Note:
this site is currently under construction J
Prior
to the 1960s the significance of Connecticut's marshes was not yet understood.
The role of wetlands as natural recyclers of waste and the high volume
of plant and animal diversity had not been thoroughly investigated.
Peak destruction rates of Connecticut's marshes reached 1 acre per day
when coastal development was at its highest (Dreyer & Niering, 1995).
Since that time the State of Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection (CT DEP), among other private and public groups, has worked
to reclaim approximately 30% of all the tidal wetlands in the state.
Changes in government policy, such as the Tidal Wetlands Act of 1969
which made draining, dredging, excavating and filling of marshes government
regulated activities also aided in marsh restoration (Dreyer & Niering,
1995).
A large
part of the problem in Connecticut marshes has been the presence of
an invasive species called Phragmites australis (P. australis).
P. australis, also called the common reed, is a tall perennial
grass (1.5-4.0m) found primarily in brackish and freshwater wetlands,
that forms extensive monocultures (very thick stands which can span
hundreds of acres or more) and decreases the plant and animal biodiversity
of the marsh. P. australis has been such a problem in Connecticut
and in other states that in 1999 the Executive Order 13112 on Invasive
Species was passed encouraging the control of P. australis on
Federal lands. Eradicating P. australis is expensive and numerous
methods have been employed in Connecticut. One of the goals of my thesis
project has been to find a method to classify P. australis using
remotely sensed imagery in order to be able to provide an estimate of
the progress of eradication efforts and to come up with a historical
analysis of P. australis in the wetland regions along the mouth
of the Connecticut river. My primary research advisor is Dr. Martha
Gilmore at Wesleyan University and I am also receiving help from Sandy
Prisloe, Emily Wilson and Dr. Daniel Civco at the University of Connecticut
through the geospatial fellow position.

Above:
Phragmites australis Tops
Remote
sensing is a powerful tool in the monitoring vegetation dynamics because
it allows for characterization on a global scale. There are several
characteristics of vegetation that allow it to be monitored by remote
sensing such as the absorption in the red and blue portion of the visible
spectrum (which creates the green reflectance~.55µm), a strong near-infrared
reflectance which correlates to overall biomass of the plant(~.72-.90µm),
differences in the mid-infrared region of the spectrum which correlate
to changes in the moisture content of the plant (~.9-2.0µm), and other
unique spectral signatures due to parameters such as leaf shape, size,
plant height, density, etc. In layman’s terms, examining the spectral
signature of P. australis allows us to monitor its
growth patterns throughout the year because we can see changes in the
chlorophyll content and overall biomass of the species spectrally as
it grows.

As
you can see from the graph above, different types of vegetation have
different spectral signatures. Spectral signatures are also affected
by factors such as water content which is evident in the dry grass/green
grass spectra.
The first
step in my thesis project was to determine if P. australis has
spectral characteristics that are unique enough to distinguish it from
surrounding marsh vegetation. Initially, to understand the spectral characteristics
of P. australis a more sensitive instrument was employed that collected
hyperspectral data and later this knowledge is applied to Landsat data
which has less sensitivity. The vegetation graph above is an example of
hyperspectral data. Hyperspectral data provides a much more intimate portrait
of P. australis, compared to Landsat data, because it has thousands
of bands (regions which it looks at the spectral signature) compared to
Landsat which has seven bands. One of the drawbacks of the hyperspectral
data collection is that it was collected in situ (at the site)
so it was time consuming and required an expensive instrument. Two graphs
below show P. australis compared to another marsh
species in hyperspectral data (A)
and what this hyperspectral data would look like in Landsat (B). The lines overlain on the hyperspectral
graph A represent the band
width for each Landsat band. Landsat data would actually be an average
of the data in the given band width, so the second graph B shows what the signature would actually
look like in Landsat. (Note that Band 6 and the Panchromatic bands of
Landsat are not included because they were not used in the study and are
not generally used to study vegetation dynamics).
A
B

Preliminary
analysis of the hyperspectral data concludes that: (1) the greatest
consistent contrast between the spectral signature P.
australis and surrounding marsh vegetation occurs in the 0.63-0.69μm
and the 0.76-0.90μm regions which correspond to Band 3 and Band
4 in Landsat data (note that the graph above is not a temporal representation),
(2) contrasts between P. australis
and other marsh species in the 0.63-0.69 and 0.76-0.90μm range in the
hyperspectral data are visible in Landsat data,(2) during July, August,
and September the spectral signature of P.
australis is more easily distinguished from other marsh species
compared to earlier months in the spring and later months in the winter, and (3) the spectral signature of the purple
bloom of the P. australis,
which appears in late July-early August, aides in distinguishing P. australis from other species due sharp
contrasts in slope between 0.63-0.90μm region, also (4) P. australis is lacking in green reflectance
when flowering (August), and (5) 1.5-1.75μm and 2.035-2.080μm
regions, which are sensitive to the moisture content of plants, were
not as helpful in distinguishing between P. australis and other marsh species as Bands 3 and 4.
It
is not surprising that the 0.63-0.69 and 0.76-0.90μm regions are
useful in distinguishing between P.
australis and other marsh species because these regions correspond
to the chlorophyll content of the plant and the biomass of the plants.
The 0.63-0.69μm (Band 3 in Landsat) region measures the visible red
portion of the electromagnetic spectrum and provides information on the
relative chlorophyll content. High values in Band 3 correlate to low chlorophyll
concentrations are seen in the hyperspectral data during April, May, and
November when the P. australis has just begun to grow (April, May) or is beginning
to die out (November). The 0.76-0.90μm (Band 4) region is sensitive
to the infrared reflectance of plant cells and will increase as the number
of plant cells increases thus giving a relative measure of biomass. Band
4 begins increasing in the hyperspectral data from May and peaks in July
for P. australis and slowly begins to decrease
again during August, September and November as the growth rate declines.
The graphs below show changes in Band 3 and Band 4 of the hyperspectral
data for P. australis and other
marsh species.

The
various dates of the Landsat scenes were chosen to cover the phonological
cycle of P. australis and also based on availability.
The graph above makes several illustrations; (1) that there is a consistent
difference in the 3:4 ratio values of P. australis and other marsh species, (2) this difference is greater
in some months than others, manly August and (3) the P. australis has a higher 3:4 ratio during
Mar/Apr/May/Aug/Oct/Nov. and a lower 3:4 ratio during Jul/Sept. Although
the difference between the 3:4 ratios of P. australis and other marsh species is small it can be used to
classify P. australis using
Landsat data.
Using the
knowledge gathered from the hyperspetral data, as well as some other
analysis methods, two remote sensing software programs were used to
classify P. australis in Landsat images along the mouth of the Connecticut
River. The Environment for Visualizing Images (ENVI) software was used
to perform an analysis involving the 3:4 ratios of the Landsat Bands.
ERDAS Imagine software was used to perform a Subpixel Classification
of P. australis in the same area using the
same Landsat images. Subpixel simply refers to the fact that sometimes
the object of interest in a pixel (unit components of the image; one
Landsat pixel is 30m x 30m) may not occupy 100% of the image and therefore
the image is “mixed.” The
ERDAS Subpixel Classifier allows you to train the program to recognize
your material of interest, in this case P.
australis, and classify the amount of P.
australis in the scene and also the percentage. To test the accuracy of both methods the results
were compared to a 1994 study conducted by Sandy Prisloe and Nells Barrett
using GIS Analysis to classify P.
australis. Both methods show the same trend in P. australis growth/decline and both methods classify somewhat conservatively
with the largest error margin (~10% using ERDAS) being in a class of
less than 20% P. australis
but with increasingly less error in classes with higher percentages
of P. australis. The results are promising
for people who wish to classify P.
australis using Landsat imagery (TM, ETM+) without the added hassle
of hyperspectral analysis. The images below are of September 1994, the
same year that the GIS study was performed. The first images are of
the 3:4 classification results in ENVI. Image 1
is a true color image of the study area, image 2 shows the results of a 3:4 band ratio, image 3 shows a wetland mask (a mask is used
to isolate the study area) and image 4 shows the P. australis
classified shown in red and the grey areas area the areas of the mask
which were not detected by the classification method. The second image
set shows the subpixel classification results for the same image. The
first image is a true color, the second image shows the wetland mask,
and the third image shows the results of the subpixel classification.
Later in
the summer I will be posting more results and a comparison of the accuracy
of the two classification methods.
ENVI
3:4 Band Threshold Classification for September 1994:

ERDAS
Subpixel Classifier Results for September 1994:
Back
to Top
Useful
Remote Sensing Sites
Below I
have listed some websites useful for finding out more about P.
australis, wetlands, and remote sensing in general. I hope you enjoy
them!
For a closer
look at hyperspectral data
visit JPL’s spectral library and search the database for different
spectra:
speclib.jpl.nasa.gov/
For a really
excellent tutorial on the
basics of remote sensing:
rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/AppC/C1.html
For more
remote sensing websites because you just can’t get enough,
Dr. Martha Gilmore at Wesleyan Univ. has an excellent page of websites
for her remote sensing class:
mgilmore.web.wesleyan.edu/wescourses/2001s/ees326/01/remlinks.htm
For more
on coastal marsh projects the following two websites are both interesting:
www.edc.uri.edu/restoration/html/intro/salt.html
glcf.umiacs.umd.edu/data/coastalMarsh/data.html
For recent
images in remote sensing:
eob.gsfc.nasa.gov/
For more
information on ERDAS and
ENVI:
gis.leica-geosystems.com/default.asp
rsinc.com/envi/index.cfm
Back
to Top
Works
Cited
Dreyer,
G.; Niering, W. Tidal Marshes of Long Island Sound: Ecology, History
and Restoration. The Connecticut College Arboretum. Bulletin No. 34,
December 1994.
Back
to Top