2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.04.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of two models with Landsat data for estimating above ground grassland biomass in Inner Mongolia, China

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
62
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 122 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
5
62
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In particular, Landsat images have been the most widely used for forest aboveground biomass (AGB) estimation in the past three decades [5,6,20,24,26,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36], mainly because they are freely downloadable, have a long history, and have medium spatial resolution. The studies deal with different climate zones and forest ecosystems, from tropical to subtropical, temperate, and boreal forests [4][5][6][7][12][13][14][15]20,28,32,[37][38][39][40][41][42][43]. However, one common problem is the data saturation in Landsat imagery; that is, spectral reflectance values are not sensitive to the change in biomass of dense and multilayer canopy forests, which results in low accuracy of AGB estimation, especially when AGB is high, such as greater than 130 Mg/ha [5,6,29].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, Landsat images have been the most widely used for forest aboveground biomass (AGB) estimation in the past three decades [5,6,20,24,26,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36], mainly because they are freely downloadable, have a long history, and have medium spatial resolution. The studies deal with different climate zones and forest ecosystems, from tropical to subtropical, temperate, and boreal forests [4][5][6][7][12][13][14][15]20,28,32,[37][38][39][40][41][42][43]. However, one common problem is the data saturation in Landsat imagery; that is, spectral reflectance values are not sensitive to the change in biomass of dense and multilayer canopy forests, which results in low accuracy of AGB estimation, especially when AGB is high, such as greater than 130 Mg/ha [5,6,29].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The precision of the results may be partially due to the method of obtaining information in the field, the characteristics of the sensor (i.e., temporal and spatial resolution) and its age, the type of ecosystem, as well as the statistical analyses carried out. The latter appears to substantially affect the fit of the models between the data from the field and the sensor data [40][41][42][43]. Although some studies have obtained a good fit with the use of a limited number of bands [25,42], others studies [23] have required the interaction of a greater number of bands, indices or synthetic bands to achieve a better fit, as it was the case in this study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…The maps generated for CGC and grass height showed moderately high accuracies that can be representative and used as a reference to help assess current and future land use development, grasslands capacities, animal production potentials and the status of grassland avian habitats [41,[56][57][58].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Xie et al [47] analyzed the performance comparison of multiple linear regression (MLR) and ANN for grassland aboveground biomass in Xilingol River Basin, Inner Mongolia. In this work, Landsat ETM+-driven (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), Bands 1, 3, 4, 5 and 7) information was used as input features for training, and ANN (R 2 = 0.817, RMSE = 42.36%) outperformed the MLR (R 2 = 0.591, RMSE = 53.20%).…”
Section: Grassland Biomass Retrievalmentioning
confidence: 99%