2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2005.11.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measuring long-term ecological changes in densely populated landscapes using current and historical high resolution imagery

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
56
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
0
56
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The supervised classification approach employed here involved training a Maximum Likelihood classifier algorithm to first recognise particular spectral patterns as representative of certain user-defined land-cover classes of interest, then classify unknown pixels into one of the land-cover classes based on the likelihood of that pixel's spectral signature falling within a normal distribution of the spectral values of a particular land class. Supervised classification's binning of a pixel into one of several user-defined land classes based on overall spectral profile may fail to capture the more nuanced biophysical meaning behind a pixel, and such classification schemes may also substantially bypass land-change processes such as forest degradation that tend to be heterogeneous on finer, sub-pixel scales [58,59]. Moreover, dividing continuous quantitative information, such as those found in satellite images, into a finite number of discrete land classes that are considered at the outset to be exhaustively defined and mutually exclusive may lend itself to the further loss of information [60].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The supervised classification approach employed here involved training a Maximum Likelihood classifier algorithm to first recognise particular spectral patterns as representative of certain user-defined land-cover classes of interest, then classify unknown pixels into one of the land-cover classes based on the likelihood of that pixel's spectral signature falling within a normal distribution of the spectral values of a particular land class. Supervised classification's binning of a pixel into one of several user-defined land classes based on overall spectral profile may fail to capture the more nuanced biophysical meaning behind a pixel, and such classification schemes may also substantially bypass land-change processes such as forest degradation that tend to be heterogeneous on finer, sub-pixel scales [58,59]. Moreover, dividing continuous quantitative information, such as those found in satellite images, into a finite number of discrete land classes that are considered at the outset to be exhaustively defined and mutually exclusive may lend itself to the further loss of information [60].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Land management and vegetation cover change substantially and landscape complexity increases (Ellis et al, 2005). The urban area of Arequipa city expanded from 60.56-69.13 km² in a period of 17 years, which is an average rate of 0.5 km² per year.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Crop type information is crucial for water use assessment, productivity assessments, and many other practical applications of data and maps at local levels. Accurate crop classification is the key to determining many other crop specific parameters [70] such as water use by crops, water productivity, biomass, yield, and carbon sequestration [19,71].…”
Section: Referencesmentioning
confidence: 99%