Exploring the use of google earth imagery and object-based methods in land use/cover mapping

Remote Sensing

Volumn 5, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 6026-6042

  Hu, Qiong ^a,b   Wu, Wenbin ^a,b   Xia, Tian ^a,b   Yu, Qiangyi ^a,b   Yang, Peng ^a,b   Li, Zhengguo ^a,b   Song, Qian ^a,b  

^a AGRO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INSTITUTE   (China)

^b INSTITUTE OF PLANT PROTECTION   (China)

Author keywords

Classification; Google Earth; Land use cover; Object based; QuickBird

Indexed keywords

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); EARTH SCIENCES; REMOTE SENSING;

GOOGLE EARTHS; HETEROGENEOUS LANDSCAPES; LAND USE/COVER; OBJECT BASED; OBJECT-BASED CLASSIFICATIONS; PARALLEL CLASSIFICATIONS; QUICKBIRD; SPECTRAL CHARACTERISTICS;

MAPPING;

EID: 84904670452     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20724292     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/rs5116026     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Colditz, R.R.; Schmidt, M.; Conrad, C.; Hansen, M.C.; Dech, S. Land cover classification with coarse spatial resolution data to derive continuous and discrete maps for complex regions. Remote Sens. Environ. 2011, 115, 3264-3275.
2. Sleeter, B.M.; Sohl, T.L.; Loveland, T.R.; Auch, R.F.; Acevedo, W.; Drummond, M.A.; Sayler, K.L.; Stehman, S.V. Land-cover change in the conterminous United States from 1973 to 2000. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2013, 23, 733-748.
3. Wu, W.; Shibasaki, R.; Yang, P.; Zhou, Q.; Tang, H. Remotely sensed estimation of cropland in China: A comparison of the maps derived from four global land cover datasets. Can. J. Remote Sens. 2008, 34, 467-479.
4. Bargiel, D.; Herrmann, S. Multi-temporal land-cover classification of agricultural areas in two European regions with high resolution spotlight TerraSAR-X data. Remote Sens. 2011, 3, 859-877.
5. Wang, Y.; Mitchell, B.R.; Nugranad-Marzilli, J.; Bonynge, G.; Zhou, Y.; Shriver, G. Remote sensing of land-cover change and landscape context of the National Parks: A case study of the Northeast temperate network. Remote Sens. Environ. 2009, 113, 1453-1461.
6. Jiang, H.; Zhao, D.; Cai, Y.; An, S. A method for application of classification tree models to map aquatic vegetation using remotely sensed images from different sensors and dates. Sensors 2012, 12, 12437-12454.
7. Zhou, H.; Aizen, E.; Aizen, V. Deriving long term snow cover extent dataset from AVHRR and MODIS data: Central Asia case study. Remote Sens. Environ. 2013, 136, 146-162.
8. Wijedasa, L.S.; Sloan, S.; Michelakis, D.G.; Clements, G.R. Overcoming limitations with Landsat imagery for mapping of peat swamp forests in Sundaland. Remote Sens. 2012, 4, 2595-2618.
9. Gong, P.; Wang, J.; Yu, L.; Zhao, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Liang, L.; Niu, Z.; Huang, X.; Fu, H.; Liu, S.; et al. Finer resolution observation and monitoring of global land cover: First mapping results with Landsat TM and ETM+ data. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2013, 34, 2607-2654.
10. Hansen, M.C.; DeFries, R.S.; Townshend, J.R.; Sohlberg, R. Global land cover classification at 1 km spatial resolution using a classification tree approach. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2000, 21, 1331-1364.
11. Tchuenté, A.T.K.; Roujean, J.L.; De Jong, S.M. Comparison and relative quality assessment of the GLC2000, GLOBCOVER, MODIS and ECOCLIMAP land cover data sets at the African continental scale. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2011, 13, 207-219.
12. Liu, J.; Liu, M.; Deng, X.; Zhuang, D.; Zhang, Z.; Luo, D. The land use and land cover change database and its relative studies in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2002, 12, 275-282.
13. Zhou, W.; Troy, A.; Grove, M. Object-based land cover classification and change analysis in the Baltimore metropolitan area using multitemporal high resolution remote sensing data. Sensors 2008, 8, 1613-1636.
14. Laliberte, A.S.; Browning, D.M.; Rango, A. A comparison of three feature selection methods for object-based classification of sub-decimeter resolution UltraCam-L imagery. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2012, 15, 70-78.
15. Duro, D.C.; Franklin, S.E.; Dubé, M.G. A comparison of pixel-based and object-based image analysis with selected machine learning algorithms for the classification of agricultural landscapes using SPOT-5 HRG imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 2012, 118, 259-272.
16. Batista, M.H.; Haertel, V. On the classification of remote sensing high spatial resolution image data. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2010, 31, 5533-5548.
17. Clark, M.L.; Aide, T.M.; Grau, H.R.; Riner, G. A scalable approach to mapping annual land cover at 250 m using MODIS time series data: A case study in the Dry Chaco Ecoregion of South America. Remote Sens. Environ. 2010, 114, 2816-2832.
18. Mering, C.; Baro, J.; Upegui, E. Retrieving urban areas on Google Earth images: Application to towns of West Africa. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2010, 31, 5867-5877.
19. Kaimaris, D.; Georgoula, O.; Patias, P.; Stylianidis, E. Comparative analysis on the archaeological content of imagery from Google Earth. J. Cult. Herit. 2011, 12, 263-269.
20. Yu, L.; Gong, P. Google Earth as a virtual globe tool for Earth science applications at the global scale: Progress and perspectives. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2011, 33, 3966-3986.
21. Guo, J.; Liang, L.; Gong, P. Removing shadows from Google Earth images. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2010, 31, 1379-1389.
22. Potere, D. Horizontal positional accuracy of Google Earth's high-resolution imagery Archive. Sensors 2008, 8, 7973-7981.
23. Dragut, L.; Tiede, D.; Levick, S.R. ESP: A tool to estimate scale parameter for multiresolution image segmentation of remotely sensed data. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2010, 24, 859-871.
24. Xiao, Y. Spatial-Temporal Land Use Patterns and Master Planning in Wuhan, China. M.S. Thesis, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China, 2002.
25. Cheng, J.; Masser, I. Urban growth pattern modeling: A case study of Wuhan city, PR China. Landsc. Urban. Plan. 2003, 62, 199-217.
26. Jensen, J.R. Thematic Map Accuracy Assessment. In Introductory Digital Image Processing: A Remote Sensing Perspective, 3rd ed.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2005; pp. 476-482.
27. Shao, Y.; Lunetta, R.S. Comparison of support vector machine, neural network, and CART algorithms for the land-cover classification using limited training data points. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2012, 70, 78-87.
28. Aitkenhead, M.J.; Aalders, I.H. Automating land cover mapping of Scotland using expert system and knowledge integration methods. Remote Sens. Environ. 2011, 115, 1285-1295.
29. Yu, Q.; Gong, P.; Clinton, N.; Biging, G.; Kelly, M.; Schirokauer, D. Object-based detailed vegetation classification with airborne high spatial resolution remote sensing imagery. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 2006, 72, 799-811.
30. Lisita, A.; Sano, E.E.; Durieux, L. Identifying potential areas of Cannabis sativa plantations using object-based image analysis of SPOT-5 satellite data. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2013, 34, 5409-5428.
31. Lu, D.; Weng, Q. A survey of image classification methods and techniques for improving classification performance. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2007, 28, 823-870.
32. Blaschke, T. Object based image analysis for remote sensing. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2010, 65, 2-16.
33. Dribault, Y.; Chokmani, K.; Bernier, M. Monitoring seasonal hydrological dynamics of minerotrophic peatlands using multi-date GeoEye-1 very high resolution imagery and object-based classification. Remote Sens. 2012, 4, 1887-1912.
34. Mathieu, R.; Aryal, J.; Chong, A. Object-based classification of Ikonos imagery for mapping large-scale vegetation communities in urban areas. Sensors 2007, 7, 2860-2880.
35. Myint, S.W.; Gober, P.; Brazel, A.; Grossman-Clarke, S.; Weng, Q. Per-pixel vs. object-based classification of urban land cover extraction using high spatial resolution imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 2011, 115, 1145-1161.
36. Manandhar, R.; Odeh, I.; Ancev, T. Improving the accuracy of land use and land cover classification of landsat data using post-classification enhancement. Remote Sens. 2009, 1, 330-344.
37. Zhou, W.; Troy, A. An object-oriented approach for analysing and characterizing urban landscape at the parcel level. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2008, 29, 3119-3135.
38. Duro, D.C.; Franklin, S.E.; Dubé, M.G. A comparison of pixel-based and object-based image analysis with selected machine learning algorithms for the classification of agricultural landscapes using SPOT-5 HRG imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 2012, 118, 259-272.
39. Benz, U.C.; Hofmann, P.; Willhauck, G.; Lingenfelder, I.; Heynen, M. Multi-resolution, object-oriented fuzzy analysis of remote sensing data for GIS-ready information. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2004, 58, 239-258.
40. Hu, Q.; Zhang, J.; Xu, B.; Li, Z. A comparison of Google Earth imagery and the homologous Quick Bird imagery being used in land-use classification. J. Huazhong Norm. Univ. 2013, 52, 287-291.
41. Gao, Y.; Mas, J.F.; Navarrete, A. The improvement of an object-oriented classification using multi-temporal MODIS EVI satellite data. Int. J. Digit. Earth 2009, 2, 219-236.
42. Zhou, W.; Huang, G.; Troy, A.; Cadenasso, M.L. Object-based land cover classification of shaded areas in high spatial resolution imagery of urban areas: A comparison study. Remote Sens. Environ. 2009, 113, 1769-1777.
43. Ghosh, A.; Joshi, P.K. A comparison of selected classification algorithms for mapping bamboo patches in lower Gangetic plains using very high resolution WorldView 2 imagery. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2014, 26, 298-311.
44. Foody, G.M. Thematic map comparison: Evaluating the statistical significance of differences in classification accuracy. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 2004, 5, 627-633.
45. Huang, X.; Zhang, L.; Li, P. Classification and extraction of spatial features in urban areas using high-resolution multispectral imagery. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens.Lett. 2007, 4, 260-264.
46. Smith, A. Image segmentation scale parameter optimization and land cover classification using the Random Forest algorithm. J. Spat. Sci. 2010, 55, 69-79.
47. Castillejo-González, I.L.; López-Granados, F.; García-Ferrer, A.; Peña-Barragán, J.M.; Jurado-Expósito, M.; de la Orden, M.S.; González-Audicana, M. Object- and pixel-based analysis for mapping crops and their agro-environmental associated measures using QuickBird imagery. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2009, 68, 207-215.
48. Petropoulos, G.P.; Kalaitzidis, C.; Prasad Vadrevu, K. Support vector machines and object-based classification for obtaining land-use/cover cartography from Hyperion hyperspectral imagery. Comput. Geosci. 2012, 41, 99-107.
49. Elatawneh, A.; Kalaitzidis, C.; Petropoulos, G.P.; Schneider, T. Evaluation of diverse classification approaches for land use/cover mapping in a Mediterranean region utilizing Hyperion data. Int. J. Digit. Earth 2012, doi: 10.1080/17538947.2012.671378.
50. Anders, N.S.; Seijmonsbergen, A.C.; Bouten, W. Segmentation optimization and stratified object-based analysis for semi-automated geomorphological mapping. Remote Sens. Environ. 2011, 115, 2976-2985.
51. Salehi, B.; Zhang, Y.; Zhong, M.; Dey, V. Object-based classification of urban areas using VHR imagery and height points ancillary data. Remote Sens. 2012, 4, 2256-2276.
52. Haala, N.; Brenner, C. Extraction of buildings and trees in urban environments. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 1999, 54, 130-137.
53. Yu, Q.; Wu, W.; Yang, P.; Li, Z.; Xiong, W.; Tang, H. Proposing an interdisciplinary and cross-scale framework for global change and food security researches. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2012, 156, 57-71