2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2005.06.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploring the spatial and temporal dynamics of land use in Xizhuang watershed of Yunnan, southwest China

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Since we wanted to classify Landsat imagery as early as 1986, when no adequate reference data to train a supervised classifier was available, we used a hybrid of unsupervised and supervised techniques combined with knowledge-based interpretation (figure 2; see description of Yunnan and detailed methods in supplementary (available online at stacks.iop.org/ERL/17/014003/mmedia)). We first defined nine land cover classes in the province using a combination of field observations, expert knowledge coupled with visual inspection of high-resolution imagery from Google Earth (www.google.com/earth/desktop, accessed on 5 July 2019) (Olofsson et al 2014), and existing land cover maps (Liu et al 2003, 2010, 2014b, Xu et al 2005, Diallo et al 2009, Zhao et al 2012, Lu et al 2015, Ning et al 2018, Zhang et al 2019a, Su et al 2020. We defined nine land cover classes, comprised of non-vegetated classes, namely water bodies (WATs), snowed regions (SNO), and built-up and bare rock areas (BURs); non-natural vegetation areas, namely croplands (CROs), tree plantations (TRPs), and bare ground (BAG); and natural vegetation areas, which are forests (FOR), which have closed tree canopies, and two savanna classes, which have open canopies: grassy, sparse-canopied PRKs and denser-canopied WDLs.…”
Section: Generating Land Cover Maps and Detecting Inter-decadal Changesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Since we wanted to classify Landsat imagery as early as 1986, when no adequate reference data to train a supervised classifier was available, we used a hybrid of unsupervised and supervised techniques combined with knowledge-based interpretation (figure 2; see description of Yunnan and detailed methods in supplementary (available online at stacks.iop.org/ERL/17/014003/mmedia)). We first defined nine land cover classes in the province using a combination of field observations, expert knowledge coupled with visual inspection of high-resolution imagery from Google Earth (www.google.com/earth/desktop, accessed on 5 July 2019) (Olofsson et al 2014), and existing land cover maps (Liu et al 2003, 2010, 2014b, Xu et al 2005, Diallo et al 2009, Zhao et al 2012, Lu et al 2015, Ning et al 2018, Zhang et al 2019a, Su et al 2020. We defined nine land cover classes, comprised of non-vegetated classes, namely water bodies (WATs), snowed regions (SNO), and built-up and bare rock areas (BURs); non-natural vegetation areas, namely croplands (CROs), tree plantations (TRPs), and bare ground (BAG); and natural vegetation areas, which are forests (FOR), which have closed tree canopies, and two savanna classes, which have open canopies: grassy, sparse-canopied PRKs and denser-canopied WDLs.…”
Section: Generating Land Cover Maps and Detecting Inter-decadal Changesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The province might also continue to observe an uptick in stable forest cover, as China continues its existing programs to conserve and expand forests (Chen et al 2019). Policies affecting Yunnan include the sloping land conversion program (SLCP) to prevent cultivation on land with slopes steeper than 25 • (Xu et al 2005), and the GTGP established in 1999 to restore natural ecosystems through the return of former croplands back to forests or savannas (Chen et al 2019). A good policy model for savannas could be the SLCP, as our drivers analysis showed that steeper slopes did in fact contribute positively to PRK and WDL conversion from farmlands and non-vegetation areas.…”
Section: Conservation Recommendationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…And despite the often documented inferiority in classification success, maximum likelihood classification is still one of the most widely used classification algorithms (Jensen, 2005), most likely also due to advantages in data handling and processing times (Paola and Schowengerdt, 1995). Therefore, many applied landscape-scale studies and land use/land cover research rely on these standard classification approaches (Brandt and Townsend, 2006;Cushman and Wallin, 2000;Jianchu et al, 2005;Joy et al, 2003;Ruiz-Luna and Berlanga-Robles, 2003). In contrast, advanced approaches are primarily limited to methodological studies for optimising the classification process, often using only very limited sample sizes (Fassnacht et al, 2006;Foody, 2001;Kavzoglu and Mather, 2003;Kavzoglu and Reis, 2008;Ouyang and Ma, 2006;Paola and Schowengerdt, 1997;Yemefack et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%