| Literature DB >> 22408558 |
Cho-Ying Huang1, Gregory P Asner.
Abstract
Biological invasions can affect ecosystems across a wide spectrum of bioclimatic conditions. Therefore, it is often important to systematically monitor the spread of species over a broad region. Remote sensing has been an important tool for large-scale ecological studies in the past three decades, but it was not commonly used to study alien invasive plants until the mid 1990s. We synthesize previous research efforts on remote sensing of invasive plants from spatial, temporal and spectral perspectives. We also highlight a recently developed state-of-the-art image fusion technique that integrates passive and active energies concurrently collected by an imaging spectrometer and a scanning-waveform light detection and ranging (LiDAR) system, respectively. This approach provides a means to detect the structure and functional properties of invasive plants of different canopy levels. Finally, we summarize regional studies of biological invasions using remote sensing, discuss the limitations of remote sensing approaches, and highlight current research needs and future directions.Entities:
Keywords: biological invasions; high spatial resolution; high temporal resolution; hyperspectral remote sensing; image fusion; light detection and ranging (LiDAR); moderate spatial/spectral resolution
Year: 2009 PMID: 22408558 PMCID: PMC3291943 DOI: 10.3390/s90604869
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.(A) The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) time-series data for Native, Mixed, and Eragrostis lehmanniana (ERLE) sites from 2000 to 2005. (B) Spatial variations of NDVI through time among sites demonstrated using the coefficient of variation (CV). (C) Bi-weekly precipitation (bars) and temperature (dotted line) data based upon daily weather records from five stations at the desert grasslands of southern Arizona, USA. Months are evenly divided by four intervals with colors from bright to dark. This figure is adapted from Huang et al. [45] with permission from Taylor & Francis.
Figure 2.(A) The Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) in October (the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer [MODIS] period 19 and 20) of the extreme wet year (2000) and normal years (2001-2005) for field sites in a semi-arid environment of southern Arizona, USA across a gradient Eragrostis lehmanniana invasion (native grasslands [Native], a mixture of E. lehmanniana and native grasses [Mixed], E. lehmanniana invaded grasslands [ERLE]). (B) Mean October temperature (dashed line) and precipitation (gray bars) from 2000 to 2005 of the study region. This figure is adapted from Huang and Geiger [46] with permission from Wiley-Blackwell.
Figure 3.Demonstration of the precision co-alignment and integration of data collected by active (LiDAR) and passive (hyperspectral) remote sensing. This image was collected by the Carnegie Airborne Observatory over a site in Hawaii. The color-coding highlights variation among canopy species and their chemical properties both derived from the hyperspectral data. In this particular example, highly invasive species with unique chemical signatures are shown in red and pink colors, whereas native hardwood forest canopy species are shown in greens and blues. The embedded LiDAR data indicates the height and 3-D structure of each tree crown on the landscape.
Figure 4.Fully integrated (A) hyperspectral and (B) LiDAR instrumentation provides a means to filter rainforest canopies into comparable units for mapping invasive species. (C) Simple pre-screening of the data based on a minimum NDVI, here set to 0.8, ensures that only foliated canopies are analyzed (red color). (D) Sun-target-view geometry (here, 20°) and minimum canopy height (here, 5 m) is controlled for using the LiDAR data thus pre-screening for view angle effects (white color). (E) Combined, these filters provide a map of canopies suitable for species determinations and comparison. These example images were collected over a Hawaiian rainforest reserve. Adapted from Asner and Martin [77] with permission from Elsevier.
Summary of remote sensing applications for non-native plant studies.
| Moderate spatial/ spectral | Spatial: 10-100 m. Temporal: Long (16-26 days). Spectral: < 20 bands. ASTER, SPOT, TM/ETM+. |
Large stands. Different phenology to co-existing plants. Selection of images acquired in the right season. | |
Coarse spatial and spectral resolutions unable to extract non-native species from a mixture of different plants. | |
| High spatial | Spatial: < 10 m. Temporal: Short (1-4 days). Spectral: ∼5 bands. Aerial photographs, QuickBird, IKONOS. |
Unique spatial patterns. Pronounced flowering season. Selection of images acquired in the right season. | |
Inflexibility of airborne data collection. Pixel spacing still not fine enough to observe plants at the species level. Unable to detect plants with no distinct flowering pattern due to the coarse spectral resolution. Impractical for large scale monitoring due to the time intensive approach (e.g., visual inspection), and small spatial extents. | |
| High temporal | Spatial: ≥ 250 m. Temporal: Very short (1-2 days). Spectral: < 40 bands. AVHRR, MODIS. |
| High temporal | Unique phenological characteristics. Combination of models and time-series vegetation indices derived from the images. |
Insufficient spectral bands to extract non-native species from large pixels covering other plants, surface soils and senescent vegetation. Time-series vegetation pattern obscured by cloud and snow requiring a statistically sounded smoothing algorithm for noise removal. Difficult to conduct field validation due to the large plot size. Overwriting non-native species signals by climatic variations such as precipitation. | |
| Hyperspectral | Spatial: Varied (0.5-30 m). Temporal: Varied. Spectral: > 100 bands. AVIRIS, Hyperion. |
Unique signatures in the hyperspectral space. Spectral mixture analysis. Biochemical analysis at the canopy level. | |
No direct link between invasion mechanism and sophisticate hyperspectral analyses. A small swath width of data collected from aircraft restricting the ability for large spatial scale monitoring. Inflexibility of airborne data collection. High similarity in the spectral space among species. | |
| Active remote sensing | Spatial: 0.5-100 m. Temporal: Varied. Spectral: 1 band. 3-D view. LiDAR, RADARSAT. |
Large and pure stand. Monitoring the progress of species invasion from data acquired at two time points. | |
No spectral information and data only useful with good field knowledge. | |
| Image fusion | Spatial: ∼0.5 m. Temporal: Varied. Spectral: 200+ bands. 3-D view. Pushing the limits of spatial, spectral and dimensional resolutions in modern remote sensing. CAO. |
Unique signatures in the hyperspectral space. Detection of non-native species of different height-levels (overstory and understory) at the very fine spatial scale. | |
High cost of data collection. Requirement of high performance computing power. Inflexibility of airborne data collection. |