Literature DB >> 32253518

Integrating drone imagery with existing rangeland monitoring programs.

Jeffrey K Gillan1, Jason W Karl2, Willem J D van Leeuwen3,4.   

Abstract

The recent availability of small and low-cost sensor carrying unmanned aerial systems (UAS, commonly known as drones) coupled with advances in image processing software (i.e., structure from motion photogrammetry) has made drone-collected imagery a potentially valuable tool for rangeland inventory and monitoring. Drone-imagery methods can observe larger extents to estimate indicators at landscape scales with higher confidence than traditional field sampling. They also have the potential to replace field methods in some instances and enable the development of indicators not measurable from the ground. Much research has already demonstrated that several quantitative rangeland indicators can be estimated from high-resolution imagery. Developing a suite of monitoring methods that are useful for supporting management decisions (e.g., repeatable, cost-effective, and validated against field methods) will require additional exploration to develop best practices for image acquisition and analytical workflows that can efficiently estimate multiple indicators. We embedded with a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) field monitoring crew in Northern California, USA to compare field-measured and imagery-derived indicator values and to evaluate the logistics of using small UAS within the framework of an existing monitoring program. The unified workflow we developed to measure fractional cover, canopy gaps, and vegetation height was specific for the sagebrush steppe, an ecosystem that is common in other BLM managed lands. The correspondence between imagery and field methods yielded encouraging agreement while revealing systematic differences between the methods. Workflow best practices for producing repeatable rangeland indicators is likely to vary by vegetation composition and phenology. An online space dedicated to sharing imagery-based workflows could spur collaboration among researchers and quicken the pace of integrating drone-imagery data within adaptive management of rangelands. Though drone-imagery methods are not likely to replace most field methods in large monitoring programs, they could be a valuable enhancement for pressing local management needs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adaptive management; Drone; Ecological inventory and monitoring; Rangelands; Remote sensing; Unmanned aerial system

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32253518     DOI: 10.1007/s10661-020-8216-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Monit Assess        ISSN: 0167-6369            Impact factor:   2.513


  8 in total

1.  Dual-camera, high-resolution aerial assessment of pipeline revegetation.

Authors:  D Terrance Booth; Samuel E Cox
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2008-10-18       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Rangeland and pasture monitoring: an approach to interpretation of high-resolution imagery focused on observer calibration for repeatability.

Authors:  Michael C Duniway; Jason W Karl; Scott Schrader; Noemi Baquera; Jeffrey E Herrick
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2011-07-23       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  Modeling vegetation heights from high resolution stereo aerial photography: an application for broad-scale rangeland monitoring.

Authors:  Jeffrey K Gillan; Jason W Karl; Michael Duniway; Ahmed Elaksher
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 6.789

4.  Ecological site‐based assessments of wind and water erosion: informing accelerated soil erosion management in rangelands.

Authors:  Nicholas P Webb; Jeffrey E Herrick; Michael C Duniway
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 4.657

5.  Measuring plant cover in sagebrush steppe rangelands: a comparison of methods.

Authors:  Steven S Seefeldt; D Terrance Booth
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.644

6.  Identifying species from the air: UAVs and the very high resolution challenge for plant conservation.

Authors:  Susana Baena; Justin Moat; Oliver Whaley; Doreen S Boyd
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Small unmanned aerial vehicles (micro-UAVs, drones) in plant ecology.

Authors:  Mitchell B Cruzan; Ben G Weinstein; Monica R Grasty; Brendan F Kohrn; Elizabeth C Hendrickson; Tina M Arredondo; Pamela G Thompson
Journal:  Appl Plant Sci       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 1.936

8.  Considerations for Achieving Cross-Platform Point Cloud Data Fusion across Different Dryland Ecosystem Structural States.

Authors:  Tyson L Swetnam; Jeffrey K Gillan; Temuulen T Sankey; Mitchel P McClaran; Mary H Nichols; Philip Heilman; Jason McVay
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 5.753

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.