4.6 Article

Segmentation and object-oriented classification of wetlands in a karst Florida landscape using multi-season Landsat-7 ETM+ imagery

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING
Volume 32, Issue 5, Pages 1471-1489

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/01431160903559762

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. United States Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development [EP-D-06-096]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Segmentation and object-oriented processing of single-season and multi-season Landsat-7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+) data was utilized for the classification of wetlands in a 1560 km(2) study area of north central Florida. This segmentation and object-oriented classification outperformed the traditional maximum likelihood algorithm (MLC) in accurately mapping wetlands, with overall accuracies of 90.2% (single-season imagery) and 90.8% (multi-season imagery), compared to overall accuracies for the MLC classifiers of 78.4 and 79.0%, respectively. Kappa coefficients were over 1.5-times greater for the segmentation/object-oriented classifications than for the MLC classifications, and producer and user accuracies were also higher. The producer accuracies of the segmentation/object-oriented classifications were 90.8% (single-season) and 91.6% (multi-season), compared to 70.6 and 74.4%, respectively, for the MLC classifications. User accuracies were 73.9 and 73.5% for the single-season and multi-season segmentation/object-oriented classifications, respectively, compared to 54.1% (single-season) and 55.0% (multi-season) for the MLC classifications. The use of multi-seasonal data resulted in only a slight increase in overall accuracy over the single-season imagery. This small increase was primarily due to better discrimination of riparian wetlands in the multi-season data. Segmentation and object-oriented processing provides a low-cost, high-accuracy method for classification of wetlands on a local, regional, or national basis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available