evaluation of multidate ERS-1 and multispectral landsat imagery for wetland detection in Southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 24(1): 60-68
  37. 37.
    Whyte A, Ferentinos K P and Petropoulos G P. 2018. A new synergistic approach for monitoring wetlands using Sentinels -1 and 2 data with object-based machine learning algorithms. Environmental Modelling and Software, 104: 40-54
  38. 38.
    Wu N, Shi R H, Zhuo W, Zhang C, Zhou B C, Xia Z L, Tao Z, Gao W and Tian B. 2021. A classification of tidal flat wetland vegetation combining phenological features with Google earth engine. Remote Sensing, 13(3): 443
  39. 39.
    Xia Y, Li E H, Wang X L, Zhang Y Y, Yang J and Zhou R. 2021. Application of random forest algorithm based on feature optimization in wetland information extraction: a case study of Honghu Wetland Nature Reserve in Hubei Province. Journal of Central China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 55(4): 639-648, 660
  40. 40.
    Xu H Q. 2005. A study on information extraction of water body with the Modified Normalized Difference Water Index (MNDWI). Journal of Remote Sensing, 9(5): 589-595
  41. 41.
    Yan X and Niu Z G. 2021. Reliability evaluation and migration of wetland samples. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 14: 8089-8099
  42. 42.
    Yang J W, Zhang J S, Zhu X F and Yuan Z M Q. 2015. Random forest applied for dimension reduction and classification in hyperspectral data. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Natural Science), 51(S1): 82-88
  43. 43.
    Zha Y, Ni S X and Yang S. 2003. An effective approach to automatically extract urban land-use from TM imagery. Journal of Remote Sensing, 7(1): 37-40
  44. 44.
    Zhang H Y, Niu Z G, Xu P P, Chen Y F, Hu S J and Gong N. 2017. The boundaries and remote sensing classification datasets on large wetlands of international importance in 2001 and 2013. Journal of Global Change Data and Discovery, 1(2): 230-238
  45. 45.
    Zhang L, Gong Z N, Wang Q W, Jin D D and Wang X. 2019. Wetland mapping of Yellow River Delta wetlands based on multi-feature optimization of Sentinel-2 images. Journal of Remote Sensing, 23(2): 313-326
  46. 46.
    Zheng L L, Xu J Y and Wang X L. 2019. Application of random forests algorithm in researches on wetlands. Wetland Science, 17(1): 16-24
  47. 47.
    Zhou X C, Zheng L and Huang H Y. 2021. Classification of forest stand based on multi-feature optimization of UAV visible light remote sensing. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 57(6): 24-36

Leer el texto completo

The above content is generated by Large Model Translation. The translated content is for reference only. We do not assume any commercial or legal responsibilty for any consequences arising from the use of our website