欢迎访问《生态学杂志》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

生态学杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (2): 587-599.doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202402.016

• 技术与方法 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于无人机影像的农业景观非农生境信息提取

张微微1,王超1*,丁喜莲2,李晓娜1,邹俊亮1


  

  1. 1北京市农林科学院草业花卉与景观生态研究所, 北京 100097; 2山东省地质科学研究院, 济南 250013)

  • 出版日期:2024-02-06 发布日期:2024-02-07

Extraction of non-agricultural habitats in agricultural landscape based on visible light remote sensing images from an unmanned aerial vehicle.

ZHANG Weiwei1, WANG Chao1*, DING Xilian2, LI Xiaona1, ZOU Junliang1#br#

#br#
  

  1. (1Institute of Grassland, Flowers and Ecology, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Beijing 100097, China; 2Shandong Institute of Geological Sciences, Jinan 250013, China).

  • Online:2024-02-06 Published:2024-02-07

摘要: 农业景观非农生境的精准识别对于打造高异质性农业景观,促进农作物增产与维持农田生物多样性具有重要意义。本研究基于无人机可见光影像构建了改进型绿蓝植被指数(MGBVI),并运用MGBVI和常见的7种可见光植被指数开展农业景观非农生境信息提取试验,对精度较高的前3种植被指数在非农生境组成有差异的2处农业景观区进行适用性验证。结果表明,MGBVI、归一化绿蓝差异指数(NGBDI)和绿蓝比指数(GBRI)提取非农生境的效果优于其他5种指数,其总体精度分别为95.08%、94.50%和94.46%,在区分非农生境和萌芽出苗期农田方面更有优势,尤其MGBVI能够精准识别非农生境中植被覆盖相对稀疏的田块边界。这3种指数在验证区的分类总体精度均高于94%,其提取结果受非农生境组成差异影响的波动较小,验证了MGBVI等绿蓝通道指数在无人机影像提取农业景观非农生境中具有较好的可用性和稳定性。本研究可为复杂小地理区域农业景观非农生境的遥感识别与动态监测提供技术参考。


关键词: 非农生境, 农业景观, 植被指数, 可见光影像, 无人机

Abstract: The accurate extraction of non-agricultural habitats is crucial for building highly heterogeneous agricultural landscape, promoting crop yielding, and maintaining farmland biodiversity. Here, we constructed a new modified green-blue vegetation index (MGBVI) to extract the non-agricultural habitat information based on visible light image from an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), and compared it with seven other visible light vegetation indices. The three indices with highest accuracy were applied in two agricultural landscape sites dominated by divergent non-agricultural habitat composition to verify their accuracy. The results showed that MGBVI, normalized green-blue difference index (NGBDI), and green-blue ratio index (GBRI) had higher accuracy in extracting non-agricultural habitats, which had more advantages in distinguishing non-agricultural habitats and budding farmlands with the overall accuracy of 95.08%, 94.50% and 94.46%, respectively. The MGBVI had more accurate information recognition ability on the field boundary with sparse vegetation coverage in non-agricultural habitats. The MGBVI, NGBDI, and GBRI accurately extracted non-agricultural habitats in two validation sites, and the overall accuracy was higher than 94%. The accuracy of these three indices did not vary with different non-agricultural habitat types, indicating that the green-blue channel indices, such as MGBVI, showed higher availability and stability in the extraction of non-agricultural habitats from UAV images. Overall, our results provide technical reference for dynamic monitoring of non-agricultural habitats in agricultural landscape with complex topographical conditions.


Key words: non-agricultural habitat, agricultural landscape, vegetation index, visible light image, unmanned aerial vehicle