Sensitivity of landscape metrics to classification scheme

被引:38
作者
Huang, C. [1 ]
Geiger, E. L.
Kupfer, J. A.
机构
[1] Univ Arizona, Sch Nat Resources, Tucson, AZ 85721 USA
[2] Univ S Carolina, Dept Geog, Columbia, SC 29208 USA
[3] Univ Arizona, Arizona Remote Sensing Ctr, Off Arid Lands Studies, Tucson, AZ 85719 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1080/01431160600554330
中图分类号
TP7 [遥感技术];
学科分类号
081102 ; 0816 ; 081602 ; 083002 ; 1404 ;
摘要
Landscape metrics are a standard tool in the study and monitoring of landscape pattern and change, but their statistical properties and behaviour across a range of classification schemes and landscapes, as well as their sensitivity to changing landscape patterns, are still not fully understood. We therefore investigated the sensitivity of 24 metrics to a number of land cover classes for three Arizona landscapes with different spatial patterns. To do so, we applied unsupervised classification of remotely sensed data with two different nominal spatial resolutions to generate maps containing 2-35 classes. We calculated metric values for these thematic maps and classified the metrics into six groups using principal components analysis. For each group, the nature and sensitivity of responses to differences in resolution, landscape pattern, and classification detail were assessed. Our results indicated that many metrics behaved predictably with increasing classification detail, increasing or decreasing at rates that were often relatively similar and independent to sensor and landscape pattern. At lower class numbers, metrics were most sensitive to increasing classification detail, and the effects of classification scheme were most erratic and sensitive to resolution and underlying landscape pattern. Overall, this study provides a descriptive overview of the sensitivity of common metrics to changes in classification scheme, as well as a first attempt to draw some generalizations about the importance of classification scheme in conjunction with resolution effects.
引用
收藏
页码:2927 / 2948
页数:22
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1976, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PR
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1994, FRAGSTATS SPATIAL PA
[3]  
[Anonymous], CAN J REM SENS
[4]   Landscape metrics with ecotones: pattern under uncertainty [J].
Arnot, C ;
Fisher, PF ;
Wadsworth, R ;
Wellens, J .
LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY, 2004, 19 (02) :181-195
[5]   THE R LE-PROGRAMS FOR MULTISCALE ANALYSIS OF LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE USING THE GRASS GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION-SYSTEM [J].
BAKER, WL ;
CAI, YM .
LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY, 1992, 7 (04) :291-302
[6]   Sensitivity of landscape pattern indices to input data characteristics on real landscapes: implications for their use in natural disturbance emulation [J].
David J. B. Baldwin ;
Kevin Weaver ;
Frank Schnekenburger ;
Ajith H. Perera .
Landscape Ecology, 2004, 19 (3) :255-271
[7]   EFFECTS OF SENSOR SPATIAL-RESOLUTION ON LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE PARAMETERS [J].
BENSON, BJ ;
MACKENZIE, MD .
LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY, 1995, 10 (02) :113-120
[8]  
Chavez PS, 1996, PHOTOGRAMM ENG REM S, V62, P1025
[9]   Rates and patterns of landscape change in the Central Sikhote-alin Mountains, Russian Far East [J].
Cushman, SA ;
Wallin, DO .
LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY, 2000, 15 (07) :643-659
[10]   Unsupervised classification of satellite imagery: choosing a good algorithm [J].
Duda, T ;
Canty, M .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING, 2002, 23 (11) :2193-2212