Inclusion of forest harvest legacies, forest type, and regeneration spatial patterns in updated forest maps: A comparison of mapping results
Inclusion of forest harvest legacies, forest type, and regeneration spatial patterns in updated forest maps: A comparison of mapping results
复制标题
将森林采伐遗产、森林类型和更新空间模式纳入更新的森林地图：制图结果比较
DOI：
10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.047
复制
发表时间：
2008
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Kasey Legaard
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Sader;Kasey Legaard
在缅因州和其他森林覆盖严重的州，现有的土地覆盖图很快就会过时，由于森林采伐和土地利用转换，因此，这些地图可能无法充分反映景观特性和模式相关的当前资源管理和生态系统研究。通过更新旧的土地覆盖产品（1993年缅因州GAP地图）使用Landsat图像和建立森林变化检测技术，我们展示了一个实用和准确的手段，提供当代，空间上明确的森林覆盖数据需要量化景观变化。对于一个180万公顷的研究面积在北方缅因州，我们量化的准确性森林采伐类和比较映射的收获和再生面积之间的2004年GAP更新产品和2004年缅因州土地覆盖数据集（MeLCD），最近开发的地图与2001年国家土地覆盖数据库（NLCD）的协调。在1995-2004年期间，差距更新图的总体收获/非收获准确度为87.5%，而MeLCD为62.1%。差距更新的生产者和用户收获检测准确率分别为92.4%和89.7%，MeLCD为48.8%和92.5%。地图上的收获区差异很大，反映了MELCD对最近收获活动的系统性代表性不足。通过整合较旧的土地覆盖数据，差距更新保留了20世纪70年代末至90年代初的森林干扰遗产，同时描绘了2004年采伐和再生林分的森林组成。相比之下，MeLCD（和2001年NLCD）过度代表的面积和连通性的老森林（自20世纪70年代末以来未受干扰），并没有提供森林组成信息映射森林再生。森林年龄类和采伐历史的系统性错误分类对野生动物栖息地建模、森林资源清查和生物量或碳储量估计的研究具有严重影响。我们建议在绘制新的森林和土地覆盖图时，将较旧的土地覆盖数据与时间序列森林变化检测相结合，以保留收获或干扰类别。
In Maine and other heavily forested states, existing land cover maps quickly become dated due to forest harvesting and land use conversion; therefore, these maps may not adequately reflect landscape properties and patterns relevant to current resource management and ecosystem studies. By updating an older land cover product (the 1993 Maine GAP map) using Landsat imagery and established forest change detection techniques, we demonstrate a practical and accurate means of providing contemporary, spatially explicit forest cover data needed to quantify landscape change. For a 1.8 million hectares study area in northern Maine, we quantify the accuracy of forest harvest classes and compare mapped harvest and regeneration area between the 2004 GAP update product and the 2004 Maine Landcover Dataset (MeLCD), a map recently developed in coordination with the 2001 National Land-Cover Database (NLCD). For the period 1995–2004, the overall harvest/non-harvest accuracy of the GAP update map is 87.5%, compared to 62.1% for the MeLCD. Producer and user accuracy for harvest detection is 92.4% and 89.7%, respectively for the GAP update, and 48.8% and 92.5% for the MeLCD. Mapped harvest area differs considerably, reflecting a systematic under-representation of recent harvest activity on the part of the MeLCD. By integrating older land cover data, the GAP update retains the forest disturbance legacies of the late 1970s through the early 1990s while simultaneously depicting 2004 forest composition for harvested and regenerating stands. In contrast, the MeLCD (and 2001 NLCD) over-represents the area and connectivity of older forest (undisturbed since the late 1970s), and provides no forest composition information for mapped forest regeneration. Systematic misclassification of forest age classes and harvest history has serious implications for studies focused on wildlife habitat modeling, forest inventory, and biomass or carbon stock estimation. We recommend the integration of older land cover data and time-series forest change detection for retention of harvest or disturbance classes when creating new forest and land cover maps.