IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p13730-d951048.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Study on the Difference of LULC Classification Results Based on Landsat 8 and Landsat 9 Data

Author

Listed:
  • Haotian You

    (College of Geomatics and Geoinformation, Guilin University of Technology, No.12 Jiangan Street, Guilin 541006, China
    Guangxi Key Laboratory of Spatial Information and Geomatics, Guilin University of Technology, 12 Jiangan Road, Guilin 541004, China)

  • Xu Tang

    (College of Geomatics and Geoinformation, Guilin University of Technology, No.12 Jiangan Street, Guilin 541006, China)

  • Weixi Deng

    (College of Geomatics and Geoinformation, Guilin University of Technology, No.12 Jiangan Street, Guilin 541006, China)

  • Haoxin Song

    (College of Geomatics and Geoinformation, Guilin University of Technology, No.12 Jiangan Street, Guilin 541006, China)

  • Yu Wang

    (College of Geomatics and Geoinformation, Guilin University of Technology, No.12 Jiangan Street, Guilin 541006, China)

  • Jianjun Chen

    (College of Geomatics and Geoinformation, Guilin University of Technology, No.12 Jiangan Street, Guilin 541006, China)

Abstract

Landsat 9 enhances the radiation resolution of the operational land imager from the 12 bits of Landsat 8 to 14 bits. The higher radiation resolution improves the sensitivity of the sensor to detect many subtler differences, especially in the case of dense forests or water. However, it remains unclear whether the difference in radiation resolution between Landsat 8 and Landsat 9 actually affects the classification results of water and tree species. Accordingly, the spectral reflectance and vegetation indices were extracted in this study, based on Landsat 8 and Landsat 9 images. Then, the classification models of land use and land cover (LULC) and tree species were developed by using a gradient tree boosting algorithm. Subsequently, the results were analyzed to further investigate how the differences in radiation resolution affect the classification results of LULC and tree species. It is shown that the LULC classification results of Landsat 8 and Landsat 9 are relatively favorable in most cases. However, the LULC classification results are relatively poor in test areas with a lower classification accuracy of water. Further analysis, in the case of test areas with poor classification results, indicates that there are significant differences in the water classification results between the two datasets. In other words, Landsat 9 produces better water classification results than Landsat 8 in most test areas. However, a temperature close to zero may lead to inverse water classification results. In addition, it indicates that the difference in forest classification results between the two datasets is small, but the results of forest tree species classification based on Landsat 9 are superior to those based on Landsat 8, with an improvement in overall accuracy of 6.01%. The results demonstrate that the difference in radiation resolution between Landsat 8 and Landsat 9 has little impact on the results of LULC classification in most cases. Nevertheless, in the case of some test areas, Landsat 9 is better suited for enhancing the classification accuracy of water and tree species.

Suggested Citation

  • Haotian You & Xu Tang & Weixi Deng & Haoxin Song & Yu Wang & Jianjun Chen, 2022. "A Study on the Difference of LULC Classification Results Based on Landsat 8 and Landsat 9 Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-24, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13730-:d:951048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13730/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13730/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xianhui Hou & Jingming Liu & Daojun Zhang, 2019. "Regional sustainable development: The relationship between natural capital utilization and economic development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 183-195, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liu, Jingming & Hou, Xianhui & Wang, Zhanqi & Shen, Yue, 2021. "Study the effect of industrial structure optimization on urban land-use efficiency in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    2. Yu Hao & Yingting Wang & Qiuwei Wu & Shiwei Sun & Weilu Wang & Menglin Cui, 2020. "What affects residents' participation in the circular economy for sustainable development? Evidence from China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1251-1268, September.
    3. Zhicheng Lai & Lei Li & Zhuomin Tao & Tao Li & Xiaoting Shi & Jialing Li & Xin Li, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Influencing Factors of Ecological Well-Being Performance from the Perspective of Strong Sustainability: A Case Study of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-25, January.
    4. Enxiang Cai & Weiqiang Chen & Hejie Wei & Jiwei Li & Hua Wang & Yulong Guo & Xinwei Feng, 2020. "The coupling characteristics of population and residential land in rural areas of China and its implications for sustainable land use," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 646-656, July.
    5. Yigang Wei & Yan Li & Meiyu Wu & Yingbo Li, 2020. "Progressing sustainable development of “the Belt and Road countries”: Estimating environmental efficiency based on the Super‐slack‐based measure model," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 521-539, July.
    6. Chao Wei & Qiaowen Lin & Li Yu & Hongwei Zhang & Sheng Ye & Di Zhang, 2021. "Research on Sustainable Land Use Based on Production–Living–Ecological Function: A Case Study of Hubei Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, January.
    7. Parvaneh Sobhani & Hassan Esmaeilzadeh & Seyed Mohammad Moein Sadeghi & Isabelle D. Wolf & Yaghoub Esmaeilzadeh & Azade Deljouei, 2022. "Assessing Spatial and Temporal Changes of Natural Capital in a Typical Semi-Arid Protected Area Based on an Ecological Footprint Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-16, September.
    8. Yani Wang & Mingyi Du & Lei Zhou & Guoyin Cai & Yongliang Bai, 2019. "A Novel Evaluation Approach of County-Level City Disaster Resilience and Urban Environmental Cleanliness Based on SDG11 and Deqing County’s Situation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-13, October.
    9. Ayad, Fayssal, 2023. "Mapping the path forward: A prospective model of natural resource depletion and sustainable development," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    10. Fang Su & Nini Song & Nannan Ma & Altynbek Sultanaliev & Jing Ma & Bing Xue & Shah Fahad, 2021. "An Assessment of Poverty Alleviation Measures and Sustainable Livelihood Capability of Farm Households in Rural China: A Sustainable Livelihood Approach," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13730-:d:951048. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.