Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of Flow Direction Algorithms in the Application of the CTI for Mapping Wetlands in Minnesota

  • Article
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Topography has been traditionally used as a surrogate to model spatial patterns of water distribution and variation of hydrological conditions. In this study, we investigated the use of light detection and ranging (lidar) data to derive two Single Flow Direction (SFD) and five Multiple Flow Direction (MFD) algorithms in the application of the compound topographic index (CTI) for mapping wetlands. The CTI is defined here as ln [(α)/(tan (β)], where α represents the local upslope contributing area and β represents the local slope gradient. We evaluated the following flow direction algorithms: D8, Rho8, DEMON, D-∞ MD-∞, Mass Flux, and FD8 in three ecoregions in Minnesota. Numerous studies have found that MFD algorithms better represent the spatial distribution of water compared to SFD algorithms. CTI maps were compared to field collected and image interpreted reference data using traditional remote sensing accuracy estimators. Overall accuracy results for the majority of CTI based algorithms were in the range of 81–92 %, with low errors of wetland omission. The results of this study provide evidence that 1) wetlands can be accurately identified using a lidar derived CTI, and 2) MFD algorithms should be preferred over SFD algorithms in most cases for mapping wetlands.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anteau MJ, Afton AD (2009) Wetland use and feeding by lesser scaup during spring migration across the upper Midwest, USA. Wetlands 29:704–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonarakis AS, Richards KS, Brasington J (2008) Object-based land cover classification using airborne Lidar. Remote Sensing of Environment 112:2988–2998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ (1979) A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrological Sciences Journal 24:43–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bridgham SD, Pastor J, Dewey B, Weltzin JF, Updegraff K (2008) Rapid carbon response of peatlands to climate change. Ecology 89:3041–3048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrough PA, McDonell RA (1998) Principles of geographical information systems. Oxford University Press, New York, 190 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaplot V, Walter C (2003) Subsurface topography to enhance the prediction of the spatial distribution of soil wetness. Hydrological Processes 17:2567–2580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charman DJ (2009) Peat and peatlands. Elsevier Inc, 541–548

  • City of Chanhassen Surface Water Management Plan (2006) In: The second generation surface water management plan - Chanhassen, Minnesota: http://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/cip/swmp/wetlandsmanagement.htm. Accessed 25 May 2013

  • Congalton RG, Green K (2009) Assessing the accuracy of remotely sensed data: principles and practices, 2nd edn. CRC Press/Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran JM, Knight JF, Brisco B, Kaya S, Cull A, Murnaghan K (2011) The integration of optical, topographic, and radar data for wetland mapping in northern Minnesota. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 37(5):564–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa-Cabral M, Burges SJ (1994) Digital elevation model networks (DEMON): a model of flow over hillslopes for computation of contributing and dispersal areas. Water Resources Research 30:1681–1692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1974. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.

  • Dahl TE (2006) Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 1998 to 2004. U.S. Department of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C., p 112

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl TE, Johnson CE (1991) Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States, mid-1970’s to mid-1980’s. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, p 28

    Google Scholar 

  • Erskine RH, Green TR, Ramirez JA, MacDonald LH (2006) Comparison of grid-based algorithms for computing upslope contributing area. Water Resources Research 42, W09416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairfield J, Leymarie P (1991) Drainage networks from grid digital elevation models. Water Resources Research 27:709–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman GT (1991) Calculating catchment area with divergent flow based on a regular grid. Computers and Geosciences 17:413–422

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabs T, Seibert J, Bishop K, Laudon H (2009) Modeling spatial patterns of saturated areas: a comparison of the topographic wetness index and a dynamic distributed model. Journal of Hydrology 373:15–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber S, Peckham S (2008) Land-surface parameters and objects in hydrology. In: Hengl T, Reuter HI (eds) Geomorphometry: concepts, software, applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 171–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Guntner A, Seibert J, Uhlenbrook S (2004) Modeling spatial patterns of saturated areas: an evaluation of different terrain indices. Water Resources Research 40, W05114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins RB, Frazier PS (2010) High-resolution remote sensing of upland swamp boundaries and vegetation for baseline mapping and monitoring. Wetlands 30:531–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight JF, Tolcser BT, Corcoran JM, Rampi LP (2013) The effects of data selection and thematic detail on the accuracy of high spatial resolution wetland classifications. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 79:613–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaBaugh JW, Winter TC, Rosenberry DO (1998) Hydrologic functions of prairie wetlands. Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences 8:17–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Land Management Information Center (LMIC) (2007) Metadata for the National Wetlands Inventory, Minnesota

  • Lang MW, McCarty GW (2009) Lidar intensity for improved detection of inundation below the forest canopy. Wetlands 29:1166–1178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lang MW, McCarty GW, Oesterling R, Yeo I (2013) Topographic metrics for improved mapping of forested wetlands. Wetlands 33:141–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minnesota Department of Administration (AdminMN) Office of geographic and demographic analysis state demographic center, 2010 census: Minnesota city profiles. http://www.demography.state.mn.us/CityProfiles2010/index.html. Accessed 20 May 2013

  • Moore ID, Gessler PE, Nielsen GA, Peterson GA (1993) Soil attribute prediction using terrain analysis. Soil Science Society of America Journal 57:443–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Callaghan JF, Mark DM (1984) The extraction of drainage networks from digital elevation data. Computer Vision, Graphic and Image Processing 28:328–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan F, Peters- Lidar CD, Sale MJ, King AW (2004) A comparison of geographical information system-based algorithms for computing the TOPMODEL topographic index. Water Resources Research 40:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Prince H (2008) Wetlands of the American Midwest: a historical geography of changing attitudes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

  • Rodhe A, Seibert J (1999) Wetland occurrence in relation to topography - a test of topographic indices as moisture indicators. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 98–99:325–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seibert J, McGlynn B (2007) A new triangular multiple flow direction algorithm for computing upslope areas from gridded digital elevation models. Water Resources Research 43:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoutis L, Dunca TP, McGlyn B (2010) Terrain-based predictive modeling of Riparian vegetation in Northern Rocky Mountain watershed. Wetlands 30:621–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen R, Seibert J (2007) Effects of DEM resolution on the calculation of topographical indices: TWI and its components. Journal of Hydrology 347:79–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen R, Zinko U, Seibert J (2006) On the calculation of the topographic wetness index: evaluation of different methods based on field observations. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 10:101–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stedman S, Dahl TE (2008) Status and trends of wetlands in the coastal watersheds of the Eastern United States 1998 o 2004. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 32 pages

  • Tarboton DG (1997) A new method for the determination of flow directions and upslope areas in grid digital elevation models. Water Resources Research 33:309–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JP, Gallant JC (2000) Secondary topographic attributes. In: Wilson JP, Gallant JC (eds) Terrain analysis: principles and applications. Wiley, New York, pp 87–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JP, Aggett G, Deng YX, Lam CS (2008) Water in the landscape: a review of contemporary flow routing algorithms. In: Zhou Q, Lees B, Tang G (eds) Advances in digital terrain analysis. Springer, Berlin, pp 213–236

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Winter TC, Rosenberry DO (1995) The interaction of ground water with prairie pothole wetlands in the Cottonwood Lake Area, eastcentral North Dakota, 1979–1990. Wetlands 15:193–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Q, Liu X (2002) Error assessment of grid-based flow routing algorithms used in hydrological models. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 16:819–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust (ENRTF), the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR), and the United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS: Award 30181AJ194).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN, USA

    Lian P. Rampi, Joseph F. Knight & Christian F. Lenhart

  2. Department of Forest Resources, 1530 Cleveland Avenue North, Saint Paul, MN, 55108, USA

    Lian P. Rampi

Authors
  1. Lian P. Rampi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joseph F. Knight
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christian F. Lenhart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lian P. Rampi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rampi, L.P., Knight, J.F. & Lenhart, C.F. Comparison of Flow Direction Algorithms in the Application of the CTI for Mapping Wetlands in Minnesota. Wetlands 34, 513–525 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-014-0517-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-014-0517-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation