In recent decades, plastic-mulched farmland has expanded rapidly in China as well as in the rest of the world because it results in marked increases of crop production. However, plastic-mulched farmland significantly influences the environment and has so far been inadequately investigated. Accurately monitoring and mapping plastic-mulched farmland is crucial for agricultural production, environmental protection, resource management, and so on. Monitoring plastic-mulched farmland using moderate-resolution remote sensing data is technically challenging because of spatial mixing and spectral confusion with other ground objects. This paper proposed a new scheme that combines spectral and textural features for monitoring the plastic-mulched farmland and evaluates the performance of a Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier with different kernel functions using Landsat-8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) imagery. The textural features were extracted from multi-bands OLI data using a Grey Level Co-occurrence Matrix (GLCM) algorithm. Then, six combined feature sets were developed for classification. The results indicated that Landsat-8 OLI data are well suitable for monitoring plastic-mulched farmland; the SVM classifier with a linear kernel function is superior both to other kernel functions and to two other widely used supervised classifiers: Maximum Likelihood Classifier (MLC) and Minimum Distance Classifier (MDC). For the SVM classifier with a linear kernel function, the highest overall accuracy was derived from combined spectral and textural features in the 90° direction (94.14%, kappa 0.92), followed by the combined spectral and textural features in the 45° (93.84%, kappa 0.92), 135° (93.73%, kappa 0.92), 0° (93.71%, kappa 0.92) directions, and the spectral features alone (93.57%, kappa 0.91). Spectral features make a more significant contribution to monitoring the plastic-mulched farmland; adding textural features from medium resolution imagery provide only limited improvement in accuracy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hasituya et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: