Improving Tree Cover Estimation for Sparse Trees Mixed with Herbaceous Vegetation in Drylands Using Texture Features of High-Resolution Imagery

Abstract

Tree cover is a crucial vegetation structural parameter for simulating ecological, hydrological, and soil erosion processes on the Chinese Loess Plateau, especially after the implementation of the Grain for Green project in 1999. However, current tree cover products performed poorly across most of the Loess Plateau, which is characterized by grasslands with sparse trees. In this study, we first acquired high-accuracy samples of 0.5 m tree canopy and 30 m tree cover using a combination of unmanned aerial vehicle imagery and WorldView-2 (WV-2) imagery. The spectral and textural features derived from Landsat 8 and WV-2 were then used to estimate tree cover with a random forest model. Finally, the tree cover estimated using WV-2, Landsat 8, and their combination were compared, and the optimal tree cover estimates were also compared with current products and tree cover derived from canopy classification. The results show that (1) the normalized difference moisture index using Landsat 8 shortwave infrared and the standard deviation of correlation metric calculated by means of gray-level co-occurrence matrix using the WV-2 near-infrared band are the optimal spectral feature and textural feature for estimating tree cover, respectively. (2) The accuracy of tree cover estimated using only WV-2 is highest (RMSE = 7.44%), indicating that high-resolution textural features are more sensitive to tree cover than the Landsat spectral features (RMSE = 11.53%) on grasslands with sparse trees. (3) Textural features with a resolution higher than 8 m perform better than the combination of Landsat 8 and textural features, and the optimal resolution is 2 m (RMSE = 7.21%) for estimating tree cover, whereas the opposite is observed when the resolution of textural features is lower than 8 m. (4) The current global product seriously underestimates tree cover on the Loess Plateau, and the tree cover calculation using the canopy classification of high-resolution imagery performs worse than the method of directly using remote sensing features.