The LandTrendr (LT) algorithm has been used widely for analysis of change in Landsat spectral time series data, but requires significant pre-processing, data management, and computational resources, and is only accessible to the community in a proprietary programming language (IDL). Here, we introduce LT for the Google Earth Engine (GEE) platform. The GEE platform simplifies pre-processing steps, allowing focus on the translation of the core temporal segmentation algorithm. Temporal segmentation involved a series of repeated random access calls to each pixel's time series, resulting in a set of breakpoints ("vertices") that bound straight-line segments. The translation of the algorithm into GEE included both transliteration and code analysis, resulting in improvement and logic error fixes. At six study areas representing diverse land cover types across the U.S., we conducted a direct comparison of the new LT-GEE code against the heritage code (LT-IDL). The algorithms agreed in most cases, and where disagreements occurred, they were largely attributable to logic error fixes in the code translation process. The practical impact of these changes is minimal, as shown by an example of forest disturbance mapping. We conclude that the LT-GEE algorithm represents a faithful translation of the LT code into a platform easily accessible by the broader user community.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Few studies have examined post-fire vegetation recovery in temperate forest ecosystems with Landsat time series analysis. We analyzed time series of Normalized Burn Ratio (NBR) derived from LandTrendr spectral-temporal segmentation fitting to examine post-fire NBR recovery for several wildfires that occurred in three different coniferous forest types in western North America during the years 2000 to 2007. We summarized NBR recovery trends, and investigated the influence of burn severity, post-fire climate, and topography on post-fire vegetation recovery via random forest (RF) analysis. Results: NBR recovery across forest types averaged 30 to 44% five years post fire, 47 to 72% ten years post fire, and 54 to 77% 13 years post fire, and varied by time since fire, severity, and forest type. Recovery rates were generally greatest for several years following fire. Recovery in terms of percent NBR was often greater for higher-severity patches. Recovery rates varied between forest types, with conifer−oak−chaparral showing the greatest NBR recovery rates, mixed conifer showing intermediate rates, and ponderosa pine showing slowest rates. Between 1 and 28% of patches had recovered to pre-fire NBR levels 9 to 16 years after fire, with greater percentages of low-severity patches showing full NBR recovery. Precipitation decreased and temperatures generally remained the same or increased post fire. Pre-fire NBR and burn severity were important predictors of NBR recovery for all forest types, and explained 2 to 6% of the variation in post-fire NBR recovery. Post-fire climate anomalies were also important predictors of NBR recovery and explained an additional 30 to 41% of the variation in post-fire NBR recovery. Conclusions: Landsat time series analysis was a useful means of describing and analyzing post-fire vegetation recovery across mixed-severity wildfire extents. We demonstrated that a relationship exists between post-fire vegetation recovery and climate in temperate ecosystems of western North America. Our methods could be applied to other burned landscapes for which spatially explicit measurements of post-fire vegetation recovery are needed.

The fate of live forest biomass is largely controlled by growth and disturbance processes, both natural and anthropogenic. Thus, biomass monitoring strategies must characterize both the biomass of the forests at a given point in time and the dynamic processes that change it. Here, we describe and test an empirical monitoring system designed to meet those needs. Our system uses a mix of field data, statistical modeling, remotely-sensed time-series imagery, and small-footprint lidar data to build and evaluate maps of forest biomass. It ascribes biomass change to specific change agents, and attempts to capture the impact of uncertainty in methodology. We find that: • A common image framework for biomass estimation and for change detection allows for consistent comparison of both state and change processes controlling biomass dynamics. • Regional estimates of total biomass agree well with those from plot data alone.• The system tracks biomass densities up to 450-500 Mg ha −1 with little bias, but begins underestimating true biomass as densities increase further. • Scale considerations are important. Estimates at the 30 m grain size are noisy, but agreement at broad scales is good. Further investigation to determine the appropriate scales is underway. • Uncertainty from methodological choices is evident, but much smaller than uncertainty based on choice of allometric equation used to estimate biomass from tree data. • In this forest-dominated study area, growth and loss processes largely balance in most years, with loss processes dominated by human removal through harvest. In years with substantial fire activity, however, overall biomass loss greatly outpaces growth. Taken together, our methods represent a unique combination of elements foundational to an operational landscape-scale forest biomass monitoring program.