4.7 Article

Global Mangrove Watch: Updated 2010 Mangrove Forest Extent (v2.5)

期刊

REMOTE SENSING
卷 14, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs14041034

关键词

mangroves; extent; mapping; sentinel-2; global mangrove watch

资金

  1. Oak Foundation
  2. COmON Foundation
  3. National Philanthropic Trust
  4. DOB Ecology
  5. Dutch Postcode Lottery
  6. Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) through the UKRI Newton Fund [NE/P014127/1]
  7. Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)
  8. NERC [NE/P014127/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents an updated global mangrove forest baseline for 2010, which includes an increased mapping area of 2660 km(2) and an overall accuracy of 95.1%. The improved map contributes to the conservation and sustainable use of mangroves globally.
This study presents an updated global mangrove forest baseline for 2010: Global Mangrove Watch (GMW) v2.5. The previous GMW maps (v2.0) of the mangrove extent are currently considered the most comprehensive available global products, however areas were identified as missing or poorly mapped. Therefore, this study has updated the 2010 baseline map to increase the mapping quality and completeness of the mangrove extent. This revision resulted in an additional 2660 km(2) of mangroves being mapped yielding a revised global mangrove extent for 2010 of some 140,260 km(2). The overall map accuracy was estimated to be 95.1% with a 95th confidence interval of 93.8-96.5%, as assessed using 50,750 reference points located across 60 globally distributed sites. Of these 60 validation sites, 26 were located in areas that were remapped to produce the v2.5 map and the overall accuracy for these was found to have increased from 82.6% (95th confidence interval: 80.1-84.9) for the v2.0 map to 95.0% (95th confidence interval: 93.7-96.4) for the v2.5 map. Overall, the improved GMW v2.5 map provides a more robust product to support the conservation and sustainable use of mangroves globally.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据