Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (37)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = National Ecological Observatory Network

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
24 pages, 7259 KiB  
Article
A Pseudo-Waveform-Based Method for Grading ICESat-2 ATL08 Terrain Estimates in Forested Areas
by Rong Zhao, Qing Hu, Zhiwei Liu, Yi Li and Kun Zhang
Forests 2024, 15(12), 2113; https://doi.org/10.3390/f15122113 - 28 Nov 2024
Viewed by 566
Abstract
The ICESat-2 Land and Vegetation Height (ATL08) product is a new control point dataset for large-scale topographic mapping and geodetic surveying. However, its elevation accuracy is typically affected by multiple factors. The study aims to propose a new approach to classify ATL08 terrain [...] Read more.
The ICESat-2 Land and Vegetation Height (ATL08) product is a new control point dataset for large-scale topographic mapping and geodetic surveying. However, its elevation accuracy is typically affected by multiple factors. The study aims to propose a new approach to classify ATL08 terrain estimates into different accuracy levels and extract reliable ground control points (GCPs) from ICESat-2 ATL08. Specifically, the methodology is divided into three stages. First, the ATL08 terrain estimates are matched with the raw ATL03 photon cloud data, and the ATL08 terrain estimates are used to fit a continuous terrain curve. Then, using the fitted continuous terrain curve and raw ATL03 photon cloud data, a pseudo-waveform is generated for grading the ATL08 terrain estimates. Finally, all the ATL08 terrain estimates are graded based on the peak characteristics of the generated pseudo-waveform. To validate the feasibility of the proposed method, four study areas from the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), characterized by various terrain features and forest types were selected. High-accuracy airborne lidar data were used to evaluate the accuracy of graded ICESat-2 terrain estimates. The results demonstrate that the method effectively classified all ATL08 terrain estimates into different accuracy levels and successfully extracted high-accuracy GCPs. The root mean square errors (RMSEs) of the first accuracy level in the four selected study areas were 0.99 m, 0.51 m, 1.88 m, and 0.65 m, representing accuracy improvement of 51.7%, 58.2%, 83.1%, and 68.8%, respectively, compared to the original ATL08 terrain estimates before classifying. Additionally, a comparison with the conventional threshold-based GCP extraction method demonstrated the superior performance of our proposed approach. This study introduces a new approach to extract high-quality elevation control points from ICESat-2 ATL08 data, particularly in forested areas. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Geolocation of the study areas: (<b>a</b>) Mountain Lake Biological Station (MLBS), (<b>b</b>) Dead Lake (DELA), (<b>c</b>) Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GRSM), (<b>d</b>) Treehaven (TREE). Blue dots in the images represent the ICESat-2 data strips over each study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flowchart of the proposed method for grading ATL08 terrain estimates.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic diagram of the pseudo-waveform derived by combining ATL08 and ATL03.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) Distribution of the ATL03 photons within a statistical buffer zone; (<b>b</b>) schematic representation of the pseudo-waveform, displaying three largest peaks: Lgst_peak, Sec_peak, and Thd_peak.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Distribution of graded ICESat-2 ATL08 terrain estimates across varying terrain slopes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Distribution of graded ICESat-2 ATL08 terrain estimates across varying VCFs.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Distribution of raw ATL08 terrain estimates and graded estimates L1~L3 in the study area of (<b>a1</b>–<b>a4</b>) DELA, (<b>b1</b>–<b>b4</b>) MLBS, (<b>c1</b>–<b>c4</b>) GRSM, and (<b>d1</b>–<b>d4</b>) TREE. White dots in the images represent the ICESat-2 data points.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Scatterplots of both raw and graded ATL08 terrain estimates (L1~L3) in (<b>a</b>) DELA, (<b>b</b>) MLBS, (<b>c</b>) GRSM, and (<b>d</b>) TREE.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) RMSE and (<b>b</b>) data retention rate of the terrain estimates graded by our proposed method and the threshold-based method. T represents the L1 estimate achieved by the threshold-based method. W1 represents our proposed method’s L1 estimate, while W2 indicates its combined L1 and L2 estimates.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Statistical distribution of elevation errors in different terrain slope classes at three accuracy levels. For each slope class, the boxplot illustrates the minimum, maximum, median, first, and third quartile values of the data over each accuracy level.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Statistical distribution of elevation errors in different terrain VCF classes at three accuracy levels. For each slope class, the boxplot illustrates the minimum, maximum, median, and first and third quartile values of the data at each accuracy level.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 8893 KiB  
Article
Assessing Data Preparation and Machine Learning for Tree Species Classification Using Hyperspectral Imagery
by Wenge Ni-Meister, Anthony Albanese and Francesca Lingo
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(17), 3313; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16173313 - 6 Sep 2024
Viewed by 1066
Abstract
Tree species classification using hyperspectral imagery shows incredible promise in developing a large-scale, high-resolution model for identifying tree species, providing unprecedented details on global tree species distribution. Many questions remain unanswered about the best practices for creating a global, general hyperspectral tree species [...] Read more.
Tree species classification using hyperspectral imagery shows incredible promise in developing a large-scale, high-resolution model for identifying tree species, providing unprecedented details on global tree species distribution. Many questions remain unanswered about the best practices for creating a global, general hyperspectral tree species classification model. This study aims to address three key issues in creating a hyperspectral species classification model. We assessed the effectiveness of three data-labeling methods to create training data, three data-splitting methods for training/validation/testing, and machine-learning and deep-learning (including semi-supervised deep-learning) models for tree species classification using hyperspectral imagery at National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) Sites. Our analysis revealed that the existing data-labeling method using the field vegetation structure survey performed reasonably well. The random tree data-splitting technique was the most efficient method for both intra-site and inter-site classifications to overcome the impact of spatial autocorrelation to avoid the potential to create a locally overfit model. Deep learning consistently outperformed random forest classification; both semi-supervised and supervised deep-learning models displayed the most promising results in creating a general taxa-classification model. This work has demonstrated the possibility of developing tree-classification models that can identify tree species from outside their training area and that semi-supervised deep learning may potentially utilize the untapped terabytes of unlabeled forest imagery. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Locations of NEON study sites used in this project.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Locations of vegetation sampling plots from the NIWO site.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Illustration of data sources used from each NEON site. From left to right: 10 cm RGB imagery, 1 m true-color composite from hyperspectral imagery, and 1 m canopy-height model (CHM) derived from lidar, all collected in August 2020. Survey tree locations are indicated in red.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Overview of experimental workflow.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Mean hyperspectral reflectance values for a study plot at the NIWO site before and after performing a simple de-noising operation. Bands with consistently low or noisy values were filtered out from further processing and analysis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Results from all three annotation methods used on the NIWO_014 study plot produced slightly different results. This is demonstrated well with the isolated tree in the middle right of the image. The filtering algorithm removes this tree location due to the difference between CHM and surveyed tree height. The snapping algorithm changes its location, and the Scholl algorithm keeps this location unaltered. Original tree locations from the NEON woody vegetation survey are on the upper left.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Network designs for deep-learning models utilized. The pre-training model utilizes the swapping assignments between views (SwAV) unsupervised clustering architecture to find clusters within the data. The encoder from the pre-training model is then used as a backbone for the semi-supervised model to the supervised multi-layer perception (MLP) learning model. At the same time, the supervised model is initialized with no pre-training or prior exposure to data to the MLP model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Mean hyperspectral reflectance from 380 to 2510 nm, extracted from all polygons with half the maximum crown diameter at the NEON NIWO site for each of the dominant tree species: ABLAL (Subalpine fir), PICOL (Lodgepole pine), PIEN (Engelmann spruce), and PIFL2 (Limber pine).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Results from testing different label-selection method algorithms at the NIWO site. Five trials were run for each set of parameters, and the median overall accuracy amongst those trials was plotted. Minimum and maximum accuracy values from trials are indicated with error bars.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Results from testing transferability of trained models using the random pixel (labeled as Pixel), plot-divide (labeled as Plot), and random tree (labeled as Tree) data-splitting methods for training/validation/testing. All models were initially trained on data from the NIWO site and then tested on data from the RMNP site. Minimum and maximum accuracy values from trials are indicated with error bars.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Results for deep-learning classification models with and without pre-training. The color of the bar indicates three cases: pre-training was not performed (purple), performed on the NIWO site (orange), or performed on the STEI site (green). The top row results were trained and classified on the NIWO site, while the bottom row results were trained on the NIWO site and classified on the RMNP site.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 12334 KiB  
Article
Derivation and Evaluation of LAI from the ICESat-2 Data over the NEON Sites: The Impact of Segment Size and Beam Type
by Yao Wang and Hongliang Fang
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(16), 3078; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16163078 - 21 Aug 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 886
Abstract
The leaf area index (LAI) is a critical variable for forest ecosystem processes. Passive optical and active LiDAR remote sensing have been used to retrieve LAI. LiDAR data have good penetration to provide vertical structure distribution and deliver the ability to estimate forest [...] Read more.
The leaf area index (LAI) is a critical variable for forest ecosystem processes. Passive optical and active LiDAR remote sensing have been used to retrieve LAI. LiDAR data have good penetration to provide vertical structure distribution and deliver the ability to estimate forest LAI, such as the Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite-2 (ICESat-2). Segment size and beam type are important for ICESat-2 LAI estimation, as they affect the amount of signal photons returned. However, the current ICESat-2 LAI estimation only covered a limited number of sites, and the performance of LAI estimation with different segment sizes has not been clearly compared. Moreover, ICESat-2 LAIs derived from strong and weak beams lack a comparative analysis. This study derived and evaluated LAI from ICESat-2 data over the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) sites in North America. The LAI estimated from ICESat-2 for different segment sizes (20, 100, and 200 m) and beam types (strong beam and weak beam) were compared with those from the airborne laser scanning (ALS) and the Copernicus Global Land Service (CGLS). The results show that the LAI derived from strong beams performs better than that of weak beams because more photon signals are received. The LAI estimated from the strong beam at the 200 m segment size shows the highest consistency with those from the ALS data (R = 0.67). Weak beams also present the potential to estimate LAI and have moderate agreement with ALS (R = 0.52). The ICESat-2 LAI shows moderate consistency with ALS for most forest types, except for the evergreen forest. The ICESat-2 LAI shows satisfactory agreement with the CGLS 300 m LAI product (R = 0.67, RMSE = 1.94) and presents a higher upper boundary. Overall, the ICESat-2 can characterize canopy structural parameters and provides the ability to estimate LAI, which may promote the LAI product generated from the photon-counting LiDAR. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue LiDAR Remote Sensing for Forest Mapping)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The spatial distribution of (<b>a</b>) ICESat-2 data over the 12 National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) sites and (<b>b</b>) an example of ICESat-2 data at the BART site. The background is a land cover map from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Statistics of point density along track distance for (<b>a</b>) ICESat-2 strong beam, (<b>b</b>) ICESat-2 weak beam, and (<b>c</b>) ALS data for different segment sizes (20 m, 100 m, and 200 m). DF, EF, MF, and WET refer to deciduous forest, evergreen forest, mixed forest, and woody wetlands, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison between the ICESat-2 LAI and the ALS LAI for different segment sizes and beam types. The upper (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>), middle (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>), and lower (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>) panels correspond to the all, strong, and weak beams at segment sizes of 20 m, 100 m, and 200 m, respectively. The solid line and dashed line indicate the fitting line and 1:1 line, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison between the LAI values derived from strong-beam ICESat-2 and ALS for DF, EF, MF, and WET. The upper (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>), middle (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>), and lower (<b>i</b>–<b>l</b>) panels correspond to the different land cover types at segment sizes of 20 m, 100 m, and 200 m, respectively. The solid line and dashed line indicate the fitting line and 1:1 line, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The correlation between ICESat-2 LAI and ALS LAI of each NEON site for different segment sizes and beam types. See <a href="#remotesensing-16-03078-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a> and <a href="#remotesensing-16-03078-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a> for the site names and land cover types, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparison between the ICESat-2 LAI from all beams, strong beams, and weak beams and the CGLS LAI. The upper (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>), middle (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>), and lower (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>) panels correspond to the all, strong, and weak beams at segment sizes of 20 m, 100 m, and 200 m, respectively. The solid line and dashed line indicate the fitting line and 1:1 line, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparison between the LAI derived from all-beam ICESat-2 and CGLS for DF, EF, MF, and WET. The upper (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>), middle (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>), and lower (<b>i</b>–<b>l</b>) panels correspond to the different land cover types at segment sizes of 20 m, 100 m, and 200 m, respectively. The solid line and dashed line indicate the fitting line and 1:1 line, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>The variation in LAI bias at different <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>ρ</mi> <mi>v</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>/<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>ρ</mi> <mi>g</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> values. The black dashed line represents the 1/3 value used in this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>The example profile of ICESat-2 photons along track distance (ATD) for DF (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>), EF (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>), MF (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>), and WET (<b>g</b>,<b>h</b>) types. The left and right panels correspond to strong and weak beams, respectively. The classified photons are from ATL08 data products. The top of the canopy, canopy photons, and ground photons are marked as light-green, forest-green dots, and orange dots, respectively. DF, EF, MF, and WET refer to deciduous forest, evergreen forest, mixed forest, and woody wetlands, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>The distribution and seasonal variation in field LAI for overall, overstory, and understory at typical NEON sites. The ratio is understory LAI divided by overall LAI.</p>
Full article ">Figure A4
<p>The ATL08 photon classification (left panel) and composed ATL08 and manual photon classification (right panel) at four example sites. (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>) SERC site, (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>) DELA site, (<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>) BART site, and (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>) DSNY site.</p>
Full article ">
2 pages, 141 KiB  
Correction
Correction: Monahan et al. Spatial Patterns in Fish Assemblages across the National Ecological Observation Network (NEON): The First Six Years. Fishes 2023, 8, 552
by Dylan Monahan, Jeff S. Wesner, Stephanie M. Parker and Hannah Schartel
Fishes 2024, 9(2), 68; https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes9020068 - 8 Feb 2024
Viewed by 1157
Abstract
Figure Legend [...] Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Biology and Ecology)
22 pages, 4754 KiB  
Article
Modeling Uncertainty of GEDI Clear-Sky Terrain Height Retrievals Using a Mixture Density Network
by Jonathan Sipps and Lori A. Magruder
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(23), 5594; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15235594 - 1 Dec 2023
Viewed by 1528
Abstract
Early spaceborne laser altimetry mission development starts in pre-phase A design, where diverse ideas are evaluated against mission science requirements. A key challenge is predicting realistic instrument performance through forward modeling at an arbitrary spatial scale. Analytical evaluations compromise accuracy for speed, while [...] Read more.
Early spaceborne laser altimetry mission development starts in pre-phase A design, where diverse ideas are evaluated against mission science requirements. A key challenge is predicting realistic instrument performance through forward modeling at an arbitrary spatial scale. Analytical evaluations compromise accuracy for speed, while radiative transfer modeling is not applicable at the global scale due to computational expense. Instead of predicting the arbitrary properties of a lidar measurement, we develop a baseline theory to predict only the distribution of uncertainty, specifically for the terrain elevation retrieval based on terrain slope and fractional canopy cover features through a deep neural network Gaussian mixture model, also known as a mixture density network (MDN). Training data were created from differencing geocorrected Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) L2B elevation measurements with 32 independent reference lidar datasets in the contiguous U.S. from the National Ecological Observatory Network. We trained the MDN and selected hyperparameters based on the regional distribution predictive capability. On average, the relative error of the equivalent standard deviation of the predicted regional distributions was 15.9%, with some anomalies in accuracy due to generalization and insufficient feature diversity and correlation. As an application, we predict the percent of elevation residuals of a GEDI-like lidar within a given mission threshold from 60°S to 78.25°N, which correlates to a qualitative understanding of prediction accuracy and instrument performance. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remote Sensing and Ecosystem Modeling for Nature-Based Solutions)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>NEON sites with (<b>a</b>) slope and (<b>b</b>) cover feature diversity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) Spatial location of DCFS ROI and slope/cover distributions, and (<b>b</b>) the resulting RERD for DCFS ROI.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The MDN takes slope (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>) and cover (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>c</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>) as inputs, and outputs MDN parameters, which are transformed by relevant activation functions to produce GMM parameters. Note there is an entire distribution prediction per pair of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>c</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) Number of footprints per ROI and (<b>b</b>) 90th percentile feature distribution by NEON site, where in (<b>b</b>), larger circles denote more data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Relative error distribution over feature space.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Validation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">Δ</mi> <mi>z</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> prediction with in-sample predictions for <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">Δ</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>z</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mtext> </mtext> <mi>ϵ</mi> <mtext> </mtext> <mfenced open="[" close="]" separators="|"> <mrow> <mn>0.1,3</mn> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> m.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Global prediction with (<b>a</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">Δ</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>z</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> m and (<b>b</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">Δ</mi> <msub> <mrow> <mi>z</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>=</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> 3 m.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Pictorial representation of pointwise feature space for an arbitrary grid cell.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 2706 KiB  
Article
Spatial Patterns in Fish Assemblages across the National Ecological Observation Network (NEON): The First Six Years
by Dylan Monahan, Jeff S. Wesner, Stephanie M. Parker and Hannah Schartel
Fishes 2023, 8(11), 552; https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8110552 - 16 Nov 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1713 | Correction
Abstract
The National Ecological Observation Network (NEON) is a thirty-year, open-source, continental-scale ecological observation platform. The objective of the NEON project is to provide data to facilitate the understanding and forecasting of the ecological impacts of anthropogenic change at a continental scale. Fish are [...] Read more.
The National Ecological Observation Network (NEON) is a thirty-year, open-source, continental-scale ecological observation platform. The objective of the NEON project is to provide data to facilitate the understanding and forecasting of the ecological impacts of anthropogenic change at a continental scale. Fish are sentinel taxa in freshwater systems, and the NEON has been sampling and collecting fish assemblage data at wadable stream sites for six years. One to two NEON wadable stream sites are located in sixteen domains from Alaska to Puerto Rico. The goal of site selection was that sites represent local conditions but with the intention that site data be analyzed at a continental observatory level. Site selection did not include fish assemblage criteria. Without using fish assemblage criteria, anomalies in fish assemblages at the site level may skew the expected spatial patterns of North American stream fish assemblages, thereby hindering change detection in subsequent years. However, if NEON stream sites are representative of the current spatial distributions of North American stream fish assemblages, we could expect to find the most diverse sites in Atlantic drainages and the most depauperate sites in Pacific drainages. Therefore, we calculated the alpha and regional (beta) diversities of wadable stream sites to highlight spatial patterns. As expected, NEON sites followed predictable spatial diversity patterns, which could facilitate future change detection and attribution to changes in environmental drivers, if any. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomonitoring and Conservation of Freshwater & Marine Fishes)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>NEON wadable stream sites in 20 ecoclimatic domains. Core sites are wilderness sites, and gradient sites are sites with known anthropogenic stressors [<a href="#B15-fishes-08-00552" class="html-bibr">15</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic of a 1 km NEON stream site delineated into ten 100 m reaches: 3 fixed and 7 random sampling reaches. The three fixed reaches are sampled every visit; three random reaches are chosen each year for sampling [<a href="#B16-fishes-08-00552" class="html-bibr">16</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>NEON stream—fish Shannon diversities.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>PCoA distances for fish species sampled at NEON sites from 2017 to 2022 and apportioned by Atlantic (black circle) vs. Pacific (red triangle) drainage.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Distribution of 52,882 individual wet weights of fish measured in 23 NEON wadable stream sites. The data include all fish measured from 2015 to 2022. The y-axis represents 154 taxa ranked by the maximum fish size per taxon. Most taxon names are removed for clarity. Colors and sizes reflect the relative wet weights of fishes (yellow = largest, black = smallest).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Individual fish wet weights (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 52,882) collected across 23 NEON stream sites from 2017 to 2022. The horizontal line shows the grand median for each site.</p>
Full article ">
12 pages, 1332 KiB  
Article
Soil Respiration and Related Abiotic and Remotely Sensed Variables in Different Overstories and Understories in a High-Elevation Southern Appalachian Forest
by Rachel L. Hammer, John R. Seiler, John A. Peterson and Valerie A. Thomas
Forests 2023, 14(8), 1645; https://doi.org/10.3390/f14081645 - 15 Aug 2023
Viewed by 1270
Abstract
Accurately predicting soil respiration (Rs) has received considerable attention recently due to its importance as a significant carbon flux back to the atmosphere. Even small changes in Rs can have a significant impact on the net ecosystem productivity of forests. [...] Read more.
Accurately predicting soil respiration (Rs) has received considerable attention recently due to its importance as a significant carbon flux back to the atmosphere. Even small changes in Rs can have a significant impact on the net ecosystem productivity of forests. Variations in Rs have been related to both spatial and temporal variation due to changes in both abiotic and biotic factors. This study focused on soil temperature and moisture and changes in the species composition of the overstory and understory and how these variables impact Rs. Sample plots consisted of four vegetation types: eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis L. Carriere)-dominated overstory, mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia L.)-dominated understory, hardwood-dominated overstory, and cinnamon fern (Osmundastrum cinnamomeum (L.) C. Presl)-dominated understory, with four replications of each. Remotely sensed data collected for each plot, light detection and ranging, and hyperspectral data, were compiled from the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) to determine if they could improve predictions of Rs. Soil temperature and soil moisture explained 82% of the variation in Rs. There were no statistically significant differences between the average annual Rs rates among the vegetation types. However, when looking at monthly Rs, cinnamon fern plots had statistically higher rates in the summer when it was abundant and hemlock had significantly higher rates in the dormant months. At the same soil temperature, the vegetation types’ Rs rates were not statistically different. However, the cinnamon fern plots showed the most sensitivity to soil moisture changes and were the wettest sites. Normalized Difference Lignin Index (NDLI) was the only vegetation index (VI) to vary between the vegetation types. It also correlated with Rs for the months of August and September. Photochemical reflectance index (PRI), normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), and normalized difference nitrogen index (NDNI) also correlated with September’s Rs. In the future, further research into the accuracy and the spatial scale of VIs could provide us with more information on the capability of VIs to estimate Rs at these fine scales. The differences we found in monthly Rs rates among the vegetation types might have been driven by varying litter quality and quantity, litter decomposition rates, and root respiration rates. Future efforts to understand carbon dynamics on a broader scale should consider the temporal and finer-scale differences we observed. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Soil)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Average soil respiration (R<sub>s</sub>) for all sampling dates for hardwood, cinnamon fern, hemlock, and mountain laurel vegetation types. A different letter signifies a significant difference (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05) between vegetation types for that sampling date.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Soil respiration (R<sub>s</sub>) in a high-elevation southern Appalachian forest (Giles County, VA, USA) as influenced by soil temperature for each vegetation type: hardwood, cinnamon fern, hemlock, and mountain laurel. Predicted lines were generated using the formulas from <a href="#forests-14-01645-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a> while holding soil moisture at a value of 33.07 (the average soil moisture for the months of May-September).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Soil Respiration (R<sub>s</sub>) in a high-elevation southern Appalachian forest (Giles County, VA, USA) as influenced by soil moisture for each vegetation type: hardwood, cinnamon fern, hemlock, and mountain laurel. Predicted lines were generated using the formulas from <a href="#forests-14-01645-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a> while holding soil temperature at a value of 15.02 °C (the average soil temperature for the months of May to September).</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 35455 KiB  
Article
The Distribution of Surface Soil Moisture over Space and Time in Eastern Taylor Valley, Antarctica
by Mark R. Salvatore, John E. Barrett, Laura E. Fackrell, Eric R. Sokol, Joseph S. Levy, Lily C. Kuentz, Michael N. Gooseff, Byron J. Adams, Sarah N. Power, J. Paul Knightly, Haley M. Matul, Brian Szutu and Peter T. Doran
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(12), 3170; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15123170 - 18 Jun 2023
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2979
Abstract
Available soil moisture is thought to be the limiting factor for most ecosystem processes in the cold polar desert of the McMurdo Dry Valleys (MDVs) of Antarctica. Previous studies have shown that microfauna throughout the MDVs are capable of biological activity when sufficient [...] Read more.
Available soil moisture is thought to be the limiting factor for most ecosystem processes in the cold polar desert of the McMurdo Dry Valleys (MDVs) of Antarctica. Previous studies have shown that microfauna throughout the MDVs are capable of biological activity when sufficient soil moisture is available (~2–10% gravimetric water content), but few studies have attempted to quantify the distribution, abundance, and frequency of soil moisture on scales beyond that of traditional field work or local field investigations. In this study, we present our work to quantify the soil moisture content of soils throughout the Fryxell basin using multispectral satellite remote sensing techniques. Our efforts demonstrate that ecologically relevant abundances of liquid water are common across the landscape throughout the austral summer. On average, the Fryxell basin of Taylor Valley is modeled as containing 1.5 ± 0.5% gravimetric water content (GWC) across its non-fluvial landscape with ~23% of the landscape experiencing an average GWC > 2% throughout the study period, which is the observed limit of soil nematode activity. These results indicate that liquid water in the soils of the MDVs may be more abundant than previously thought, and that the distribution and availability of liquid water is dependent on both soil properties and the distribution of water sources. These results can also help to identify ecological hotspots in the harsh polar Antarctic environment and serve as a baseline for detecting future changes in the soil hydrological regime. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antarctic Remote Sensing Applications)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Major hydrologic features of the Fryxell basin, eastern Taylor Valley, Antarctica. Streams are labeled according to their USGS designated numbers, which correspond to the following: (F1) Canada Stream; (F2) Huey Creek; (F3) Lost Seal Stream; (F4) McKnight Creek; (F5) Aiken Creek; (F6) Von Guerard Stream; (F7) Harnish Creek; (F8) Crescent Stream; (F9) Green Creek; (F10) Delta Stream; and (F11) the relict channel. The locations of other figures are marked with green triangles, and the locations where sediments were collected for our experiments are indicated with yellow triangles. Imagery © 2019 Maxar.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Primary sources of soil moisture in the McMurdo Dry Valleys of Antarctica: (<b>a</b>) wetting of the hyporheic zone by nearby overland flow; (<b>b</b>) soil moisture sourced from the melting of uphill snow or glaciers; (<b>c</b>) atmospheric deposition of moisture (deliquescence); (<b>d</b>) direct precipitation; and (<b>e</b>) capillary wicking from melting of buried ground ice.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Demonstrating the removal of topographic shading from high-resolution satellite images: (<b>a</b>) a panchromatic WorldView-2 image of the Many Glaciers Pond region of eastern Taylor Valley, Antarctica; (<b>b</b>) a topographic hillshade generated using 1 m lidar topographic data [<a href="#B68-remotesensing-15-03170" class="html-bibr">68</a>] and solar geometry information obtained from the WorldView-2 image metadata file; (<b>c</b>) the topographically removed WorldView-2 image created by normalizing the data to the hillshade-predicted albedo. Imagery © 2018 Maxar.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Particle size distributions for the four soil samples studied in this investigation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Visible/near-infrared reflectance spectra of the four soil samples studied in this investigation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The relationship between gravimetric water content and relative surface albedo for each of the four soil samples studied in this investigation. The different spectral regions (R#) are noted. The thick black dashed line represents the best-fit linear relationship between these two variables for all four samples through Region #2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Average soil gravimetric water content (GWC) calculated using 21 individual satellite images acquired since 2009; (<b>b</b>) the standard deviation of GWC calculated using the same images as (<b>a</b>); (<b>c</b>) the frequency that a given pixel is observed to exceed the soil’s estimated wilting point (WP; 6.1% GWC); and (<b>d</b>) the frequency that a given pixel is observed to exceed the soil’s measured field capacity (FC; 12.3% GWC). Source imagery © 2009–2021 Maxar.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) True color image of an area south of Canada Glacier, which is seen at the upper edge of the image; (<b>b</b>) average gravimetric water content (GWC) of the soil in the 21-image composite developed in this study; (<b>c</b>) the fraction of the time each pixel is observed to exceed the estimated wilting point (WP) of 6.1% GWC; and (<b>d</b>) the fraction of the time each pixel is observed to exceed the measured field capacity (FC) of 12.3% GWC. Source imagery © 2009–2021 Maxar.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) True color image of a region south of Lake Fryxell, Taylor Valley, Antarctica, that demonstrates observed changes in soil moisture throughout the season; (<b>b</b>–<b>d</b>) show derived gravimetric water content (GWC) maps for the same regions scaled in an identical manner, showing a brightening over time. The chart at the bottom shows the evolution of these GWC transects over time, with the final date showing little, if any, soil moisture remaining. The location of the yellow stars in (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) are represented in the profiles in the bottom chart. Imagery © 2017 Maxar.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 13886 KiB  
Article
Accuracy Assessment and Impact Factor Analysis of GEDI Leaf Area Index Product in Temperate Forest
by Cangjiao Wang, Duo Jia, Shaogang Lei, Izaya Numata and Luo Tian
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(6), 1535; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15061535 - 10 Mar 2023
Cited by 14 | Viewed by 3493
Abstract
The leaf area index (LAI) is a vital parameter for quantifying the material and energy exchange between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere. The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI), with its mission to produce a near-global map of forest structure, provides a product of [...] Read more.
The leaf area index (LAI) is a vital parameter for quantifying the material and energy exchange between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere. The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI), with its mission to produce a near-global map of forest structure, provides a product of the effective leaf area index (referred to as GEDI LAIe). However, it is unclear about the performance of GEDI LAIe across different temperate forest types and the degree of factors influencing GEDI LAIe performance. This study assessed the accuracy of GEDI LAIe in temperate forests and quantifies the effects of various factors, such as the difference of gap fraction (DGF) between GEDI and discrete point cloud Lidar of the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), sensor system parameters, and characteristics of the canopy, topography, and soil. The reference data for the LAIe assessment were derived from the NEON discrete point cloud Lidar, referred to as NEON Lidar LAIe, covering 12 forest types across 22 sites in the Continental United States (the CONUS). Results showed that GEDI underestimated LAIe (Bias: −0.56 m2/m2), with values of the mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), percent bias (%Bias), and percent RMSE (%RMSE) of 0.70 m2/m2, 0.89 m2/m2, −0.20, and 0.31, respectively. Among forest types, the underestimation of GEDI LAIe in broadleaf forests and mixed forests was generally greater than that in coniferous forests, which showed a moderate error (%RMSE: 0.33~0.52). Factor analysis indicated that multiple factors explained 52% variance of the GEDI LAIe error, among which the DGF contributed the most with a relative importance of 49.82%, followed by characteristics of canopy and soil with a relative importance of 23.20% and 16.18%, respectively. The DGF was a key pivot for GEDI LAIe error; that is, other factors indirectly influence the GEDI LAIe error by affecting the DGF first. Our findings demonstrated that the GEDI LAIe product has good performance, and the factor analysis is expected to shed some light on further improvements in GEDI LAIe estimation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Application of LiDAR Point Cloud in Forest Structure)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>The distribution of study areas (<b>A</b>) including 22 NEON sites across the CONUS (<b>B</b>) and field-measured plots located in the Fenghuang Mountains in China (<b>C</b>). The red points in (<b>A</b>) were NEON sites in the COUNS and location of the Fenghuang Mountains in China. The numbers in (<b>B</b>) were identifications for the eco-climate region in the U.S.A. The red rectangle in (<b>C</b>) was the boundary for the field survey around the Fenghuang Mountains, while the red points in (<b>C</b>) were plot locations. The white number showed the field plot ID. The true color images were downloaded from google maps.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Comparison of NEON Lidar LAIe and NEON DHP LAIe. The bias greater than 0 indicates that NEON Lidar overestimated LAIe compared to DHP LAIe, and vice versa. The black and red solid lines are the 1:1 line and regression line, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison of LAIe between GEDI and DHP images. The black and red solid lines are the 1:1 line and regression line, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison of LAIe between GEDI and NEON Lidar among the 22 NEON sites. The top map shows the spatial distribution of accuracy metrics among the NEON sites. The black and red solid lines in scatter plot are the 1:1 line and regression line, respectively. The scatter plots and histogram show the LAIe difference between GEDI and NEON Lidar, respectively. Each scatter plot represented a NEON site with its name marked in the gray rectangle.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of LAIe between GEDI and NEON Lidar among forest types. Each scatter plot indicated a forest type with its name marked by a gray rectangle. The black and red solid lines are the 1:1 line and regression line, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Values of GEDI LAIe among forest types. The values from 1 to 12 on the <span class="html-italic">X</span>-axis represented forest types of Longleaf/Slash Pine, Loblolly/Shortleaf Pine, Ponderosa Pine, Lodgepole Pine, Douglas-fir, Fir/Spruce/Mountain Hemlock, California Mixed Conifer, Oak/Pine, Aspen/Birch, Oak/Hickory, Oak/Gum/Cypress, and Maple/Beech/Birch, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Structural equation model for explaining the direct and indirect effect of factors on the absolute deviation of GEDI LAIe. Different colored boxes represented categories of factors (see <a href="#remotesensing-15-01535-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>). Light blue and brown arrows show a significant negative and positive correlation between factors, respectively. The R<sup>2</sup> and relative importance were calculated by IMG. Other factors included the characteristics of topographic slope and sensor system parameters.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The influence (<b>A</b>) and relative errors (<b>B</b>) of the clumping effect. The black and red solid lines in (<b>A</b>) are the 1:1 line and regression line, respectively. The relative error is caused by clumping in different scales, such as footprint (overall), between crowns (between), and within crowns (within).</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 14795 KiB  
Article
Detecting Woody Plants in Southern Arizona Using Data from the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON)
by Thomas Hutsler, Narcisa G. Pricope, Peng Gao and Monica T. Rother
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(1), 98; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15010098 - 24 Dec 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2179
Abstract
Land cover changes and conversions are occurring rapidly in response to human activities throughout the world. Woody plant encroachment (WPE) is a type of land cover conversion that involves the proliferation and/or densification of woody plants in an ecosystem. WPE is especially prevalent [...] Read more.
Land cover changes and conversions are occurring rapidly in response to human activities throughout the world. Woody plant encroachment (WPE) is a type of land cover conversion that involves the proliferation and/or densification of woody plants in an ecosystem. WPE is especially prevalent in drylands, where subtle changes in precipitation and disturbance regimes can have dramatic effects on vegetation structure and degrade ecosystem functions and services. Accurately determining the distribution of woody plants in drylands is critical for protecting human and natural resources through woody plant management strategies. Using an object-based approach, we have used novel open-source remote sensing and in situ data from Santa Rita Experimental Range (SRER), National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), Arizona, USA with machine learning algorithms and tested each model’s efficacy for estimating fractional woody cover (FWC) to quantify woody plant extent. Model performance was compared using standard model assessment metrics such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and runtime to assess model variables and hyperparameters. We found that decision tree-based models with a binary classification scheme performed best, with sequential models (Boosting) slightly outperforming independent models (Random Forest) for both object classification and FWC estimates. Mean canopy height and mean, median, and maximum statistics for all vegetation indices were found to have highest variable importance. Optimal model hyperparameters and potential limitations of the NEON dataset for classifying woody plants in dryland regions were also identified. Overall, this study lays the groundwork for developing machine learning models for dryland woody plant management using solely NEON data. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Santa Rita Experimental Range (SRER). AOP flight box is outlined in red, with prediction areas outlined in purple and training areas outlined in black [<a href="#B25-remotesensing-15-00098" class="html-bibr">25</a>,<a href="#B27-remotesensing-15-00098" class="html-bibr">27</a>,<a href="#B30-remotesensing-15-00098" class="html-bibr">30</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Finalized binary model performance showed a slight improvement at the lower limit of overall accuracy compared to the previous runs (68.2% from 67.8% and 67.0%) and slight decline at the upper limit of overall accuracy (69.4% from 69.8% and 69.5%). Specificity remained higher than sensitivity for all models, with the only improvement from initial models seen in the lower limit of sensitivity (67.0% from 65.0%). Random Forest performed with highest overall accuracy with 69.4% but has a larger difference between sensitivity and specificity compared to Gradient Boost, which has an overall accuracy of 69.3%. Lowest sensitivity was observed from the Bagging, eXtreme Gradient Boost, Light Gradient Boost, and Cat Boost models (67%) and highest sensitivity was observed from the Gradient Boost model (69%). Lowest specificity was observed from the Ada Boost model (68%) and highest specificity was observed from the eXtreme Gradient Boost and Cat Boost models (72%).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Finalized binary model stability showed that Bagging had the lowest range (1.9%), and Decision Tree had the highest range (5.0%). This is a slight improvement for the lower limit compared to initial models (2.4%) and slight decline for the upper limit compared to initial models (4.8%).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>XGB had the lowest dFWC for both binary and multiclass schemes (0.2%, 3.19%, respectively). Cat Boost also had dFWC of 0.2% for binary. Decision Tree performed worst overall when considering both schemes, with binary dFWC of 4.01% and multiclass dFWC of 3.7%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Overview of Plot 46 (moderate FWC). Average FWC between binary and multiclass training data was 33.73%. Plot 46 is a tower plot and is representative of the most dominant vegetation properties at SRER, which is why there are many plots within its image tile. This plot is also double the dimensions of the distributed plots (1600 m<sup>2</sup> instead of 400 m<sup>2</sup>). Due to its size, field located vegetation is concentrated in four regions. Vegetation for this plot is denser than Plot 14.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>XGB predictions for Plot 46 under both binary and multiclass classification schemes. Despite slight differences in image segmentation, overall estimations of FWC are very similar between training and prediction methods, with slight overprediction of FWC indicated by positive dFWC values. Most differences in classification occur in polygons that appear less green in imagery, but field verification indicates live vegetation (polygons on the east and southeast border for example). This presents a possible limitation in AOP or model ability to determine live plant status with current sensor/data resolutions. The multiclass scheme appears to be classifying the less green, but still live vegetation as non-woody and the surrounding bare ground as other. Model predictions also seem to predict woody vegetation in more clustered groups compared to the training data which is more sporadic. This highlights human ability to discern small gaps in vegetation relative to the model. dFWC remained relatively low (0.59% for binary and 3.27% for multiclass) despite these differences.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Cat Boost predictions for Plot 46. Multiclass is not shown, as it was not supported by the Cat Boost model. As observed in the XGB model, less-green live vegetation is being classified as non-woody and areas of woody vegetation are being predicted in a more clustered pattern compared to training data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Decision Tree predictions for Plot 46 for the binary and multiclass schemes. Despite having the worst performance overall, the Decision Tree model performs very well at this moderate FWC plot under the binary classification scheme, although the areas of less-green live vegetation to the east and southeast are still misclassified. Decision Tree also differed from eXtreme Gradient Boost for the multiclass prediction in that it did not predict much “other” cover, which is consistent with the Decision Tree predictions for Plot 14. Decision Tree overpredicted FWC in the multiclass scheme with a relatively high dFWC value of 4.65%. Like the previous models, woody vegetation was predicted in a more clustered pattern than in the training data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>XGB predictions for the Plot 46 image tile using the binary classification scheme. FWC for the entire prediction area is 31.7%. Areas with higher densities of woody plant cover are clearly highlighted in green in both the RGB and prediction tile, along with clear delineation of water and road/trail features.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>XGB model predictions for the Plot 46 image tile using a multiclass classification scheme. FWC for the entire prediction area is 33.1%. Major woody vegetation patterns appear in green for both the RGB and prediction tile, with areas of bare ground, roads, and water features being classified in blue as “other”. Areas being classified as non-woody appear to have a reddish soil color or have areas of less-green vegetation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>dFWC for the binary XGB, Cat Boost, and Decision Tree models. dFWC is highest for plots with high FWC with Decision Tree having the highest dFWC (11.17%). This pattern of declined model prediction accuracy occurring with increased site complexity is in agreement with suggestions made by [<a href="#B23-remotesensing-15-00098" class="html-bibr">23</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>dFWC for the multiclass XGB and Decision Tree models. dFWC is highest for plots with high FWC with Decision Tree and eXtreme Gradient Boost having the highest dFWC (24.99%). This pattern of declined model prediction accuracy occurring with increased site complexity is in agreement with suggestions made by [<a href="#B23-remotesensing-15-00098" class="html-bibr">23</a>].</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 2295 KiB  
Article
Diversity and Resilience of Seed-Removing Ant Species in Longleaf Sandhill to Frequent Fire
by Rachel A. Atchison and Andrea Lucky
Diversity 2022, 14(12), 1012; https://doi.org/10.3390/d14121012 - 22 Nov 2022
Viewed by 2171
Abstract
Prescribed fire is used globally as a habitat restoration tool and is widely accepted as supporting biotic diversity. However, in fire-prone ecosystems, research has sometimes documented post-fire reduction in ant diversity and accompanying changes in seed removal behavior. This is concerning because ants [...] Read more.
Prescribed fire is used globally as a habitat restoration tool and is widely accepted as supporting biotic diversity. However, in fire-prone ecosystems, research has sometimes documented post-fire reduction in ant diversity and accompanying changes in seed removal behavior. This is concerning because ants provide important ecosystem services that can aid in restoration efforts, including seed dispersal. In this study, we examined the immediate impacts of fire in the well-studied ant community of longleaf pine forests (LLP) in the SE USA. We surveyed seed-removing ant species in a LLP sandhill ecosystem to investigate the effects of prescribed fire and coarse woody debris (CWD), a nesting and foraging resource, on ant community composition and ant–seed interactions. Seed-removing ants comprised a significant portion of detected ant species (20 of 45); eight of these species are documented removing seeds for the first time. Following an experimentally applied low-intensity summer burn, decreases in seed remover detection were observed, along with reductions in the number of seeds removed, across both burned and unburned areas; neither prescribed fire nor proximity to CWD significantly influenced these factors. Together, these results show that seed-removing ant species constitute a substantial proportion of the LLP sandhill ant community and are relatively robust to habitat changes mediated by low-intensity prescribed burning during the growing season. Considering ant community resiliency to fire, we can infer that using prescribed fire aligns with the goals of restoring and maintaining biotic diversity in this fire-prone ecosystem. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diversity, Biogeography and Community Ecology of Ants II)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Diagram of the 10 treatment plots, each containing a pair of treatment subplots, at Ordway-Swisher Biological Station in Putnam Co. FL. Red line represents the division between burned and unburned sites. One experimental burn was conducted south of the red line; north of the line remained unburned. Each 25 m<sup>2</sup> subplot is represented by four orange circles, each represents the Global Positioning System referenced locations of a subplot corner.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Ant species richness accumulation and extrapolation by sampling type: leaf litter quadrats, tuna–honey bait recruitment, and seed bait removals.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>A</b>) Subfamily breakdown of all species sampled compared to the subset of species identified as seed removers. (<b>B</b>) Seed-removing ant species and the percent of seeds each species removed out of 644 total seeds removed across the entire study. Asterisks denote new observations of seed removal for a species. “w” identifies the species as a non-exclusive wood nester.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>NMDS for ant community composition. Burn treatment is labeled “PB” for prescribed burn and “UB” for unburned. (<b>A</b>) Seed-removing species: species frequency of occurrence in transects using Bray–Curtis distance metric. (<b>B</b>) Overall community: species frequency of occurrence in transects using Bray–Curtis distance metric.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Sampling period effects in seed trials. Error bars are ±1 SE. (<b>A</b>) Effect on species richness. (<b>B</b>) Effect on number of seeds removed.</p>
Full article ">
30 pages, 3651 KiB  
Article
Integrating Ecological Forecasting into Undergraduate Ecology Curricula with an R Shiny Application-Based Teaching Module
by Tadhg N. Moore, R. Quinn Thomas, Whitney M. Woelmer and Cayelan C. Carey
Forecasting 2022, 4(3), 604-633; https://doi.org/10.3390/forecast4030033 - 30 Jun 2022
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 3583
Abstract
Ecological forecasting is an emerging approach to estimate the future state of an ecological system with uncertainty, allowing society to better manage ecosystem services. Ecological forecasting is a core mission of the U.S. National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) and several federal agencies, yet, [...] Read more.
Ecological forecasting is an emerging approach to estimate the future state of an ecological system with uncertainty, allowing society to better manage ecosystem services. Ecological forecasting is a core mission of the U.S. National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) and several federal agencies, yet, to date, forecasting training has focused on graduate students, representing a gap in undergraduate ecology curricula. In response, we developed a teaching module for the Macrosystems EDDIE (Environmental Data-Driven Inquiry and Exploration; MacrosystemsEDDIE.org) educational program to introduce ecological forecasting to undergraduate students through an interactive online tool built with R Shiny. To date, we have assessed this module, “Introduction to Ecological Forecasting,” at ten universities and two conference workshops with both undergraduate and graduate students (N = 136 total) and found that the module significantly increased undergraduate students’ ability to correctly define ecological forecasting terms and identify steps in the ecological forecasting cycle. Undergraduate and graduate students who completed the module showed increased familiarity with ecological forecasts and forecast uncertainty. These results suggest that integrating ecological forecasting into undergraduate ecology curricula will enhance students’ abilities to engage and understand complex ecological concepts. Full article
(This article belongs to the Collection Near-Term Ecological Forecasting)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Schematic of the iterative, near-term ecological forecasting (INTEF) cycle used in the module to teach ecological forecasting to students.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Screenshots from the R Shiny application that show example activities the students complete as part of the module and the tool’s high level of customization. (<b>A</b>) In Activity A, students select an aquatic site from the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) for which they will generate a productivity forecast. (<b>B</b>). In Activity B, students complete the near-term, iterative forecast cycle by updating their model parameters, with the aim of improving the next forecast.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Percentage of students who answered questions 1–4 (Q1–4) correctly in the pre- and post-module assessments for undergraduate (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 109) and graduate students (N = 20). Stars (*) indicate statistically significant (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05) differences between pre- and post-module assessments, color-coded for undergraduate or graduate students (see statistical results in <a href="#forecasting-04-00033-t0A7" class="html-table">Table A7</a>). The questions and their responses are provided in <a href="#forecasting-04-00033-t0A2" class="html-table">Table A2</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>A</b>) Percentage of undergraduate (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 112) and graduate students (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 24) who included zero to six steps of the INTEF cycle in their answer to the question about how they would develop lake algae forecasts in the pre- and post-module assessment. The lines between the vertical bars represent changes by individual students between the number of forecast steps included in pre- and post-module responses. (<b>B</b>) Percentage of undergraduate (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 112) and graduate students (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 24) who included each of the steps of the INTEF cycle (corresponding to <a href="#forecasting-04-00033-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>) in their pre- and post-module assessment responses to the question about how they would forecast lake algae. Students were also given the option to state “I don’t know.” Stars (*) indicate statistically significant (<span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05) differences between the pre- and post-module assessments (statistical results presented in <a href="#forecasting-04-00033-t0A8" class="html-table">Table A8</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Network diagrams representing the steps of the iterative near-term ecological forecast (INTEF) cycle (corresponding to <a href="#forecasting-04-00033-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>) that undergraduate (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 112) and graduate students (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 24) included in their pre- and post-module assessment responses to the question about how they would forecast lake algae. The size of the nodes is sized to the number of students which included that step in their responses; the darkness of the edges connecting the nodes is sized to the number of students who included both steps.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Students’ self-reported familiarity with ecological forecasting (left column) and ecological forecast uncertainty (right column) for undergraduate (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 105, top row) and graduate (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 19, bottom row) students in the pre- and post-assessment. Lines between bars represent changes in individual responses pre- and post-module use. Statistical results are given in <a href="#forecasting-04-00033-t0A10" class="html-table">Table A10</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Students’ self-reported assessment of the importance of generating a forecast (left column), communicating a forecast (middle column), and quantifying uncertainty (right column), separated by undergraduate (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 105, top row) and graduate students (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 19, bottom row) for the pre- and post-module assessment. Lines between bars represent changes in individual responses pre- and post-module use. Statistical results are given in <a href="#forecasting-04-00033-t0A11" class="html-table">Table A11</a>.</p>
Full article ">
32 pages, 23250 KiB  
Article
Integration of VIIRS Observations with GEDI-Lidar Measurements to Monitor Forest Structure Dynamics from 2013 to 2020 across the Conterminous United States
by Khaldoun Rishmawi, Chengquan Huang, Karen Schleeweis and Xiwu Zhan
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(10), 2320; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14102320 - 11 May 2022
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 3263
Abstract
Consistent and spatially explicit periodic monitoring of forest structure is essential for estimating forest-related carbon emissions, analyzing forest degradation, and supporting sustainable forest management policies. To date, few products are available that allow for continental to global operational monitoring of changes in canopy [...] Read more.
Consistent and spatially explicit periodic monitoring of forest structure is essential for estimating forest-related carbon emissions, analyzing forest degradation, and supporting sustainable forest management policies. To date, few products are available that allow for continental to global operational monitoring of changes in canopy structure. In this study, we explored the synergy between the NASA’s spaceborne Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) waveform LiDAR and the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) data to produce spatially explicit and consistent annual maps of canopy height (CH), percent canopy cover (PCC), plant area index (PAI), and foliage height diversity (FHD) across the conterminous United States (CONUS) at a 1-km resolution for 2013–2020. The accuracies of the annual maps were assessed using forest structure attribute derived from airborne laser scanning (ALS) data acquired between 2013 and 2020 for the 48 National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) field sites distributed across the CONUS. The root mean square error (RMSE) values of the annual canopy height maps as compared with the ALS reference data varied from a minimum of 3.31-m for 2020 to a maximum of 4.19-m for 2017. Similarly, the RMSE values for PCC ranged between 8% (2020) and 11% (all other years). Qualitative evaluations of the annual maps using time series of very high-resolution images further suggested that the VIIRS-derived products could capture both large and “more” subtle changes in forest structure associated with partial harvesting, wind damage, wildfires, and other environmental stresses. The methods developed in this study are expected to enable multi-decadal analysis of forest structure and its dynamics using consistent satellite observations from moderate resolution sensors such as VIIRS onboard JPSS satellites. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Forest Monitoring in a Multi-Sensor Approach)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Flowchart of the steps used to produce and evaluate the accuracy of annual (2013–2020) wall-to-wall forest structure products. The canopy height, canopy cover, plant area index (PAI), and foliage height diversity index (FHDI) forest structure products were obtained by exploiting the synergy between VIIRS and GEDI measurements using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms. The models that were trained using the 2019 data were applied to the VIIRS observation period from 2013 to 2020. The uncertainties in the annual map products were then evaluated using airborne laser scanning (ALS) data collected for the National Science Foundation’s National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) field sites in the U.S. mainland.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flowchart showing the steps used in selecting, editing, and filtering the GEDI-derived Level 02B products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>A graphical representation of the method used to calculate mean and median GEDI forest structure attributes with a VIIRS pixel. (<b>a</b>) Location of GEDI footprints (yellow points) collocated with a VIIRS pixel (red parallelogram), (<b>b</b>) GEDI waveform (red line) and the derived RH profile for a single GEDI footprint, (<b>c</b>) the GEDI-derived vertical profiles used in the calculation of percent tree cover (%cover), Plant area index (PAI), and foliage height diversity (FHD), (<b>d</b>) derived tree height statistics from the collocated GEDI footprints, and (<b>e</b>) derived tree cover statistics.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) The distribution of GEDI−VIIRS paired data records testing and training subset with a cutoff value of 30 or more GEDI footprints per VIIRS pixel, and (<b>b</b>) the 25-km checkerboard used to subset the GEDI–VIIRS paired data records into training (blue points) and testing (green points) subsets.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparisons between VIIRS-derived and GEDI-derived: (<b>a</b>) canopy height; (<b>b</b>) canopy fraction cover; (<b>c</b>) plant area index; and (<b>d</b>) foliage height diversity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Distribution of differences between (<b>a</b>) VIIRS and GEDI-derived canopy height; (<b>b</b>) VIIRS and GEDI-derived fraction cover, (<b>c</b>) VIIRS and GEDI-derived Plant Area Index; and (<b>d</b>) VIIRS and GEDI-derived foliage height diversity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>Distribution of differences between (<b>a</b>) VIIRS and GEDI-derived canopy height; (<b>b</b>) VIIRS and GEDI-derived fraction cover, (<b>c</b>) VIIRS and GEDI-derived Plant Area Index; and (<b>d</b>) VIIRS and GEDI-derived foliage height diversity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) 2020 wall−to−wall VIIRS−derived canopy cover map, and (<b>b</b>) 2020 wall−to−wall VIIRS−derived canopy height map. From right to left: panel ① shows canopy cover in 2013 prior to fire disturbance events (red polygons are the MTBS fire disturbance boundaries occurring between 2014−2019) and canopy cover in 2020 after the fire disturbance vents; panel ② shows canopy height in 2017 (left) and 2020 (right) showing the impacts of Hurricane Michael 2019 on derived canopy height; panel ③ demonstrates the ability of the maps to detect “more” subtle changes in canopy cover associated with selective logging (blue polygon). High-resolution satellite image insets visually demonstrate post-disturbance impacts on vegetation structure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) A difference map between the 2019 canopy height produced in this study and the 2019 canopy height map in Rishmawi et al. (2021). Red shades indicate areas in this study with lower derived canopy height values (inset ①) while green shades in inset ② show areas with comparatively higher canopy height values. (<b>b</b>) Is the same as in (<b>a</b>) but for percent canopy cover. From left to right: panel ① shows significant improvements in modeling canopy height in barren areas that can be attributed to the corrections applied to the GEDI canopy height data (black circles); panel ② shows improvements in modeling canopy height in agricultural areas with field crop height values ~ 0 m in the current study; and ③ shows for the densely forested landscapes higher canopy cover (green areas) values than in Rishmawi et al. (2021).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Distribution of residuals between (<b>a</b>) 2020 VIIRS and GEDI-derived canopy height prior to mean bias adjustment; and (<b>b</b>) 2020 VIIRS and GEDI-derived canopy height post mean bias adjustment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Scatter plots between VIIRS-derived and ALS-derived: (<b>a</b>) canopy height; (<b>b</b>) canopy fraction cover; (<b>c</b>) plant area index; and (<b>d</b>) foliage height diversity. Different years are represented in different colors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10 Cont.
<p>Scatter plots between VIIRS-derived and ALS-derived: (<b>a</b>) canopy height; (<b>b</b>) canopy fraction cover; (<b>c</b>) plant area index; and (<b>d</b>) foliage height diversity. Different years are represented in different colors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>(<b>a</b>) Changes in percentage tree cover from 2013 to 2020 (VIIRS 2020−VIIRS 2019) for the conterminous US. Over the period of 8 years, some 56,000 km<sup>2</sup> of western forests (west of −100° parallel) lost more than 10% of their tree cover while only 22,000 km<sup>2</sup> of forests increased their cover density by 10% or more (<b>b</b>). To the east, the area of forests with gains in canopy cover of 10% or more exceeded 285,000 km<sup>2</sup> compared to 199,000 km<sup>2</sup> of forests that lost 10 or more of their canopy cover (<b>c</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Changes in percentage tree cover from 2013 to 2020 (VIIRS 2020−VIIRS 2019) for the conterminous US. Over the period of 8 years, some 56,000 km<sup>2</sup> of western forests (west of −100° parallel) lost more than 10% of their tree cover while only 22,000 km<sup>2</sup> of forests increased their cover density by 10% or more (<b>b</b>). To the east, the area of forests with gains in canopy cover of 10% or more exceeded 285,000 km<sup>2</sup> compared to 199,000 km<sup>2</sup> of forests that lost 10 or more of their canopy cover (<b>c</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Post wildfires (2014) canopy cover dynamics 2014–2020 calculated from all pixels within the MTBS fire boundary for four fire-prone EPA level two ecoregions (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>). These show very slow post-disturbance recovery of canopy cover. Faster cover recovery rates (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) were found for much of the Eastern forest such as in the Ozark/Ouachita–Appalachian forests blue ridge and southeastern Plains. Black lines represent the mean canopy cover values. Gray lines represent the mean ± 2 standard deviations of the distribution of values within the MTBS fire boundary.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Annual canopy height (CH) and canopy fraction cover (CFC) derived from the annual VIIRS multi-temporal metrics observations acquired over 8 years (2013–2020) plotted over time for: (<b>a</b>) forest trees overthrown by wind damage from Hurricane Michael in the Florida panhandle; (<b>b</b>) gradual increases in forest height and canopy cover associated with natural growth in northern California; (<b>c</b>) a forest gradually thinned over multiple years (2013–2015) and recovered afterward in Washington State; and (<b>d</b>) subtle reductions in tree height and forest cover associated with environmental stress. Red polygons drawn on top of the GoogleEarth images show the 926–meter VIIRS pixel area used to create the plots to the left.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 2703 KiB  
Article
A Camera-Based Method for Collecting Rapid Vegetation Data to Support Remote-Sensing Studies of Shrubland Biodiversity
by Erin J. Questad, Marlee Antill, Nanfeng Liu, E. Natasha Stavros, Philip A. Townsend, Susan Bonfield and David Schimel
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(8), 1933; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14081933 - 16 Apr 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3423
Abstract
The decline in biodiversity in Mediterranean-type ecosystems (MTEs) and other shrublands underscores the importance of understanding the trends in species loss through consistent vegetation mapping over broad spatial and temporal ranges, which is increasingly accomplished with optical remote sensing (imaging spectroscopy). Airborne missions [...] Read more.
The decline in biodiversity in Mediterranean-type ecosystems (MTEs) and other shrublands underscores the importance of understanding the trends in species loss through consistent vegetation mapping over broad spatial and temporal ranges, which is increasingly accomplished with optical remote sensing (imaging spectroscopy). Airborne missions planned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and other groups (e.g., US National Ecological Observatory Network, NEON) are essential for improving high-quality maps of vegetation and plant species. These surveys require robust and efficient ground calibration/validation data; however, barriers to ground-data collection exist, such as steep terrain, which is a common feature of Mediterranean-type ecosystems. We developed and tested a method for rapidly collecting ground-truth data for shrubland plant communities across steep topographic gradients in southern California. Our method utilizes semi-aerial photos taken with a high-resolution digital camera mounted on a telescoping pole to capture groundcover, and a point-intercept image-classification program (Photogrid) that allows efficient sub-sampling of field images to derive vegetation percent-cover estimates while reducing human bias. Here, we assessed the quality of data collection using the image-based method compared to a traditional point-intercept ground survey and performed time trials to compare the efficiency of various survey efforts. The results showed no significant difference in estimates of percent cover and Simpson’s diversity derived from the point-intercept and those derived using the image-based method; however, there was lower correspondence in estimates of species richness and evenness. The image-based method was overall more efficient than the point-intercept surveys, reducing the total survey time by 13 to 46 min per plot depending on sampling effort. The difference in survey time between the two methods became increasingly greater when the vegetation height was above 1 m. Due to the high correspondence between estimates of species percent cover derived from the image-based compared to the point-intercept method, we recommend this type of survey for the verification of remote-sensing datasets featuring percent cover of individual species or closely related plant groups, for use in classifying UAS imagery, and especially for use in MTEs that have steep, rugged terrain and other situations such as tall, dense-growing shrubs where traditional field methods are dangerous or burdensome. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of the study area in the Angeles National Forest (green), Los Angeles County, CA, USA. The Copper and Sayre fires burned approximately 25,000 acres between 2002 and 2008.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Diagram of photo-survey method for (<b>A</b>) steep plots: surveyor walks along a 45-m transect taking 10 5-m × 5-m photos (grey boxes) of the plot below, (<b>B</b>) a field crew member taking photos with camera attached to a pole extended 5 m, and (<b>C</b>) diagram of photo survey for flat plots: surveyor walks along two crossed 45-m transects taking 10 5-m × 5-m photos from above.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Photogrid classification process: (<b>A</b>) in the field, aboveground photos were marked with a smartphone app to aid with later species ID; (<b>B</b>) back in the lab, photos were uploaded into the Photogrid classifier program and number of gridpoints per photo (generally 42) were chosen, which instructs the program to populate each photo with gridpoints to classify; (<b>C</b>) for each gridpoint, the user must select the dominant species/cover class within that cell from a pre-entered list; (<b>D</b>) after completing classification for all ten plot photos, a table is generated with percent cover of each class identified, out of 100% (Annual Grass was a composite category that included annual grass species that could not be distinguished in the photos such as <span class="html-italic">Bromus</span> spp., <span class="html-italic">Avena</span> spp., etc.).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Relationship between species richness of field observations (S<sub>field</sub>) and Photogrid surveys (S<sub>photo</sub>) for Flat and Steep protocols. Data are from 2018 field surveys including 69 steep (shown in black) and 14 flat plots (shown in grey). The dashed line is the one-to-one line. Results of a linear mixed-effects regression showed a significant effect of S<sub>field</sub> (F<sub>1,79</sub> = 95.55, <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.0001) and protocol (F<sub>1,79</sub> = 7.91, <span class="html-italic">p</span> = 0.006) on S<sub>photo</sub>, with no significant interaction (F<sub>1,79</sub> = 0.47, <span class="html-italic">p</span> &gt; 0.05). Pearson correlation coefficients between S<sub>photo</sub> and S<sub>field</sub> are shown.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Regressions between field (e.g., S<sub>p-i</sub>) and Photogrid (e.g., S<sub>p</sub>) vegetation metrics from the 2019 data, shown for the 12 Photogrid configurations of (<b>A</b>) Simpson’s species diversity (1/D); (<b>B</b>) % Cover; (<b>C</b>) species richness (S); and (<b>D</b>) Simpson’s evenness. The heavy black lines show the one-to-one relationship. Dashed lines represent the regression between Photogrid configuration 1 (highest sampling effort) and the field point-intercept method; colored lines are those configurations that did not produce significantly different results from configuration 1, and grey lines represent those that were significantly different than configuration 1, based on a Tukey HSD test. There was no significant difference among the configurations for 1/D<sub>p</sub> or % Cover<sub>p</sub>. Five configurations produced significantly lower values for S<sub>p</sub>, and three configurations produced significantly greater values for E<sub>p</sub> when compared to configuration 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Survey time in minutes by survey method and vegetation height class. Height classes were low (&lt;1 m), mid (1 m to 1.5 m), and high (&gt;1.5 m). Crossbars represent the mean ±95% confidence interval for 13 field plots within three vegetation height classes surveyed in 2019 by both the point-intercept and Photogrid methods. There were no significant effects of method, height class, or their interaction on survey time. The graph is provided to illustrate a trend that the photo method time was lower in mid and high height classes.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 1506 KiB  
Article
MOSQUITO EDGE: An Edge-Intelligent Real-Time Mosquito Threat Prediction Using an IoT-Enabled Hardware System
by Shyam Polineni, Om Shastri, Avi Bagchi, Govind Gnanakumar, Sujay Rasamsetti and Prabha Sundaravadivel
Sensors 2022, 22(2), 695; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22020695 - 17 Jan 2022
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 5732
Abstract
Species distribution models (SDMs) that use climate variables to make binary predictions are effective tools for niche prediction in current and future climate scenarios. In this study, a Hutchinson hypervolume is defined with temperature, humidity, air pressure, precipitation, and cloud cover climate vectors [...] Read more.
Species distribution models (SDMs) that use climate variables to make binary predictions are effective tools for niche prediction in current and future climate scenarios. In this study, a Hutchinson hypervolume is defined with temperature, humidity, air pressure, precipitation, and cloud cover climate vectors collected from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that were matched to mosquito presence and absence points extracted from NASA’s citizen science platform called GLOBE Observer and the National Ecological Observatory Network. An 86% accurate Random Forest model that operates on binary classification was created to predict mosquito threat. Given a location and date input, the model produces a threat level based on the number of decision trees that vote for a presence label. The feature importance chart and regression show a positive, linear correlation between humidity and mosquito threat and between temperature and mosquito threat below a threshold of 28 °C. In accordance with the statistical analysis and ecological wisdom, high threat clusters in warm, humid regions and low threat clusters in cold, dry regions were found. With the model running on the cloud and within ArcGIS Dashboard, accurate and granular real-time threat level predictions can be made at any latitude and longitude. A device leveraging Global Positioning System (GPS) smartphone technology and the Internet of Things (IoT) to collect and analyze data on the edge was developed. The data from the edge device along with its respective date and location collected are automatically inputted into the aforementioned Random Forest model to provide users with a real-time threat level prediction. This inexpensive hardware can be used in developing countries that are threatened by vector-borne diseases or in remote areas without cloud connectivity. Such devices can be linked with citizen science mosquito data platforms to build training datasets for machine learning based SDMs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Environmental Sensing Systems)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Overview of the proposed method in MOSQUITO EDGE framework.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Mosquito edge framework configured with sensors and PC.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Temperature and Threat analysis using Random Forest.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Humidity and Threat analysis using Random Forest.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Pressure and Threat analysis using Random Forest.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Precipitation and Threat analysis using Random Forest.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Cloud Cover and Threat analysis using Random Forest.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop