A Global Irrigated Area Map (GIAM) has been produced for the end of the last millennium using multiple satellite sensor, secondary, Google Earth and groundtruth data. The data included: (a) Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) 3-band and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) 10 km monthly time-series for 1997-1999, (b) Syste`me pour l'Observation de la Terre Vegetation (SPOT VGT) NDVI 1 km monthly time series for 1999, (c) East Anglia University Climate Research Unit (CRU) rainfall 50km monthly time series for 1961-2000, (d) Global 30 Arc-Second Elevation Data Set (GTOPO30) 1 km digital elevation data of the World, (e) Japanese Earth Resources Satellite-1 Synthetic Aperture Radar (JERS-1 SAR) data for the rain forests during two seasons in 1996 and (f) University of Maryland Global Tree Cover 1 km data for 1992-1993. A single mega-file data-cube (MFDC) of the World with 159 layers, akin to hyperspectral data, was composed by re-sampling different data types into a common 1 km resolution. The MFDC was segmented based on elevation, temperature and precipitation zones. Classification was performed on the segments. Quantitative spectral matching techniques (SMTs) used in hyperspectral data analysis were adopted to group class spectra derived from unsupervised classification and match them with ideal or target spectra. A rigorous class identification and labelling process involved the use of: (a) space-time spiral curve (ST-SC) plots, (b) brightness-greenness-wetness (BGW) plots, (c) time series NDVI plots, (d) Google Earth very-high-resolution imagery (VHRI) 'zoom-in views' in over 11 000 locations, (e) groundtruth data broadly sourced from the degree confluence project (3 864 sample locations) and from the GIAM project (1 790 sample locations), (f) high-resolution Landsat-ETM+ Geocover 150m mosaic of the World and (g) secondary data (e.g. national and global land use and land cover data). Mixed classes were resolved based on decision tree algorithms and spatial modelling, and when that did not work, the problem class was used to mask and re-classify the MDFC, and the class identification and labelling protocol repeated. The sub-pixel area (SPA) calculations were performed by multiplying full-pixel areas (FPAs) with irrigated area fractions (IAFs) for every class. A 28 class GIAMwas produced and the area statistics reported as: (a) annualized irrigated areas (AIAs), which consider intensity of irrigation (i.e. sum of irrigated areas from different seasons in a year plus continuous year-round irrigation or gross irrigated areas), and (b) total area available for irrigation (TAAI), which does not consider intensity of irrigation (i.e. irrigated areas at any given point of time plus the areas left fallow but 'equipped for irrigation' at the same point of time or net irrigated areas). The AIA of the World at the end of the last millennium was 467million hectares (Mha), which is sum of the non-overlapping areas of: (a) 252Mha from season one, (b) 174Mha from season two and (c) 41Mha from continuous yea...

No abstract

No abstract

Diverse irrigated areas were mapped in the Krishna River Basin (258,912 km 2 ), southern India, using an irrigated fraction approach and multiple ancillary data sources. Unsupervised classification of a monthly time series of net difference vegetation index (NDVI) images from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MODIS) over January-December 2002 generated 40 classes. Nine generalized classes included five irrigated classes with distinct NDVI time signatures: continuous irrigation, double-cropped, irrigated with low biomass, minor irrigation, and groundwater irrigation. Areas irrigated by surface water began greening 45 days after groundwater-irrigated areas, which allowed separation of surface and groundwater irrigation in the classification. The fraction of each class area irrigated was determined using three different methods: ground truth data, a linear regression model calibrated to agricultural census data, and visual interpretation of Landsat TM imagery. Irrigated fractions determined by the three methods varied least for the double-cropped irrigated class (0.62-0.79) and rangeland (0.00-0.02), and most for the minor irrigated class (0.06-0.43). Small irrigated patches (,0.1 km 2 ) accounted for more irrigated area than all major surface water irrigated areas combined. The irrigated fractions of the minor and groundwater-irrigated classes differed widely by method, suggesting that mapping patchy and small irrigated areas remains challenging, but comparison of multiple data sources improves confidence in the classification and highlights areas requiring more intensive fieldwork.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract