Preliminary Investigation of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Mapping using Hyperspectral Remote Sensing
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
The use of airborne hyperspectral remote sensing imagery for automated mapping of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in the tidal Potomac River was investigated for near to real-time resource assessment and monitoring. Airborne hyperspectral imagery and field spectrometer measurements were obtained in October of 2000. A spectral library database containing selected ground-based and airborne sensor spectra was developed for use in image processing. The spectral library is used to automate the processing of hyperspectral imagery for potential real-time material identification and mapping. Field based spectra were compared to the airborne imagery using the database to identify and map two species of SAV (Myriophyllum spicatum and Vallisneria americana). Overall accuracy of the vegetation maps derived from hyperspectral imagery was determined by comparison to a product that combined aerial photography and field based sampling at the end of the SAV growing season. The algorithms and databases developed in this study will be useful with the current and forthcoming space-based hyperspectral remote sensing systems.
- Asner, G.P. 1998, ‘Biophysical and biochemical sources of variability in canopy reflectance’, Remote Sens. Environ. 64, 234–253.
- Batiuk, R., Heasley, Orth, R., Moore, K., Stevenson, J.C., Dennison, W., Staver, L., Carter, V., Rybicki, N.B., Hickman, R.E., Kollar, S., Bieber, S. and Bergstrom, P.: 1992, ‘Chesapeake Bay submerged aquatic vegetation habitat requirements and restoration goals: A Technical Synthesis’, USEPA CBP/TRS 83/92, 162 pp.
- Batiuk, R., Bergstrom, P., Kemp, M., Koch, E., Murray, L., Stevenson, J. C., Bartleson, R, Carter, V., Rybicki, N. B., Landwehr, J. M., Gallegos, C., Karrh, L., Naylor, M., Wilcox, D., Moore, K. A., Ailstock, S. and Teichberg, M.: 2000, ‘Chesapeake Bay submerged aquatic vegetation water quality and habitat-based requirements and restoration targets: a second technical synthesis’, USEPA, CBP/TRS 245/00. web address: http://www.chesapeakebay.net/pubs/sav/index.html
- Clark, R.N.: 1999, ‘Spectroscopy of rocks and minerals, and principles of spectroscopy’, In: A. Rencz, (Ed), The Manual Of Remote Sensing, 3rd Edition (A Series): Volume 3: Remote Sensing for the Earth Sciences. John Wiley and Sons, New York
- Clark, R. N., Swayze, G.A., King, T.V.V., Livo, E., Kokaly, R.F., Dalton, B.J., Vance, S. J., Rockwell, B.W. and McDougal, R.R.: 1999, ‘surface reflectance calibration of terrestrial imaging spectroscopy data: a tutorial using AVIRIS’, USGS Open File Report 99.
- Clark, R.N. and Roush, T.L.: 1984. Reflectance spectroscopy: quantitative analysis techniques for remote sensing applications', J. Geophysical Res. 89(B7), 6329–6340.
- Cocks, T., Jenssen, R., Stewart, A., Wilson, I. and Shields, T.: 1998. ‘The HyMap airborne hyperspectral sensor: the system, calibration and performance’, Proceedings of the 1st EARSEL Workshop on Imaging Spectroscopy, Zurich, October 1998.
- ENVI.: 1999, ‘ENVI users guide’, Research Systems. Boulder Colorado.
- Kirkman, H.: 1996. ‘Baseline and monitoring methods for seagrass meadows’, J. Environ. Mgmt. 47, 191–201.
- Kruse, F.A., Lefkoff, A.B. and Dietze, J.B.: 1993, ‘Expert system-based mineral mapping in northern Death Valley, California/Nevada using the Airborne Visible/InfraRed Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS)’, Remote Sens. Environ. 44, 309–336.
- Orth, R.J., Wilcox, D.J., Nagey, L.S., Whiting, J.R.,and Fishman, J.R.: 2000, ‘1999 distribution of submerged aquatic vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay and coastal bays’, VIMS Special Scientific Report Number 141. Final report to U.S. EPA, Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, MD. Grant No.CB993777–02–0. web address: http://www.vims.edu/bio/sav/sav99
- Orth, R. J., Moore, K. A, and van Montfrans, J.: 1982, ‘submerged aquatic vegetation: Distribution and abundance in the lower Chesapeake Bay and interactive effects of light, epiphytes and grazers’, Final Report, USEPA Chesapeake Program Grant No. X003246. 1982. 141 pp.
- Ruhl, H.A., Rybicki, N.B., Reel, J.T. and Carter, V.: 1999, ‘Distribution and abundance of submersed aquatic vegetation in the tidal Potomac River and upper Potomac Estuary, Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia, 1993–1998’, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–233.
- Small A.M., Roberts D.L., Adey W.H., Lutz S.M. and Reese E.G.: 1996, ‘A macrophyte-based rapid biosurvey of stream water quality: restoration at the watershed scale’, Restoration Eco. 4(2), 124–145.
- Stankelis, R.M., Boynton, W.R. and Frank, J.M.: 2000. ‘submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) habitat evaluation’, In Chesapeake Bay water quality monitoring program ecosystem processes component (EPC) level one report #17 (interpretive). University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Technical Report Series No. TS-252–00–CBL, Ref. No. [UMCES]CBL 00–0174.
- Preliminary Investigation of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Mapping using Hyperspectral Remote Sensing
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Volume 81, Issue 1-3 , pp 383-392
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- submerged aquatic vegetation
- remote sensing
- species mapping
- estuarine ecosystems
- reflectance spectroscopy
- computational techniques
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Landscape Ecology Branch, Environmental Sciences Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, 555 National Center, Reston, VA, 20192
- 2. National Research Program, Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, 555 National Center, Reston, VA, 20192
- 3. Environmental Concern Inc., P.O. Box P, St, Michaels, MD, 21663
- 4. Center for Earth Observing and Space Research, School of Computational Sciences, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, 22030