Using high resolution QuickBird imagery for crop identification and area estimation |
| |
| Authors: | Chenghai Yang James H Everitt Reginald S Fletcher Dale Murden |
| |
| Institution: | 1. USDA-ARS, Kika de la Garza Subtropical Agricultural Research Center 2413 E. Highway 83 , Weslaco, Texas, 78596, USA cyang@weslaco.ars.usda.gov;3. USDA-ARS, Kika de la Garza Subtropical Agricultural Research Center 2413 E. Highway 83 , Weslaco, Texas, 78596, USA;4. Rio Farms, Inc. , Monte Alto, Texas, 78538, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Imagery from recently launched high spatial resolution satellite sensors offers new opportunities for crop assessment and monitoring. A 2.8-m multispectral QuickBird image covering an intensively cropped area in south Texas was evaluated for crop identification and area estimation. Three reduced-resolution images with pixel sizes of 11.2 m, 19.6 m, and 30.8 m were also generated from the original image to simulate coarser resolution imagery from other satellite systems. Supervised classification techniques were used to classify the original image and the three aggregated images into five crop classes (grain sorghum, cotton, citrus, sugarcane, and melons) and five non-crop cover types (mixed herbaceous species, mixed brush, water bodies, wet areas, and dry soil/roads). The five non-crop classes in the 10-category classification maps were then merged as one class. The classification maps were filtered to remove the small inclusions of other classes within the dominant class. For accuracy assessment of the classification maps, crop fields were ground verified and field boundaries were digitized from the original image to determine reference field areas for the five crops. Overall accuracy for the unfiltered 2.8-m, 11.2-m, 19.6-m, and 30.8-m classification maps were 71.4, 76.9, 77.1, and 78.0%, respectively, while overall accuracy for the respective filtered classification maps were 83.6, 82.3, 79.8, and 78.5%. Although increase in pixel size improved overall accuracy for the unfiltered classification maps, the filtered 2.8-m classification map provided the best overall accuracy. Percentage area estimates based on the filtered 2.8-m classification map (34.3, 16.4, 2.3, 2.2, 8.0, and 36.8% for grain sorghum, cotton, citrus, sugarcane, melons, and non-crop, respectively) agreed well with estimates from the digitized polygon map (35.0, 17.9, 2.4, 2.1, 8.0, and 34.6% for the respective categories). These results indicate that QuickBird imagery can be a useful data source for identifying crop types and estimating crop areas. |
| |
| Keywords: | Accuracy assessment Area estimation Crop identification QuickBird imagery Supervised classification |
|
|
