Mapping forest types using ecological niche modeling and fuzzy accuracy assessment in Thailand

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Dec 29, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14456/sehs.2022.53
Keywords:
tropical forest type ecotone forest ecological niche model fuzzy accuracy assessment

Main Article Content

Yaowaret Jantakat
Department of Information and Communication Technology, Faculty of Sciences and Liberal Arts, Rajamangala University of Technology Isan, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand. Corresponding author's e-mail: [email protected]
Jefferson Fox
East West Center, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
Pongpun Juntakut
Department of Civil Engineering, Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy, Nakhon Nayok, Thailand

Abstract

The forest map remains essential for investigating plant ecology and biodiversity patterns. This study proposed methods for mapping forest types based on ecological niche modeling and then used fuzzy error matrix for accuracy assessment. The upper Ping basin of northern Thailand was selected as study area. The modeled data included forest inventory, topographic, climatic, soil, and geological data. Ecological niche factor analysis was used to model and produce the best habitat suitability index of each forest type, which were then combined using hierarchically generated coding. As a result, eight classes of forest types were generated: dry dipterocarp forest (7,373.94 km2, 32.81%), evergreen ecotone or transition area (3,666.97 km2, 16.32%), mixed deciduous forest (3,440.79 km2, 15.31%), deciduous ecotone or transition area (3,225.58 km2, 14.35%), deciduous and evergreen forest (2,027.12 km2, 9.02), coniferous forest (CF; 365.28 km2, 1.63%), moist and dry evergreen forest (290.08 km2, 1.29%), and hill evergreen forest (270.56 km2, 1.21%). Four variables were found to be critical in forest type distribution: elevation, mean annual temperature, annual maximum temperatures and annual minimum temperatures. To assess map accuracy, fuzzy error matrix, which allows the recognition of ambiguous classes and does not ignore variation in the interpretation of the reference data at class boundaries, was used (75.89% of overall accuracy).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Jantakat, Y., Fox, J., & Juntakut, P. (2022). Mapping forest types using ecological niche modeling and fuzzy accuracy assessment in Thailand. Science, Engineering and Health Studies, 16, 22020011. https://doi.org/10.14456/sehs.2022.53
Issue
Volume 16, 2022
Section
Physical sciences
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

Bareth, G., and Waldhoff, G. (2018). GIS for mapping vegetation. In Comprehensive Geographic Information Systems, vol. 2: GIS Applications for Environment and Resources (Bareth, G., Song, C., and Song, Y., eds.), pp. 1-27. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Barve, N. B., Barve, V., Jimenez-Valverde, A., Lira-Noriega, A., Maher, S. P., Peterson, A. T., Soberon, J., and Villalobos, F. (2011). The crucial role of the accessible area in ecological niche modelling and species distribution modelling. Journal of Ecological Modeling, 222(11), 1810-1819.

Berberoglu, S., and Satir, O. (2008). Fuzzy classification of Mediterranean type forest using ENVISAT MERRIS data. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol. XXXVII. Part B8, pp. 1109-1114. Beijing, China.

Brown, D. G. (1998). Mapping historical forest types in Baraga County Michigan, USA as fuzzy sets. Plant Ecology, 134, 97-111.

Burrough, P. A. (1989). Fuzzy mathematical methods for soil survey and land evaluation. Journal of Soil Sciences, 40, 477-492.

Congalton, R. G. (1991). A review of assessing the accuracy of classification of remotely sensed data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 37, 35-46.

Congalton, R. G., and Green, K. (2009). Assessing the Accuracy of Remote Sensed Data, 2nd, Boca Raton: CRC Press, pp. 131-140.

Cox, C. B., and Moore, P. D. (2005). Biography: An Ecological and Evolutionary Approach, 7th, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 117-142.

FAO. (2016). Map accuracy assessment and area estimation: A practical guide. [Online URL: http://www.fao.org/3/i5601e/i5601e.pdf] accessed on September 24, 2021.

FAO., and UNEP. (2020). The state of the world’s forests 2020: forests, biodiversity and people. [Online URL: http://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/ca8642en/] accessed on September 23, 2021.

Foody, G. M. (2008). Harshness in image classification accuracy assessment. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 29, 3137-3158.

Gerhart, V. J., Waugh, W. J., Glenn, E. P., and Pepper, I. L. (2004). Ecological restoration-19. In Environmental Monitoring and Characterization (Artiola, J. F., Pepper, I. L., and Brusseau, M. L., eds.), pp. 357-375. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Gopal, S., and Roodcock, C. (1994). Theory and methods for accuracy assessment of thematic maps using fuzzy sets. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 60(2), 181-188.

Green, K., and Congalton, R. G. (2004). An error matrix approach to fuzzy accuracy assessment: the NIMA Geocover project. In Remote Sensing and GIS Accuracy Assessment (Lunetta, R. S., and J. G. Lyon, eds.), pp. 163-172. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.

Hirzel, A. H., Hausser, J., and Perrin, N. (2007). Biomapper 1.0-4.0. University of Lausanne. [Online URL: https://www2.unil.ch/biomapper/products.html] accessed on August 18, 2020.

Ihse, M. (2010). Vegetation mapping and landscape changes, GIS-modelling and analysis of vegetation transitions, forest limits and expected future forest expansion. Journal of Geography, 64(1), 76.

Kutintara, U. (1999). Fundamental Forest Ecology, 1st, Bangkok: Kasetsart University, pp. 80-110.

Landis, J., and Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159- 174.

Lawrence, R. L., and Moran, C. J. (2015). The America view classification methods accuracy comparison project: A rigorous approach for model selection. Remote Sensing of Environment, 170, 115-120.

Lunetta, R. S., and Lyon, J. G. (2004). Remote Sensing and GIS Accuracy Assessment, 1st, Boca Raton: CRC Press, pp. 321-328.

Maxwell, A. E., Warner, T. A., and Fang, F. (2018). Implementation of machine-learning classification in remote sensing: An applied review. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 39, 2784-2817.

Maxwell, A. E., and Warner, T. A. (2020). Thematic classification accuracy assessment with inherently uncertain boundaries: An argument for center-weighted accuracy assessment aetrics. Remote Sensing, 12, 1905.

McGill, B. J., Enquist, B. J., Weiher, E., and Westoby, M. (2006). Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21(4), 178-185.

Miller, S., Eng, H., Byrne, M., Milliken, J., and Rosenberg, M. (1994). Northeastern California vegetation mapping: A joint agency effort. In Remote Sensing and Ecosystem Management: Proceedings of the Fifth Forest Service Remote Sensing Applications Conference (Greer, J. D., ed.), pp. 115-125. Darby, PA: Diane Publishing.

Milliken, J., Beardsley, D., and Gill, S. (1998). Accuracy assessment of vegetation map of Northeastern California using permanent plots and fuzzy sets. US Forest Service. [Online URL: https://www.fs.fed.us/r5/rsl/publications/] accessed on September 24, 2021.

Milliken, J. A., and Woodcock, C. F. (1996). Integration of inventory and field data for automated fuzzy accuracy assessment of large scale remote-sensing derived vegetation maps in region 5 national forests. In Spatial Accuracy Assessment in Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences: Second International Symposium (Mowrer, H. T., Czaplewski, R. L., and Hamre, R. H., eds.), pp. 541-544. Fort Collins, CO: Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

Oregon Forest Resources Institute. (2021). Forest type map. [Online URL: https://oregonforests.org/content/forest-type-interactive-map] accessed on September 23, 2021.

Peterson, A. T., Soberon, J., Pearson, R. G., Anderson, R. P., Martinez-Meyer, E., Nakamura, M., and Araujo, A. B. (2011). Ecological Niches and Geographic Distributions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 118-150.

Rogan, J., Franklin, J., Stow, D., Miller, J., Woodcock, C., and Roberts, D. (2008). Mapping land-cover modifications over large areas: A comparison of machine learning algorithms. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 2272- 2283.

Santisuk, T. (2006). Forest of Thailand, Bangkok: Prachachon Co., Ltd. [Online URL: https://www.dnp.go.th/botany/PDF/publications/veget.pdf] accessed on September 18, 2021. [in Thai]

Tierney, D. A., Powell, M. J., and Eriksson, C. E. (2019). Vegetation mapping. [Online URL: https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199830060/obo-9780199830060-0176.xml] accessed on September 24, 2021.

Waser, L. T., Boesch, R., Wang, Z., and Ginzler, C. (2017). Towards automated forest mapping. In Mapping Forest Landscape Patterns (Remmel, T. K., and Perera, A. H., eds.), pp. 263-304. Birmensdorf: Springer.

Woodcock, C. E., and Gopal, S. (2000). Fuzzy set theory and thematic maps: accuracy assessment and area estimation. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 14(2), 153-172.

WorldClim. (2020). Bioclimatic variables. [Online URL: https://www.worldclim.org/data/bioclim.html] accessed on September 28, 2021.

Zadeh, L. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information Control, 8, 338-353.

Zlinszky, A., and Kania, A. (2016). Will it blend? Visualization and accuracy evaluation of high-resolution fuzzy vegetation maps. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol. XLI-B2, pp. 335-342. Prague, Czech Republic.