Mapping shallow nearshore benthic features in a Caribbean marine-protected area : assessing the efficacy of using different data types (hydroacoustic versus satellite images) and classification techniques
(2018) In International Journal of Remote Sensing 39(4). p.1117-1150- Abstract
Various benthic mapping methods exist but financing and technical capacity limit the choice of technology available to developing states to aid with natural resource management. Therefore, we assessed the efficacy of using a single-beam echosounder (SBES), satellite images (GeoEye-1 and WorldView-2) and different image (pixel-based Maximum Likelihood Classifier (MLC), and an objectbased image analysis (OBIA)) and hydroacoustic classification and interpolation techniques, to map nearshore benthic features at the Bluefields Bay marine protected area in western Jamaica (13.82 km2 in size). A map with three benthic classes (submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), bare substrate, and coral reef) produced from a radiometrically corrected,... (More)
Various benthic mapping methods exist but financing and technical capacity limit the choice of technology available to developing states to aid with natural resource management. Therefore, we assessed the efficacy of using a single-beam echosounder (SBES), satellite images (GeoEye-1 and WorldView-2) and different image (pixel-based Maximum Likelihood Classifier (MLC), and an objectbased image analysis (OBIA)) and hydroacoustic classification and interpolation techniques, to map nearshore benthic features at the Bluefields Bay marine protected area in western Jamaica (13.82 km2 in size). A map with three benthic classes (submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), bare substrate, and coral reef) produced from a radiometrically corrected, deglinted and water columncorrected WorldView-2 image had a marginally higher accuracy (3%) than that of a map classified from a similarly corrected GeoEye-1 image. However, only one of the two extra WorldView- 2 image bands (coastal) was used because the yellow band was completely attenuated at depths ≥3.7 m. The coral reef class was completely misclassified by the MLC and had to be contextually edited. The contextually edited MLC map had a higher overall accuracy (OA) than the OBIA map (86.7% versus 80.4%) and maps that were not contextually edited. But, the OBIA map had a higher OA than a MLC map without edits. Maps produced from the images also had a higher accuracy than the SAV map created from the acoustic data (OAs >80% and kappa >0.67 versus 76.6% and kappa = 0.32). SAV classification was comparable among the classified SBES SAV data points and all the final maps. The total area classified as SAV was marginally larger for satellite maps; however, the total area classified as bare substrate using the images was twice as large. A substrate map with three classes (silt, sand, and coral/hard bottom) produced from the SBES data using a random forest classifier and a Markov chain interpolator had a higher accuracy than a substrate map produced using a fractal dimension classifier and an indicator krig (the default choice) (72.4% versus 53.5%). The coral reef class from the SBES, OBIA, and contextually edited maps had comparable accuracies, but covered a much smaller area in the SBES maps because data points were lost during the interpolation process. The use of images was limited by turbidity levels and cloud cover and it yielded lower benthic detail. Despite these limitations, satellite image classification was the most efficacious method. If greater benthic detail is required, the SBES is more suitable or more effort is required during image classification. Also, the SBES can be operated in areas with turbid waters and greater depths. However, it could not be used in very shallow areas. Also, processing and interpolation of data points can result in a loss of resolution and introduces spatial uncertainty.
(Less)
- author
- McIntyre, Karen ; McLaren, Kurt and Prospere, Kurt
- publishing date
- 2018-02-16
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- International Journal of Remote Sensing
- volume
- 39
- issue
- 4
- pages
- 34 pages
- publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85048105374
- ISSN
- 0143-1161
- DOI
- 10.1080/01431161.2017.1395924
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- 74194df5-a5db-4cfd-98c0-e0bdb081a526
- date added to LUP
- 2018-06-20 14:04:16
- date last changed
- 2022-07-12 00:47:27
@article{74194df5-a5db-4cfd-98c0-e0bdb081a526,
abstract = {{<p>Various benthic mapping methods exist but financing and technical capacity limit the choice of technology available to developing states to aid with natural resource management. Therefore, we assessed the efficacy of using a single-beam echosounder (SBES), satellite images (GeoEye-1 and WorldView-2) and different image (pixel-based Maximum Likelihood Classifier (MLC), and an objectbased image analysis (OBIA)) and hydroacoustic classification and interpolation techniques, to map nearshore benthic features at the Bluefields Bay marine protected area in western Jamaica (13.82 km2 in size). A map with three benthic classes (submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), bare substrate, and coral reef) produced from a radiometrically corrected, deglinted and water columncorrected WorldView-2 image had a marginally higher accuracy (3%) than that of a map classified from a similarly corrected GeoEye-1 image. However, only one of the two extra WorldView- 2 image bands (coastal) was used because the yellow band was completely attenuated at depths ≥3.7 m. The coral reef class was completely misclassified by the MLC and had to be contextually edited. The contextually edited MLC map had a higher overall accuracy (OA) than the OBIA map (86.7% versus 80.4%) and maps that were not contextually edited. But, the OBIA map had a higher OA than a MLC map without edits. Maps produced from the images also had a higher accuracy than the SAV map created from the acoustic data (OAs >80% and kappa >0.67 versus 76.6% and kappa = 0.32). SAV classification was comparable among the classified SBES SAV data points and all the final maps. The total area classified as SAV was marginally larger for satellite maps; however, the total area classified as bare substrate using the images was twice as large. A substrate map with three classes (silt, sand, and coral/hard bottom) produced from the SBES data using a random forest classifier and a Markov chain interpolator had a higher accuracy than a substrate map produced using a fractal dimension classifier and an indicator krig (the default choice) (72.4% versus 53.5%). The coral reef class from the SBES, OBIA, and contextually edited maps had comparable accuracies, but covered a much smaller area in the SBES maps because data points were lost during the interpolation process. The use of images was limited by turbidity levels and cloud cover and it yielded lower benthic detail. Despite these limitations, satellite image classification was the most efficacious method. If greater benthic detail is required, the SBES is more suitable or more effort is required during image classification. Also, the SBES can be operated in areas with turbid waters and greater depths. However, it could not be used in very shallow areas. Also, processing and interpolation of data points can result in a loss of resolution and introduces spatial uncertainty.</p>}},
author = {{McIntyre, Karen and McLaren, Kurt and Prospere, Kurt}},
issn = {{0143-1161}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{02}},
number = {{4}},
pages = {{1117--1150}},
publisher = {{Taylor & Francis}},
series = {{International Journal of Remote Sensing}},
title = {{Mapping shallow nearshore benthic features in a Caribbean marine-protected area : assessing the efficacy of using different data types (hydroacoustic versus satellite images) and classification techniques}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2017.1395924}},
doi = {{10.1080/01431161.2017.1395924}},
volume = {{39}},
year = {{2018}},
}