Upload
others
View
8
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Remote Sensing CropResidue Cover
Guy Serbin, E. Raymond Hunt Jr., andCraig S. T. Daughtry
USDA/ARS Hydrology and RemoteSensing Lab, Beltsville, MD
What are crop residues?
• Crop residues arestalks, cobs, andother plant parts leftbehind after aharvest.
• They are alsoreferred to as non-photosyntheticvegetation.
Why are crop residues important?
• When left on the soil surface, they:
– Protect the soil from wind and water erosion.
– Reduce evaporation by acting as a mulch.
– Their breakdown helps sequester carbon tothe soil.
• This also recycles nutrients.
– Improve soil structure and water retention.
• When removed from the soil:
– They do not benefit the soil.
– But, they can be used for cellulosic ethanolbiofuels.
Tillage systems and residues
A. Intensively tilled field B. No-tilled field
• Intensive tillage removes residue, exposes soil to erosion.
• Conservation tillage (e.g., no-till) leaves residue on fields.
• With conservation tillage, farmers save money on fuel, cansell carbon credits, and receive monetary benefits.
CTIC and USDA-NRCS tillagedefinitions
• Intensive tillage (< 15% residue cover)
• Reduced tillage (15 – 30% residue cover)
• Conservation tillage (> 30% residue cover)
Where else is non-photosyntheticvegetation important?
• Dry vegetation is animportant indicator ofrangeland quality and soilhealth.
• Dry plant material easilycatches fire:– Prescribed burning is an
important management practicein Western US.
– In Oct. 2007, California wildfirescaused over $1 billion indamage.
– Wildfires also occurring thisyear.
Prescribed rangeland burn, imagecourtesy Wyoming Wildlife andNatural Resource Trust
Simi Valley, CA, Oct. 14, 2008.(Associated Press)
Verification of residue cover
A. Line-point transect.
B. Photographic. C. Photo comparison.
Landsat TM-based indices:• NDI5 (McNairn and Protz, 1993)*
• NDI7 (McNairn and Protz, 1993)
• NDSVI (Qi et al., 2003)*
• NDTI (van Deventer et al., 1997)
*Only NDI5, NDSVIappropriate for AWiFS/LISS III
Remote sensing of crop residue coverR
efle
cta
nce
Facto
r
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
FF
Refle
cta
nce
Facto
r0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
F
AS
TE
R 1 2 3 4 56789 5 6 7 8 9
Wavelength, nm
400 1000 1600 2200
Lan
dsa
tT
M
123 4 5 7
Wavelength, nm
2000 2200 2400
7
2.0 2.1 2.2
75
75
TMTM
TMTMNDTI
54
545
TMTM
TMTMNDI
74
747
TMTM
TMTMNDI
35
35
TMTM
TMTMNDSVI
Remote sensing of crop residue cover• ASTER: Lignin-Cellulose
Absorption (LCA) Index
• Hyperspectral SWIR:Cellulose AbsorptionIndex (CAI)
– CAI most effective inmeasuring residuecover:
• Shortwave infrared
• Narrowband
8562100 ASTERASTERASTERLCA
Refle
cta
nce
Facto
r
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
FF
Refle
cta
nce
Facto
r0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
F
AS
TE
R 1 2 3 4 56789 5 6 7 8 9
Wavelength, nm
400 1000 1600 2200
Lan
dsa
tT
M
123 4 5 7
Wavelength, nm
2000 2200 2400
7
2.0 2.1 2.2
210122112031 2/100 RRRCAI
CAI, surface soils
• Crop residues contrast well with all soils, greenvegetation.
• N = 893 surface soils from Brown et al. 2006.
Surface soil samples
CA
I
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
Alfi
sol
And
isol
Arid
isol
Ent
isol
His
toso
lIn
cept
isol
Mol
lisol
Oxi
sol
Spo
doso
lU
ltiso
lV
ertis
olU
ndet
.R
esid
ues
Live
corn
LCA, surface soilsSurface soil samples
LC
A
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Alfi
sol
And
isol
Arid
isol
Ent
isol
His
toso
lIn
cept
isol
Mol
lisol
Oxi
sol
Spo
doso
lU
ltiso
lV
ertis
olU
ndet
.R
esid
ues
Live
corn
• Some overlap seen between crop residues,soils, and green vegetation.
NDTI, surface soilsSurface soil samples
ND
TI
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Alfi
sol
And
isol
Arid
isol
Ent
isol
His
toso
lIn
cept
isol
Mol
lisol
Oxi
sol
Spo
doso
lU
ltiso
lV
ertis
olU
ndet
.R
esid
ues
Live
corn
• Green vegetation has strongest response.
• Crop residues overlap some soils andgreen vegetation.
NDSVI, NDI5, surface soilsSurface soil samples
ND
SV
I
-0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Alfi
sol
And
isol
Arid
isol
Ent
isol
His
toso
lIn
cept
isol
Mol
lisol
Oxi
sol
Spo
doso
lU
ltiso
lV
ertis
olU
ndet
.R
esid
ues
Live
corn
Surface soil samples
ND
I5
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
Alfi
sol
And
isol
Arid
isol
Ent
isol
His
toso
lIn
cept
isol
Mol
lisol
Oxi
sol
Spo
doso
lU
ltiso
lV
ertis
olU
ndet
.R
esid
ues
Live
corn
• Green vegetation has strongest response.
• Crop residues overlap most soils.
• These indices only usable in limited areas.
2006-2007 study areas• Airborne hyperspectral SpecTIR
imagery were acquired in north-central Indiana.
• Imagery acquired shortly afterplanting (May/June).
• Most fields were soybean or corn.
• Ground truth of residue coveracquired at > 50 fields using line-point transects, 2 locationsmeasured per field.
• Soil and residue samples alsoacquired at select locations.
• Hyperspectral bands convolved toequivalent ASTER VNIR andSWIR, and Landsat TM bands.
2006-2007 field analysis methods• Pixels within 30 m of sampling locations analyzed
for:
– NDVI for live green vegetation cover.
– Indices residue cover.
1. Compared with line-point transect fR using linearregression.
2. Inversion to determine fR for CAI:
fR = (CAIpixel - CAIsoil)/(CAIresidue - CAIsoil)
– Two CAIsoil endmembers: low- and high-soil organic carbon(SOC).
– Two CAIresidue endmembers: Corn and soybean.
2006-2007 field analysis methods• Linear regression and inversion fR
compared against line-point transect fRestimates using:
– Correlation coefficients (r2).
– Root-mean-square errors (RMSE).
• Data points aggregated into two residuecover classes:
fR < 0.30 (Intensive and reduced till)
0.30 ≤ fR (Conservation till)
• Classifications were assessed foraccuracy.
Indiana 2006 results
• NDVI showed that live green vegetation wasminimal, ranged from 0.10 to 0.29, mean of 0.16.
NDSVI
0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55
0
20
40
60
80
100
CAI
-1 0 1 2 3 4
Perc
entre
sid
ue
cover
0
20
40
60
80
100r2 = 0.80RMSE = 9.9%Accuracy = 93.7%
NDTI
-0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
0
20
40
60
80
100r2 = 0.39RMSE = 17.1%Accuracy = 77.9%
LCA
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Perc
en
tre
sid
ue
cove
r
0
20
40
60
80
100r2 = 0.47RMSE = 15.9%Accuracy = 89.5%
NDI5
-0.35 -0.30 -0.25 -0.20 -0.15 -0.10 -0.05
0
20
40
60
80
100
NDI7
-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1
0
20
40
60
80
100r2 = 0.03RMSE = 21.6%Accuracy = 68.4%
r2 = 0.05RMSE = 21.4%Accuracy = 70.5%
r2 = 0.04RMSE = 21.5%Accuracy = 69.5%
Indiana 2006 statistical data
-0.71
0.684
0.215
0.05
NDI7
0.38
0.695
0.219
0.02
NDI5
4.66
0.779
0.171
0.39
NDTI
0.51
0.705
0.216
0.04
NDSVI
9.4016.3112.24z-stat
0.8950.9580.9372-class
accuracy
0.1590.0990.099RMSE
0.470.820.80r2
LCACAIcal.
CAIreg.
Index
Indiana 2007 results• In 2007 aircraft data
acquired later than in2006.
• Scene was significantlygreener: NDVI range:0.17 to 0.84, mean of0.36.
• CAI, LCA gaveacceptable results.
• NDTI showedimprovement afterremoval of NDVI > 0.5pixels, and subpixelgreen cover correction(NDTIgc).
NDTI
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3
f R
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
NDTINDTI
gc
NDTI
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3
ND
VI
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Indiana 2007 fR, spectral index
CAI
-1 0 1 2 3 4
f R
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
LCA
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
f R
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Indiana 2007 statistics
5.973.044.4711.8711.40z-statistic
0.7280.6250.6760.8600.8532-class
accuracy
0.2190.2350.1560.1070.107RMSE
0.090.180.640.830.83r2
NDTIgcNDTILCACAI 4-way
CAIreg.
Index
Spectral index results• Spectral index
performance (frombest to worst):
1. CAI
2. LCA
3. NDTI
4. NDI5*, NDI7, NDSVI*
*Only NDI5, NDSVIappropriate forAWiFS/ LISS III
Conclusions• CAI works best for crop residue cover estimation.
• CAI might also work well for fire risk assessmentand rangeland quality research.
• Future Resourcesat sensors could include thethree CAI bands.
• NDTI (TM bands 5 and 7) works well; may becorrected for vegetation.
• Current AWiFS/LISS bands may estimate cropresidue cover only at a few locations.