The Methods Guide helps you find the field and remote-sensing methods most useful for your rangeland assessment and monitoring needs. It provides ratings, based on expert and user reviews, on how well each method performs to answer specific questions as well as descriptions, relative costs, references to rangeland applications, and contact information for the different techniques. To learn more about the Methods Guide please visit www.rangelandmethods.org.
Date: Printed on 09/09/2010
Topic: Cover of rare or invasive species
Chosen scale: Small landscape(25,000 to 250,000ac)
Chosen date range:
Field methods applicable to your question are listed below. The field methods have been rated by experts according to their precision in answering the question you chose and the feasibility of implementing them. Deciding which method is best for your application will require more in depth comparison tables available with the compare button and consideration of details contained in the full abstracts of each method.
Sample design: Where you sample is every bit as important as how you sample. Sample design will determine whether or not your observations can address your overall objectives and question. An effective number and distribution of samples is required to make valid inferences from field data. Values for costs and level of required effort provided in the comparison tables are relative because the actual cost will depend on sample design. Visit our page on sample design.
| Precision | Effort/Cost | Potential for Bias | Name |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Line-point Intercept (for cover and composition) | |
|
|
Canopy Gap Intercept | |
|
|
Photo Plots - Quantitative Assessment | |
|
|
Step-pin Transect Method | |
|
|
Basal Gap Intercept | |
|
|
Step Point Transect Method | |
|
|
Daubenmire Method | |
|
|
Ocular Cover Estimates (plots) |
Remote sensing methods applicable to your question are listed below. They are ranked by experts according to how well they can answer the question you selected as part of a complete analysis process. Sensors that work with a particular method or methods that work with data from a particular sensor will be highlighted by clicking on the items in the list. Deciding which method is best for your application will require more in depth comparisons available with the compare button and consideration of details contained in the full abstracts of each method.
| Name | Owner | Cost | Platform | Swath Width (km) | Resolution (m) | Return Interval | Image Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quickbird | DigitalGlobe | $$$ | Satellite | 16.5 | 2.5 | 1 to 3.5 days | Multispectral |
| SPOT5 | Spot Image | $$$ | Satellite | 60 | 2.5 | 1 to 4 days | Panchromatic |
| IKONOS | GeoEye | $$$ | Satellite | 11.3 | 4.0 | 3 days | Multispectral |
| RapidEye | RapidEye | $$$ | Satellite | 77 | 5.0 | Daily | Multispectral |
| FORMOSAT-2 | National Space Agency, Republic of China/Spot Image | $$$ | Satellite | 24 | 8.0 | Daily | Multispectral |
| SPOT5 | Spot Image | $$$ | Satellite | 120 | 10.0 | 1 to 4 days | Multispectral |
| SPOT1-4 | Spot Image | $$$ | Satellite | 60 | 10.0 | 1 to 4 days | Panchromatic |
| ASTER | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 60 | 15.0 | On demand | Multispectral |
| TM7 | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 185 | 15.0 | 16 days | Panchromatic |
| AVIRIS | NASA | $$$ | Aircraft | 2, 11 | 17.0 | On demand | Hyperspectral |
| SPOT1-4 | Spot Image | $$$ | Satellite | 60 | 20.0 | 1 to 4 days | Multispectral |
| TM7 | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 185 | 30.0 | 16 days | Multispectral |
| TM5 | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 185 | 30.0 | 16 days | Multispectral |
| ASTER | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 60 | 30.0 | On demand | Multispectral |
| Radarsat-1 | Canadian Space Agency | $$$ | Satellite | 50 - 500 | 50.0 | 4 to 6 days | Synthetic-aperature radar |
| Radarsat-2 | Canadian Space Agency | $$$ | Satellite | 20 - 500 | 50.0 | On demand | Synthetic-aperature radar |
| TM5 | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 185 | 60.0 | 16 days | Multispectral |
| TM7 | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 185 | 60.0 | 16 days | Multispectral |
| MSS | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 185 | 80.0 | 18 days | Multispectral |
| ASTER | NASA | $$$ | Satellite | 60 | 90.0 | On demand | Multispectral |
| Name | Relevance |
|---|---|
| Regression Kriging | |
| Fractional Cover Estimate | |
| Normalized Difference Vegetation Index | |
| Modified Soil-adjusted Vegetation Index | |
| Soil-adjusted Vegetation Index | |
| Enhanced Vegetation Index | |
| Soil-adjusted Total Vegetation Index | |
| Leaf-area Index | |
| Fraction of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (fPAR) | |
| Tasseled-cap Transformation | |
| Net Primary Productivity Estimate | |
| Object-based Classification | |
| Spectral Mixture Analysis | |
| Supervised Classification | |
| Unsupervised Classification | |
| Change Detection | |