Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Monitoring and assessing of landscape heterogeneity at different scales

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In numerous studies, spatial and spectral aggregations of pixel information using average values from imaging spectrometer data are suggested to derive spectral indices and the subsequent vegetation parameters that are derived from these. Currently, there are very few empirical studies that use hyperspectral data, to support the hypothesis for deriving land surface variables from different spectral and spatial scales. In the study at hand, for the first time ever, investigations were carried out on fundamental scaling issues using specific experimental test flights with a hyperspectral sensor to investigate how vegetation patterns change as an effect of (1) different spatial resolutions, (2) different spectral resolutions, (3) different spatial and spectral resolutions as well as (4) different spatial and spectral resolutions of originally recorded hyperspectral image data compared to spatial and spectral up- and downscaled image data. For these experiments, the hyperspectral sensor AISA-EAGLE/HAWK (DUAL) was mounted on an aircraft to collect spectral signatures over a very short time sequence of a particular day. In the first experiment, reflectance measurements were collected at three different spatial resolutions ranging from 1 to 3 m over a 2-h period in 1 day. In the second experiment, different spectral image data and different additional spatial data were collected over a 1-h period on a particular day from the same test area. The differently recorded hyperspectral data were then spatially and spectrally rescaled to synthesize different up- and down-rescaled images. The normalised difference vegetation index (NDVI) was determined from all image data. The NDVI heterogeneity of all images was compared based on methods of variography. The results showed that (a) the spatial NDVI patterns of up- and downscaled data do not correspond with the un-scaled image data, (b) only small differences were found between NDVI patterns determined from data recorded and resampled at different spectral resolutions and (c) the overall conclusion from the tests carried out is that the spatial resolution is more important in determining heterogeneity by means of NDVI than the depth of the spectral data. The implications behind these findings are that we need to exercise caution when interpreting and combining spatial structures and spectral indices derived from satellite images with differently recorded geometric resolutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Atkinson, P. M. (1993). The effect of spatial resolution on the experimental variogram of airborne MSS imagery. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 14, 1005–1011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, P. M., & Tate, N. J. (2000). Spatial scale and geostatistical solutions: a review. The Professional Geographer, 52, 607–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blöschl, G. (1999). Scaling issues in snow hydrology. Hydrological Processes, 13, 2149–2175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, J. M., & Nellis, M. D. (1991). Seasonal variation of heterogeneity in the tallgrass prairie: a quantitative measure using remote sensing. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 57, 407–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W., & Henebry, G. M. (2010). Spatio-spectral heterogeneity analysis using EO-1 Hyperion imagery. Computers & Geoscience, 36, 167–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cola, L. (1994). Simulating and mapping spatial complexity using multiscale techniques. International Journal of Geographic Information Systems 8(5), 411–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ettema, C. H., & Wardle, D. A. (2002). Spatial soil ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17, 177–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrigues, S., Allard, D., Baret, F., & Weiss, M. (2006). Quantifying spatial heterogeneity at the landscape scale using variogram models. Remote Sensing of Environment, 103, 81–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrigues, S., Allard, D., Baret, F., & Moisett, J. (2008). Multivariate quantification of landscape spatial heterogeneity using variogram models. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 216–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, D. G., & Henebry, G. M. (1998). Seasonality of finely-resolved spatial structure of NDVI and its component reflectances in tallgrass prairie. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 19, 3213–3220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, D. G., & Henebry, G. M. (2002). The effect of rescaling on fine spatial resolution NDVI data: a test using multi-resolution aircraft sensor data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 23, 3865–3871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodin, D. G., Gao, J., & Henebry, G. M. (2004). The effect of solar zenith angle and sensor view angle on observed patterns of spatial structure in tallgrass prairie. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41, 154–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. R., Swanton, C. J., & Anderson, G. W. (1992). The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Science, 40, 441–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornschuch, F., & Riek, W. (2009). Bodenheterogenität als Indikator von Naturnähe? 2. Biologische, strukturelle und bodenkundliche Diversität in Natur- und Wirtschafts- wäldern Brandenburgs und Nordwest-Polens. Waldökologie, Landschaftsforschung und Naturschutz, 7, 55–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaak, E. H., & Srivastava, R. M. (1989). An introduction to applied geostatistics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lausch, A., Pause, M., Merbach, I., Gwillym-Margianto, S., Schulz, K., Zacharias, S., et al. (2012). Scale-specific hyperspectral remote sensing approach in environmental research. PFG, 5, 589–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lausch, A., Pause, M., Merbach, I., Zacharias, S., Doktor, D., Volk, M., et al. (2013). A new multi-scale approach for monitoring vegetation using remote sensing-based indicators in laboratory, field and landscape. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 185, 1215–1235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levesque, J., & King, D. J. (1999). Airborne digital camera image semivariance for evaluation of forest structural damage at an acid mine site. Remote Sensing of Environment, 68, 112–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mäkisara, K., Meinander, M., Rantasuo, M., Okkonen, J., Aikio, M., Sipola, K., Pylkkö, P. & Braam, B. (1993). Airborne Imaging Spectrometer for Applications (AISA), Digest of IGARSS’93, 2, 479–481 (Tokyo, Japan).

  • Malenovský, Z., Bartholomeus, H. M., Acerbi-Junior, F., Schopfer, J. T., Painter, T. H., Epema, G. F., et al. (2007). Scaling dimensions in spectroscopy of soil and vegetation. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 9, 137–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, R., & Schlapfer, D. (2002). Geo-atmospheric processing of airborne imaging spectrometry data. Part 2: atmospheric/topographic correction. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 23, 2631–2649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogaß, C., Spengler, D., Bochow, M., Segl, K., Lausch, A., Doktor, D., et al. (2011). Reduction of radiometric miscalibration—applications to pushbroom sensors. Sensors, 11, 6370–6395. doi:10.3390/s110606370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouse, J.W.J., Hass, R.H., Schell, J.A., Deering, D.W. (1974). Monitoring vegetation systems in the Great Plains with ERTS. In Proceedings Earth Resources Technology Satellite (ERTS) Symposium, 3rd., Greenbelt, MD, 10–14 Dec 1973, 309–317.

  • Sellers. (1985). Canopy reflectance, photosynthesis and transpiration. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 6, 1335–1372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegmann, B. (2011). Klassifikation trockener Offenlandvegetation mit bildspektrometrischen Daten unterschiedlicher Auflösung im Naturschutzgebiet Döberitzer Heide - Ein Vergleich verschiedener Klassifikationsverfahren des maschinellen Lernens. Diplomarbeit, Martin Luther Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 114 pp.

  • Tarnavsky, E., Garrigues, S., & Brown, M. E. (2008). Multiscale geostatistical analysis of AVHRR, SPOT-VGT, and Modis global NDVI products. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 535–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, R., & Oliver, M. A. (2001). Geostatistics for environmental scientists. Statistics in practice (p. 271). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J. (2009). Scale Issues in remote sensing: a review on analysis, processing and modeling. Sensors, 9, 1768–1793. doi:10.3390/s90301768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zacharias, S., Bogena, H., Samaniego, L., Mauder, M., Fuß, R., Pütz, T., et al. (2011). A network of terrestrial environmental observatories in Germany. Vadose Zone Journal, 10, 955–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department Computational Landscape Ecology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Permoserstraße 15, 04318, Leipzig, Germany

    Angela Lausch, Daniel Doktor & Sebastian Preidl

  2. Water & Earth System Science Competence Centre (WESS), University of Tuebingen, Keplerstrasse 17, 72074, Tuebingen, Germany

    Marion Pause

  3. Institute of Water Management, Hydrology and Hydraulic Engineering (IWHW), University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Muthgasse 18, 1190, Vienna, Austria

    Karsten Schulz

Authors
  1. Angela Lausch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marion Pause
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Doktor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sebastian Preidl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Karsten Schulz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angela Lausch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lausch, A., Pause, M., Doktor, D. et al. Monitoring and assessing of landscape heterogeneity at different scales. Environ Monit Assess 185, 9419–9434 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-013-3262-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-013-3262-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation