Exploratory ecological-stress screening for regional planning: a quality-controlled Landsat-based mRSEI analysis of Sakarya Province, Türkiye (2000–2025)
{"title":"Exploratory ecological-stress screening for regional planning: a quality-controlled Landsat-based mRSEI analysis of Sakarya Province, Türkiye (2000–2025)","authors":"Mustafa Ergen","doi":"10.1007/s12518-026-00789-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Regional averages can conceal localized ecological deterioration in rapidly transforming peri-urban landscapes. This study presents a quality-controlled remote-sensing workflow for screening ecological stress across Sakarya Province, Türkiye, using six benchmark-date Landsat composites (2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2025). After raster alignment and quality control, the Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) was excluded because the 2025 layer differed substantially in spatial resolution and value distribution from the preceding series. A modified Remote Sensing Ecological Index (mRSEI) was therefore constructed from pooled, commonly normalized NDVI, NDMI, inverse NDBI and NBR layers using one fixed-loading principal component model. The first component explained 93.75% of pooled variance. Mean mRSEI increased from 0.609 in 2010 to 0.688 in 2015 but declined to 0.595 in 2025; the sensor transition and six-date design prevent this pattern from being interpreted as an unambiguous ecological trajectory. Pixel-wise Sen slope and Mann-Kendall tests indicated significant positive, significant negative and non-significant mRSEI trends over 4.83%, 1.10% and 94.08% of the common valid area, respectively, before multiple-testing correction. No trend remained significant after Benjamini-Hochberg false-discovery-rate control. A conservative Exploratory Ecological Stress Synthesis (EESS) classified 97.67% of the valid area as Low, 1.54% as Moderate, 0.57% as High and 0.22% as Very High stress. Because no independent field, cadastral or land-cover validation was available, these classes are modelled screening outputs rather than validated vulnerability zones. They can guide subsequent stratified field sampling, high-resolution image interpretation and planning review, but should not be used directly as statutory zoning boundaries.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46286,"journal":{"name":"Applied Geomatics","volume":"18 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Geomatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12518-026-00789-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REMOTE SENSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Regional averages can conceal localized ecological deterioration in rapidly transforming peri-urban landscapes. This study presents a quality-controlled remote-sensing workflow for screening ecological stress across Sakarya Province, Türkiye, using six benchmark-date Landsat composites (2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2025). After raster alignment and quality control, the Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) was excluded because the 2025 layer differed substantially in spatial resolution and value distribution from the preceding series. A modified Remote Sensing Ecological Index (mRSEI) was therefore constructed from pooled, commonly normalized NDVI, NDMI, inverse NDBI and NBR layers using one fixed-loading principal component model. The first component explained 93.75% of pooled variance. Mean mRSEI increased from 0.609 in 2010 to 0.688 in 2015 but declined to 0.595 in 2025; the sensor transition and six-date design prevent this pattern from being interpreted as an unambiguous ecological trajectory. Pixel-wise Sen slope and Mann-Kendall tests indicated significant positive, significant negative and non-significant mRSEI trends over 4.83%, 1.10% and 94.08% of the common valid area, respectively, before multiple-testing correction. No trend remained significant after Benjamini-Hochberg false-discovery-rate control. A conservative Exploratory Ecological Stress Synthesis (EESS) classified 97.67% of the valid area as Low, 1.54% as Moderate, 0.57% as High and 0.22% as Very High stress. Because no independent field, cadastral or land-cover validation was available, these classes are modelled screening outputs rather than validated vulnerability zones. They can guide subsequent stratified field sampling, high-resolution image interpretation and planning review, but should not be used directly as statutory zoning boundaries.
期刊介绍:
Applied Geomatics (AGMJ) is the official journal of SIFET the Italian Society of Photogrammetry and Topography and covers all aspects and information on scientific and technical advances in the geomatics sciences. The Journal publishes innovative contributions in geomatics applications ranging from the integration of instruments, methodologies and technologies and their use in the environmental sciences, engineering and other natural sciences.
The areas of interest include many research fields such as: remote sensing, close range and videometric photogrammetry, image analysis, digital mapping, land and geographic information systems, geographic information science, integrated geodesy, spatial data analysis, heritage recording; network adjustment and numerical processes. Furthermore, Applied Geomatics is open to articles from all areas of deformation measurements and analysis, structural engineering, mechanical engineering and all trends in earth and planetary survey science and space technology. The Journal also contains notices of conferences and international workshops, industry news, and information on new products. It provides a useful forum for professional and academic scientists involved in geomatics science and technology.
Information on Open Research Funding and Support may be found here: https://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/institutional-agreements