对德国各地基于哨兵-2 号卫星的大规模森林干扰图进行详细验证

IF 3 2区 农林科学 Q1 FORESTRY
Forestry Pub Date : 2024-07-11 DOI:10.1093/forestry/cpae038
Eike Reinosch, Julian Backa, Petra Adler, Janik Deutscher, Philipp Eisnecker, Karina Hoffmann, Niklas Langner, Martin Puhm, Marius Rüetschi, Christoph Straub, Lars T Waser, Jens Wiesehahn, Katja Oehmichen
{"title":"对德国各地基于哨兵-2 号卫星的大规模森林干扰图进行详细验证","authors":"Eike Reinosch, Julian Backa, Petra Adler, Janik Deutscher, Philipp Eisnecker, Karina Hoffmann, Niklas Langner, Martin Puhm, Marius Rüetschi, Christoph Straub, Lars T Waser, Jens Wiesehahn, Katja Oehmichen","doi":"10.1093/forestry/cpae038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Monitoring forest areas with satellite data has become a vital tool to derive information on disturbances in European forests at large scales. An extensive validation of generated maps is essential to evaluate their potential and limitations in detecting various disturbance patterns. Here, we present the validation results of forest disturbance maps generated for four study areas in Germany using Sentinel-2 data from 2018 to 2022. We apply a time series filtering method to map annual forest disturbances larger than 0.1 ha based on spectral clustering and annual change magnitude. The presented method is part of a research study to design a precursor for a national German forest disturbance monitoring system. In this context, annual forest change areas are used to estimate affected timber volume and related economic losses. To better understand the thematic accuracies and the reliability of the area estimates, we performed an independent and extensive validation of the annual product using 20 validation sets embedded in our four study areas and comprising a total of 11 019 sample points. The collected reference datasets are based on an expert interpretation of high-resolution aerial and satellite imagery, including information on the dominant tree species, disturbance cause, and disturbance severity level. Our forest disturbance map achieves an overall accuracy of 99.1 ± 0.1% in separating disturbed from undisturbed forest. This is mainly indicative of the accuracy for undisturbed forest, as that class covers 97.2% of the total forest area. For the disturbed forest class, the user’s accuracy is 84.4 ± 2.0% and producer’s accuracy is 85.1 ± 3.4% for 2018 to 2022. The similar user’s and producer’s accuracies indicate that the total disturbance area is estimated accurately. However, for 2022, we observe an overestimation of the total disturbance extent, which we attribute to the high drought stress in that year leading to false detections, especially around forest edges. The accuracy varies widely among validation sets and seems related to the disturbance cause, the disturbance severity, and the disturbance patch size. User’s accuracies range from 31.0 ± 8.4% to 98.8 ± 1.3%, while producer’s accuracies range from 60.5 ± 37.3% to 100.0 ± 0.0% across the validation sets. These variations highlight that the accuracy of a single local validation set is not representative of a region with a large diversity of disturbance patterns, such as Germany. This emphasizes the need to assess the accuracies of large-scale disturbance products in as many different study areas as possible, to cover different patch sizes, disturbance severities, and disturbance causes.","PeriodicalId":12342,"journal":{"name":"Forestry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detailed validation of large-scale Sentinel-2-based forest disturbance maps across Germany\",\"authors\":\"Eike Reinosch, Julian Backa, Petra Adler, Janik Deutscher, Philipp Eisnecker, Karina Hoffmann, Niklas Langner, Martin Puhm, Marius Rüetschi, Christoph Straub, Lars T Waser, Jens Wiesehahn, Katja Oehmichen\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/forestry/cpae038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Monitoring forest areas with satellite data has become a vital tool to derive information on disturbances in European forests at large scales. An extensive validation of generated maps is essential to evaluate their potential and limitations in detecting various disturbance patterns. Here, we present the validation results of forest disturbance maps generated for four study areas in Germany using Sentinel-2 data from 2018 to 2022. We apply a time series filtering method to map annual forest disturbances larger than 0.1 ha based on spectral clustering and annual change magnitude. The presented method is part of a research study to design a precursor for a national German forest disturbance monitoring system. In this context, annual forest change areas are used to estimate affected timber volume and related economic losses. To better understand the thematic accuracies and the reliability of the area estimates, we performed an independent and extensive validation of the annual product using 20 validation sets embedded in our four study areas and comprising a total of 11 019 sample points. The collected reference datasets are based on an expert interpretation of high-resolution aerial and satellite imagery, including information on the dominant tree species, disturbance cause, and disturbance severity level. Our forest disturbance map achieves an overall accuracy of 99.1 ± 0.1% in separating disturbed from undisturbed forest. This is mainly indicative of the accuracy for undisturbed forest, as that class covers 97.2% of the total forest area. For the disturbed forest class, the user’s accuracy is 84.4 ± 2.0% and producer’s accuracy is 85.1 ± 3.4% for 2018 to 2022. The similar user’s and producer’s accuracies indicate that the total disturbance area is estimated accurately. However, for 2022, we observe an overestimation of the total disturbance extent, which we attribute to the high drought stress in that year leading to false detections, especially around forest edges. The accuracy varies widely among validation sets and seems related to the disturbance cause, the disturbance severity, and the disturbance patch size. User’s accuracies range from 31.0 ± 8.4% to 98.8 ± 1.3%, while producer’s accuracies range from 60.5 ± 37.3% to 100.0 ± 0.0% across the validation sets. These variations highlight that the accuracy of a single local validation set is not representative of a region with a large diversity of disturbance patterns, such as Germany. This emphasizes the need to assess the accuracies of large-scale disturbance products in as many different study areas as possible, to cover different patch sizes, disturbance severities, and disturbance causes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12342,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forestry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forestry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpae038\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FORESTRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forestry","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpae038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

利用卫星数据监测林区已成为获取欧洲森林大尺度干扰信息的重要工具。对生成的地图进行广泛验证对于评估其在检测各种干扰模式方面的潜力和局限性至关重要。在此,我们介绍了利用 2018 年至 2022 年哨兵-2 数据为德国四个研究区域生成的森林干扰地图的验证结果。我们根据光谱聚类和年度变化幅度,采用时间序列滤波方法绘制了面积大于 0.1 公顷的年度森林干扰图。该方法是一项研究的一部分,旨在为德国国家森林扰动监测系统设计一个前导系统。在此背景下,年度森林变化面积被用于估算受影响的木材量和相关经济损失。为了更好地了解专题准确性和面积估算的可靠性,我们使用嵌入四个研究区域的 20 个验证集(共包括 11 019 个样本点)对年度产品进行了独立和广泛的验证。所收集的参考数据集基于专家对高分辨率航空和卫星图像的解读,包括主要树种、干扰原因和干扰严重程度等信息。我们的森林扰动地图在区分扰动和未扰动森林方面的总体准确率达到 99.1 ± 0.1%。这主要体现在未受干扰森林的准确性上,因为该类森林占森林总面积的 97.2%。对于受干扰森林类别,2018 年至 2022 年用户的准确度为 84.4 ± 2.0%,生产者的准确度为 85.1 ± 3.4%。用户准确率和生产者准确率相近,表明对总扰动面积的估算是准确的。然而,在 2022 年,我们发现干扰总面积被高估了,我们将其归因于该年的高干旱压力导致了错误检测,尤其是在森林边缘。各验证集的准确度差异很大,似乎与干扰原因、干扰严重程度和干扰斑块大小有关。用户的准确率在 31.0 ± 8.4% 到 98.8 ± 1.3% 之间,而生产者的准确率在 60.5 ± 37.3% 到 100.0 ± 0.0% 之间。这些差异凸显出,单个本地验证集的准确度并不能代表像德国这样干扰模式多样化的地区。这强调了在尽可能多的不同研究区域评估大尺度扰动产品精度的必要性,以涵盖不同的斑块大小、扰动严重程度和扰动原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Detailed validation of large-scale Sentinel-2-based forest disturbance maps across Germany
Monitoring forest areas with satellite data has become a vital tool to derive information on disturbances in European forests at large scales. An extensive validation of generated maps is essential to evaluate their potential and limitations in detecting various disturbance patterns. Here, we present the validation results of forest disturbance maps generated for four study areas in Germany using Sentinel-2 data from 2018 to 2022. We apply a time series filtering method to map annual forest disturbances larger than 0.1 ha based on spectral clustering and annual change magnitude. The presented method is part of a research study to design a precursor for a national German forest disturbance monitoring system. In this context, annual forest change areas are used to estimate affected timber volume and related economic losses. To better understand the thematic accuracies and the reliability of the area estimates, we performed an independent and extensive validation of the annual product using 20 validation sets embedded in our four study areas and comprising a total of 11 019 sample points. The collected reference datasets are based on an expert interpretation of high-resolution aerial and satellite imagery, including information on the dominant tree species, disturbance cause, and disturbance severity level. Our forest disturbance map achieves an overall accuracy of 99.1 ± 0.1% in separating disturbed from undisturbed forest. This is mainly indicative of the accuracy for undisturbed forest, as that class covers 97.2% of the total forest area. For the disturbed forest class, the user’s accuracy is 84.4 ± 2.0% and producer’s accuracy is 85.1 ± 3.4% for 2018 to 2022. The similar user’s and producer’s accuracies indicate that the total disturbance area is estimated accurately. However, for 2022, we observe an overestimation of the total disturbance extent, which we attribute to the high drought stress in that year leading to false detections, especially around forest edges. The accuracy varies widely among validation sets and seems related to the disturbance cause, the disturbance severity, and the disturbance patch size. User’s accuracies range from 31.0 ± 8.4% to 98.8 ± 1.3%, while producer’s accuracies range from 60.5 ± 37.3% to 100.0 ± 0.0% across the validation sets. These variations highlight that the accuracy of a single local validation set is not representative of a region with a large diversity of disturbance patterns, such as Germany. This emphasizes the need to assess the accuracies of large-scale disturbance products in as many different study areas as possible, to cover different patch sizes, disturbance severities, and disturbance causes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Forestry
Forestry 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
7.10%
发文量
47
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal is inclusive of all subjects, geographical zones and study locations, including trees in urban environments, plantations and natural forests. We welcome papers that consider economic, environmental and social factors and, in particular, studies that take an integrated approach to sustainable management. In considering suitability for publication, attention is given to the originality of contributions and their likely impact on policy and practice, as well as their contribution to the development of knowledge. Special Issues - each year one edition of Forestry will be a Special Issue and will focus on one subject in detail; this will usually be by publication of the proceedings of an international meeting.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信