Monitoring Vegetation Change in the El Pinacate y Gran Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve, Sonora, Mexico (1994-2005) Item Type text; Electronic Thesis Authors Fisher de Leon, Anna Denisse Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 30/09/2021 17:43:34 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/193381 MONITORING VEGETATION CHANGE IN THE EL PINACATE Y GRAN DESIERTO DE ALTAR BIOSPHERE RESERVE, SONORA, MEXICO (1994-2005) by Anna Denisse Fisher de León ________________________ A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the SCHOOL OF NATURAL RESOURCES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN RENEWABLE NATURAL RESOURCES STUDIES In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2007 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission fro extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: ____Anna Denisse Fisher de Leon_____ APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: ___________________________________ _______09-17-2007_____________ Dr. William W. Shaw Date: Professor of Wildlife and Fisheries Resources 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my thesis committee members, Dr. Shaw, Dr. Marsh and Floyd Gray for all of their comments and direction. I would also like to give special thanks to Floyd Gray and the U.S. Geological Survey for providing the necessary funds to acquire the satellite imagery. I would like to express gratitude to Erick Sanchez for sharing all of his knowledge and data on the PBR, which were immensely important for the completion of this project. I would like to express thanks to the Department of Arid Lands for allowing me to use their facilities and to its graduate students for helping me find my way through the software, especially to Hugo and Grant for having the patience to answer all my questions I would also like to thank Dr. Yool, Dr. Turner, and Dr. Ezcurra for all of their helpful comments. Many thanks to the PBR managers for their collaboration on this project. 4 DEDICATION I would like to dedicate this thesis to my parents, for their unconditional love and support, to Christophe, for all your love and am looking forward to sharing my future with you, and all to my friends for always being my family away from home. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES...……………………………………………………………..….…...7 LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………….......8 ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………….....9 CHAPTER ONE. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………...10 1.1 Study Area………………………..………………………………………………….16 1.1.1 Climate…...………………………………………………………………...17 1.1.2 Local Geomorphology………………………………..………………........18 1.1.3 Vegetation………………………………………………………………….21 1.2 Land Cover Change Analysis ………………………………………...………..……27 1.2.1 Satellite Systems.……………...…………………………………………...29 1.2.2 Image Analysis and Normalization...……..….………………………..…...30 1.2.2.1 Geometric Correction..……………..…………...……………….31 1.2.2.2. Radiometric Correction……...………...………....….…………..32 1.3 Change Detection Techniques...……………………………..……………………....35 1.3.1 Image Differencing Method…………………………………..……..……..37 1.3.2 Vegetation Indices……………………………….………..……………….38 1. 3.3. Multi-temporal Kauth-Thomas Transformation……………….....………43 1.3.4 Unsupervised Classification ……………………………...…...………..…44 1.3.4.1. Accuracy Assessment……………………..……………………45 CHAPTER TWO. MATERIALS AND METHODS………………………………...47 2.1 Geometric Correction……………………………………………………..………….47 2.2 Radiometric Correction………………………………………………..……………..48 2.3 Vegetation Index Differencing……………………………………..………………..52 2.4 Multi-temporal Kauth-Thomas (MKT) Transformation……………………..……....53 2.5 MODIS-EVI Comparison…………………...….………………..…………………..54 2.6 Unsupervised Classification…………………………………………………..……...55 2.6.1 Accuracy Assessment………………………………….…………...……...56 2.6.2 Rate of change …………………………………...…………...……………57 2.7 Key interviews and Sketch Mapping…...…………………...……………………….57 CHAPTER THREE. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………59 3.1 Image Analysis and Normalization…………….……………………………….……59 3.2 Vegetation Index Differencing Results………………………………………………59 3.2.1SAVI Differencing Results..………..………………………..……………..60 3.2.2 MKT Differencing Results………………...…………..…………….….....63 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS – Continued 3.2.3 MODIS-EVI Comparison……………………………..………….………..66 3.3 Causes of Land Cover Change………………………..……………………………...68 3.4 Unsupervised Classification Results……….………..……………………………….70 3.4.1 Accuracy Assessment……………….…..…………………………………72 3.4.2 Rate of Change………………………...…………………………………...75 3.5 Key Interviews and Sketch Mapping…..…………………………………………….78 3.5.1 Local Analysis of Vegetation Changes...…………………………………..79 CHAPTER FOUR. CONCLUSIONS……………………………………...………....85 4.1 Future Work………..………………………………………………………...89 APPENDIX A. RADIOMETRIC CORRECTION RESULTS .………….......................92 APPENDIX B. QUESTIONNAIRE......………………...….............................................94 APPENDIX C. IMAGE DIFFERENCING IMAGES,………...…...................................96 APPENDIX D. IMAGE DIFFERENCING SUMMARY.………….………………….106 APPENDIX E. LAND COVER CLASSIFICATION ……………………...….............108 APPENDIX F. LAND COVER MAPS…………………………...…...........................109 APPENDIX G. TIMELINE……………………...…......................................................113 APPENDIX H. LOCAL ANALYSIS OF VEGETATION CHANGES…...……..…...114 APPENDIX I. SKETCH MAP...………………...…...…...............................................116 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………...….............117 7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. El Pinacate and Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve…………………………17 Figure 2. Change-no change histogram thresholds ………………………………...........38 Figure 3. Spectral signature curve of healthy vegetation…………………...……………40 Figure 4. MKT two-dimensional coordinate system…………………………………….43 Figure 5. Example of error matrix……………………………………………………….46 Figure 6. Z-scores of precipitation data from the Pinacate Biosphere Reserve.…...……70 Figure 7a. SAVI 1994-2000 Difference Image…………………………………………..97 Figure 7b. SAVI 2000-2005 Difference Image……………………………………...…..98 Figure 8a. Brightness 1994-2000 Difference Image……………………………………..99 Figure 8b. Greenness 1994-2000 Difference Image……………………………………100 Figure 8c. Wetness 1994-2000 Difference Image……………………………...………101 Figure 9a. Brightness 2000-2005 Difference Image……………………………………102 Figure 9b. Greenness 2000-2005 Difference Image……………………………………103 Figure 9c. Wetness 2000-2005 Difference Image……...………………………………104 Figure10. MODIS-EVI Difference Image……………………...………………………105 Figure 11a. Land cover classification map during 1994………………………………..110 Figure 11b. Land cover classification map during 1994………………………………..111 Figure 11c. Land cover classification map during 1994………………………………..112 Figure 12. Local Analysis of Grazing Area………………………….…………………114 Figure 13. Local Analysis of Agricultural Area………………………………………..115 Figure 14. Sketch Map…………………………………………………….……...……116 8 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Landsat TM and Landsat ETM+ satellite characteristics………………………29 Table 2. Landsat TM 5 postcalibration dynamic ranges………...……………………….49 Table 3. ETM+ high-gain and low-gain postcalibration dynamic ranges……………….50 Table 4. - Minimum DN values for the COST Model…………………………………...50 Table 5. Landsat TM Solar Exoatmospheric Spectral Irradiances………………………51 Table 6. Image acquisition dates…………………………………………………………51 Table 7. Tasseled cap coefficients for Landsat TM data at-satellite reflectance………...53 Table 8. Tasseled cap coefficients for Landsat ETM+ at-satellite reflectance…………..53 Table 9. Error matrix for land cover classes ……..……………………………………...74 Table 10. Changes in area extent per vegetation type…………………………………...75 Table 11. Rate of change per vegetation type ………………………………………..….77 Table 12. Image normalization statistics……..……………………………………….....92 Table 13. Summary of vegetation index differencing results……………………...…...106 Table 14. Land cover classes extracted from Landsat images……..…………………...108 Table. 15. Timeline……………………………………………………………………..113 9 ABSTRACT At a time of increasing climatological and anthropogenic impacts, managers of Natural Protected Areas in Mexico require monitoring efforts to assess the ecological integrity of their regions and adapt management activities accordingly. However, for many of these areas, like the Pinacate and Gran Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve (PBR), the location and extent of land cover impacts are generally unknown. An analysis of the natural vegetation of this area, with the use of several remote sensing techniques, concluded that it continues to be relatively stable at a landscape level. Any perceivable changes appear to be the result of natural vegetative