Advertisement

Wetlands

pp 1–12 | Cite as

Fine-Scale Mapping of Coastal Plant Communities in the Northeastern USA

  • Maureen D. Correll
  • Wouter Hantson
  • Thomas P. Hodgman
  • Brittany B. Cline
  • Chris S. Elphick
  • W. Gregory Shriver
  • Elizabeth L. Tymkiw
  • Brian J. Olsen
Applied Wetland Science

Abstract

Salt marshes of the northeastern United States are dynamic landscapes where the tidal flooding regime creates patterns of plant zonation based on differences in elevation, salinity, and local hydrology. These patterns of zonation can change quickly due to both natural and anthropogenic stressors, making tidal marshes vulnerable to degradation and loss. We compared several remote sensing techniques to develop a tool that accurately maps high- and low-marsh zonation to use in management and conservation planning for this ecosystem in the northeast USA. We found that random forests (RF) outperformed other classifier tools when applied to the most recent National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) imagery, NAIP derivatives, and elevation data between coastal Maine and Virginia, USA. We then used RF methods to classify plant zonation within a 500-m buffer around coastal marsh delineated in the National Wetland Inventory. We found mean classification accuracies of 94% for high marsh, 76% for low marsh zones, and 90% overall map accuracy. The detailed output is a 3-m resolution continuous map of tidal marsh vegetation communities and cover classes that can be used in habitat modeling of marsh-obligate species or to monitor changes in marsh plant communities over time.

Keywords

High marsh NAIP Random Forest Remote sensing Spartina Tidal marsh 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was made possible through financial support from the North Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Northeast Region Science Applications (#24), and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch Project Number ME0-21710 through the Maine Agricultural & Forest Experiment Station. This is Maine State Agricultural and Forest Experimentation Station Publication # 3590. We would like to thank all Saltmarsh Habitat and Avian Research Program (SHARP) field technicians who collected field training data for this effort, and all participating landowners that allowed access to their properties for surveying. We also thank Janet Leese for countless hours spent digitizing training polygons in the lab. Comments from Erin and Kasey Legaard, D. Rosco, N. Hanson, and the Olsen Lab substantially improved the methods described here.

Supplementary material

13157_2018_1028_MOESM1_ESM.docx (24 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 23 kb)

References

  1. Adam E, Mutanga O, Rugege D (2010) Multispectral and hyperspectral remote sensing for identification and mapping of wetland vegetation: a review. Wetl Ecol Manag 18(3):281–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arkema KK, Guannel G, Verutes G, Wood SA, Guerry A, Ruckelshaus M, Kareiva P, Lacayo M, Silver JM (2013) Coastal habitats shield people and property from sea-level rise and storms. Nat Clim Chang 3:913–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker B, Warner T, Conley JF, McNeil BE (2013) Does spatial resolution matter? A multi-scale comparison of object-based and pixel-based methods for detecting change associated with gas well drilling operations. Int J Remote Sens 34(5):1633–1651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbier EB, Hacker SD, Kennedy C, Koch EW, Stier AC, Silliman BR (2011) The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. Ecol Monogr 81(2):169–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belgiu and Dragut (2016) Random forest in remote sensing: a review of applications and future directions. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 114:24–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belluco E, Camuffo M, Ferrari S, Modenese L, Silvestri S, Marani A, Marani M (2006) Mapping salt-marsh vegetation by multispectral and hyperspectral remote sensing. Remote Sens Environ 105(1):54–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertness MD (1991) Zonation of Spartina Patens and Spartina Alterniflora in New England salt marsh. Ecology 72(1):138–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bertness MD, Ellison AM (1987) Determinants of pattern in a New England salt marsh plant community. Ecol Monogr 57(2):129–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bertness MD, Ewanchuk PJ, Silliman BR (2002) Anthropogenic modification of New England salt marsh landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99(3):1395–1398CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Boesch DF, Turner RE (1984) Dependence of fishery species on salt marshes: the role of food and refuge. Estuaries 7(4):460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bourgeau-Chavez L, Endres S, Battaglia M, Miller ME, Banda E, Laubach Z, Marcaccio J (2015) Development of a bi-national Great Lakes coastal wetland and land use map using three-season PALSAR and Landsat imagery. Remote Sens 7(7):8655–8682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45(1):5–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ (1984) Classification and regression trees. The Wadsworth Statistics Probability Series (Vol. 19)Google Scholar
  14. Brown S, Harrington B, Parsons K, Mallory E (2002) Waterbird use of northern Atlantic wetlands protected under the north American wetlands conservation act. Waterbirds 25:106–114Google Scholar
  15. Chambers RM, Meyerson LA, Saltonstall K (1999) Expansion of Phragmites australis into tidal wetlands of North America. Aquat Bot 64(3–4):261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chu-Agor ML, Muñoz-Carpena R, Kiker G, Emanuelsson A, Linkov I (2011) Exploring vulnerability of coastal habitats to sea level rise through global sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Environ Model Softw 26(5):593–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Correll MD (2015) The biogeography and conservation of tidal marsh bird communities across a changing landscape. Dissertation, University of Maine, Orono Maine USAGoogle Scholar
  18. Correll MD, Wiest WA, Hodgman TP, Shriver WG, Elphick CS, McGill BJ, O'Brien K, Olsen BJ (2017) Predictors of specialist avifaunal decline in coastal marshes. Conserv Biol 31(1):172–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Crosby SC, Sax DF, Palmer ME, Booth HS, Deegan LA, Bertness MD, Leslie HM (2016) Salt marsh persistence is threatened by predicted sea-level rise. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 181:93–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davies KW, Petersen SL, Johnson DD, Davis DB, Madsen MD, Zvirzdin DL, Bates JD (2010) Estimating juniper cover from National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) imagery and evaluating relationships between potential cover and environmental variables. Rangel Ecol Manag 63(6):630–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Day JW, Christian RR, Boesch DM, Yáñez-Arancibia A, Morris J, Twilley RR, Stevenson C (2008) Consequences of climate change on the ecogeomorphology of coastal wetlands. Estuar Coasts 31(3):477–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dimitriadou E, Hornik K, Leisch F, Meyer D (2006) e1071: Misc functions of the Department of Statistics, probability theory group (formerly E1071), TU Wien. R package version 1.6–8. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=e1071
  23. Donnelly JP, Bertness MD (2001) Rapid shoreward encroachment of salt marsh cordgrass in response to accelerated sea-level rise. Proc Natl Acad Sci 98(25):14218–14223CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Dreyer GD, Niering WA (1995) Tidal marshes of Long Island sound: ecology, history and restoration. Bulletins 34. Connecticut College Digital Commons, New LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Emery NC, Ewanchuk PJ, Bertness MD (2001) Competition and salt-marsh plant zonation: stress tolerators may be dominant competitors. Ecology 82(9):2471–2485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. ESRI (2016) ArcGIS desktop: release 10.3. Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  27. Ewanchuk PJ, Bertness MD (2004) Structure and organization of a northern New England salt marsh plant community. J Ecol 92:72–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Field CR, Gjerdrum C, Elphick CS (2016) Forest resistance to sea-level rise prevents landward migration of tidal marsh. Biol Conserv 201:363–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Field CR, Bayard TS, Gjerdrum C, Hill JM, Meiman S, Elphick CS (2017a) High-resolution tide projections reveal extinction threshold in response to sea-level rise. Glob Chang Biol 23(5):2058–2070CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Field CR, Dayer AA, Elphick CS (2017b) Landowner behavior can determine the success of conservation strategies for ecosystem migration under sea-level rise. Proc Natl Acad Sci 114:9134–9139CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Field CR, Ruskin KJ, Benvenuti B, Borowske A, Cohen JB, Garey L, Hodgman TP, Kern RA, King E, Kocek AR, Kovach AI, O’Brien KM, Olsen BJ, Pau N, Roberts SG, Shelly E, Shriver WG, Walsh J, Elphick CS (2017c) Quantifying the importance of geographic replication and representativeness when estimating demographic rates, using a coastal species as a case study. Ecography 40:001–010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fry J, Xian G, Jin S, Dewitz J, Homer CG, Yang L, Wickham JD (2011) Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous United States. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 77:858–566Google Scholar
  33. Fung T, Ledrew E (1987) Application of principal components analysis to change detection. Photogrammetric Enginnering and. Remote Sens 53(12):1649–1658Google Scholar
  34. Garrett C (1972) Tidal resonance in the bay of Fundy and gulf of Maine. Nature 238:441–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gilmore MS, Wilson EH, Barrett N, Civco DL, Prisloe S, Hurd JD, Chadwick C (2008) Integrating multi-temporal spectral and structural information to map wetland vegetation in a lower Connecticut River tidal marsh. Remote Sens Environ 112(11):4048–4060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Greenberg R, Maldonado JE, Droege S, McDonald MV (2006) Terrestrial vertebrates of tidal marshes: evolution, ecology, and conservation. Stud Avian Biol 32Google Scholar
  37. Hladik C, Schalles J, Alber M (2013) Salt marsh elevation and habitat mapping using hyperspectral and LIDAR data. Remote Sens Environ 139:318–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hoover M, Civco D, Whelchel A (2010) The development of a salt marsh migration tool and its application in Long Island sound. ASPRS 2010 Annual Conference Proceedings. San Diego, CA USAGoogle Scholar
  39. IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the FIfth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri RK and Meyer LA (eds)]. IPCC, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  40. Isacch JP, Costa CSB, Rodriguez-Gallego L, Conde D, Escapa M, Gagliardini D, Iribarne OO (2006) Distribution of saltmarsh plant communities associated with environmental factors along a latitudinal gradient on the south-West Atlantic coast. J Biogeogr 33(5):888–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jin S, Sader S (2005) Comparison of time series tasseled cap wetness and the normalized difference moisture index in detecting forest disturbances. Remote Sens Environ 94(3):364–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kettenring KM, Mock KE, Zaman B, McKee M (2016) Life on the edge: reproductive mode and rate of invasive Phragmites australis patch expansion. Biol Invasions 18(9):2475–2495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kirwan ML, Guntenspergen GR (2010) Influence of tidal range on the stability of coastal marshland. J Geophys Res 115(F2):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kirwan ML, Temmerman S, Skeehan EE, Guntenspergen GR, Faghe S (2016) Overestimation of marsh vulnerability to sea level rise. Nat Clim Chang 6(3):253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Klemas V (2011) Remote sensing of wetlands: case studies comparing practical techniques. J Coast Res 27(3):418–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Liaw A, Wiener M (2002) Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2(3):18–22Google Scholar
  47. Liu C, Jiang H, Hou Y, Zhang S, Su L, Li X, Wen Z (2010) Habitat changes for breeding waterbirds in Yancheng National Nature Reserve, China: a remote sensing study. Wetlands 30(5):879–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Long AL, Kettenring KM, Hawkins CP, Neale CM (2017) Distribution and drivers of a widespread, invasive wetland grass, Phragmites australis, in wetlands of the great salt Lake, Utah, USA. Wetlands 37(1):45–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Master TL (1992) Composition, structure, and dynamics of mixed-species foraging aggregations in a southern New Jersey salt marsh. Colon Waterbirds 15(1):66–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Maxwell AE, Strager MP, Warner TA, Zégre NP, Yuill CB (2014) Comparison of NAIP orthophotography and RapidEye satellite imagery for mapping of mining and mine reclamation. GISci Remote Sens 51(3):301–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Maxwell AE, Warner TA, Strager MP (2016) Predicting palustrine wetland probability sing random Forest machine learning and digital elevation data-derived terrain variables. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 82(6):437–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McFeeters SK (1996) The use of the normalized difference water index (NDWI) in the delineation of open water features. Int J Remote Sens 17(7):1425–1432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Meiman S, Civco D, Holsinger K, Elphick CS (2012) Comparing habitat models using ground-based and remote sensing data: saltmarsh sparrow presence versus nesting. Wetlands 32(4):725–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Meneguzzo DM, Liknes GC, Nelson MD (2013) Mapping trees outside forests using high-resolution aerial imagery: a comparison of pixel- and object-based classification approaches. Environ Monit Assess 185(8):6261–6275CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Miller W, Egler F (1950) Vegetation of the Wequetequock-Pawcatuck tidal-marshes, Connecticut. Ecol Monogr 20(2):143–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2016) Tides and Currents. Available at: https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov. Accessed February 2017
  57. Nixon SW, Oviatt CA (1973) Ecology of a New England salt marsh. Ecol Monogr 43(4):463–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Otukei JR, Blaschke T (2010) Land cover change assessment using decision trees, support vector machines and maximum likelihood classification algorithms. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 12(1):27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pennings S, Callaway R (1992) Salt marsh plant zonation: the relative importance of competition and physical factors. Ecology 73(2):681–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pettorelli N, Vik JO, Mysterud A, Gaillard JM, Tucker CJ, Stenseth NC (2005) Using the satellite-derived NDVI to assess ecological responses to environmental change. Trends Ecol Evol 20(9):503–510CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Philipp KR, Field RT (2005) Phragmites australis expansion in Delaware Bay salt marshes. Ecol Eng 25(3):275–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Richardson AJ, Wiegand CL (1977) Distinguishing vegetation from soil background information. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 43(12):1541–1552Google Scholar
  63. Rosso PH, Ustin SL, Hastings A (2005) Mapping marshland vegetation of San Francisco Bay, California, using hyperspectral data. Int J Remote Sens 26(23):5169–5191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rouse JW, Haas RH, Schell JA (1974) Monitoring the vernal advancement and retrogradation (greenwave effect) of natural vegetation. Progress Report. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, College Station Texas, USAGoogle Scholar
  65. Saltonstall K (2002) Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99(4):2445–2449CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. Samiappan S, Turnage G, Hathcock L, Casagrande L, Stinson P, Moorhead R (2017) Using unmanned aerial systems for high-resolution remote sensing to map invasive Phragmites australis in coastal wetlands. Int J Remote Sens 38(8–10):2199–2217Google Scholar
  67. Silliman BR, Bertness MD (2004) Shoreline development drives invasion of Phragmites australis and the loss of plant diversity on New England salt marshes. Conserv Biol 18(5):1424–1434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Silvestri S, Defina A, Marani M (2005) Tidal regime, salinity and salt marsh plant zonation. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 62(1–2):119–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Therneau T, Atkinson B, Ripley B, Ripley MB (2015) Rpart: recursive partitioning and regression trees. R Package Version 4.1–10Google Scholar
  70. Trimble (2015) GEO 7X Ground Positioning System. Available at: https://www.trimble.com/mappingGIS/geo-7-series
  71. US Department of Agriculture (2016) National Agriculture Imagery Program accessed through the Geospatial Data Gateway. Available at: http:// datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed February 2016
  72. US Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetland Inventory (2010) Available at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/index.html. Accessed January 2016
  73. US Geological Survey (2015) National Elevation Dataset (NED). Available at: https://nationalmap.gov/elevation.html. Accessed January 2016
  74. Wiest WA, Correll MD, Olsen BJ, Elphick CS, Hodgman TP, Curson DR, Shriver WG (2016) Population estimates for tidal marsh birds of high conservation concern in the northeastern USA from a design-based survey. Condor 118(2):274–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wilson C, Hughes ZJ, FitzGerald DM, Hopkinson CS, Valentine V, Kolker AS (2014) Saltmarsh pool and tidal creek morphodynamics: dynamic equilibrium of northern latitude saltmarshes? Geomorphology 213:99–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Xie Y, Zhang A, Welsh W (2015) Mapping wetlands and Phragmites using publically available remotely sensed images. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 81(1):69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Yang J (2009) Mapping salt marsh vegetation by integrating hyperspectral imagery and LiDAR remote sensing. In: Wang Y (ed) Remote sensing of coastal environments. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 173–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maureen D. Correll
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wouter Hantson
    • 1
  • Thomas P. Hodgman
    • 3
  • Brittany B. Cline
    • 1
    • 4
  • Chris S. Elphick
    • 5
  • W. Gregory Shriver
    • 4
  • Elizabeth L. Tymkiw
    • 4
  • Brian J. Olsen
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biology and EcologyThe University of MaineOronoUSA
  2. 2.Bird Conservancy of the RockiesFort CollinsUSA
  3. 3.Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and WildlifeBangorUSA
  4. 4.Department of Entomology and Wildlife EcologyThe University of DelawareNewarkUSA
  5. 5.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Center for Conservation and BiodiversityUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA

Personalised recommendations