2021
DOI: 10.1139/as-2020-0006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accuracy assessment of late winter snow depth mapping for tundra environments using Structure-from-Motion photogrammetry

Abstract: Arctic tundra environments are characterized by a spatially heterogeneous end-of-winter snow depth resulting from wind transport and deposition. Traditional methods for measuring snow depth do not accurately capture such heterogeneity at catchment scales. In this study we address the use of high-resolution, spatially distributed, snow depth data for Arctic environments through the application of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). We apply Structure-from-Motion photogrammetry to images collected using a fixed-wing … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
24
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
(39 reference statements)
1
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Positive MBE values for both transects is consistent with the hypothesis that the snow depth would be overestimated because of the freeboard of floating ice. The RMSE for both transects is within the reported error for studies observing UAV SD on terrestrial sites (Walker et al, 2020), however the highly positive MBE indicates that the bias from freeboard can be addressed through the derived freeboard height.…”
Section: Snow Surface Validation and Freeboard Correctionsupporting
confidence: 66%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Positive MBE values for both transects is consistent with the hypothesis that the snow depth would be overestimated because of the freeboard of floating ice. The RMSE for both transects is within the reported error for studies observing UAV SD on terrestrial sites (Walker et al, 2020), however the highly positive MBE indicates that the bias from freeboard can be addressed through the derived freeboard height.…”
Section: Snow Surface Validation and Freeboard Correctionsupporting
confidence: 66%
“…In similar studies that utilize snow depths observed using Magnaprobes to validate UAV-derived snow depths a simple extraction of the UAV snow depth (UAV SD ) raster by the point location yielded co-registration errors, as the horizontal accuracy of the Magnaprobe GPS (approximately 2.5 m) is much lower than the UAV (< 0.03 m) (Nolan et al, 2015;Walker et al, 2020). Therefore, to reduce the potential inclusion of erroneous snow depth information, Magnaprobe snow depths (Magnaprobe SD ) are validated against the average snow depth extracted from a 5 m buffer surrounding each insitu observation, which would approximate the spatial accuracy of the GPS location.…”
Section: Snow Surface Validation and Freeboard Correctionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For TVC, pit locations were chosen based on previous snow depth distribution (2016), slope and elevation. Multiple snow depth maps at 1m resolution from RPAS surveys conducted in March 2018 (Walker et al, 2020) were used to estimate snow depth distribution in TVC with total spatial coverage of 13 km 2 . Also, a small RPAS survey is available for CB with spatial coverage of 0.2 km 2 at 1 m resolution.…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Airborne remote sensing methods are able to provide high resolution snow data, but also have certain limitations. For example, methods to map snow depth at high resolutions are available (Deems et al, 2013;Walker et al, 2020), but mapping of snow density or SWE are not (Koch et al, 2019). SWE along flight transects is available using airborne gamma methods but have limited applicability in the Arctic due to high cost.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%