An accuracy assessment of satellite-derived rangeland fractional cover

• Nationwide map error was highest for perennial herbaceous and bare ground and lowest for trees. • Error varied across ecoregions and plant functional groups. • Map error was greater for riparian and wetland vegetation than upland cover. Satellite-derived maps of vegetation cover provide detailed information about vegetation spatiotemporal patterns and are increasingly used to better understand and manage rangelands. Despite their utility, questions remain regarding the regional and site level accuracy for these maps, especially compared to field-collected data. We conducted an accuracy assessment of the Rangeland Analysis Platform (RAP), using over 17,000 field plots sampled through nationwide rangeland vegetation monitoring programs in the continental U.S. We observed higher overall nationwide map error compared to previous validations of RAP, and absolute error (Mean Absolute Error [MAE] and Root Mean Square Error [RMSE]) was highest for perennial herbaceous and bare ground and lowest for trees (MAE range = 2.98 –10.22 %). There were also differences in map agreement with field data across ecoregions. Generally, map agreement was highest in the Great Basin and lowest in the Great Plains and Desert Southwest. Additionally, we assessed the suitability of using RAP in riparian and wetland areas, which are absent in the current version’s training. Errors for bare ground in riparian areas were lower than errors of upland accuracy assessments (upland MAE = 10.22 %, riparian MAE = 7.22 %), but for all other functional groups, riparian error was higher (ΔMAE range: 0.21 – 20.49 %). We examine how our results could inform regional applications of fractional cover data while considering error and uncertainty and identify areas for potential model improvement. Our findings inform the use of RAP regionally and provide a technique for evaluating other vegetation mapping products for use in rangeland management.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ecological Indicators
Published
2025-02-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113267
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Rangeland and Wildlife Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.58

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An accuracy assessment of satellite-derived rangeland fractional cover

Timothy J. Assal, Georgia R. Harrison, Darren K. James, Matthew Rigge et al.
5 citations
Ecological Indicators
Rangeland and Wildlife Management
8.58
article

An accuracy assessment of satellite-derived rangeland fractional cover

Timothy J. Assal, Georgia R. Harrison, Darren K. James, Matthew Rigge, Sarah E. McCord, Cara Applestein
article en
5 citations

Abstract

• Nationwide map error was highest for perennial herbaceous and bare ground and lowest for trees. • Error varied across ecoregions and plant functional groups. • Map error was greater for riparian and wetland vegetation than upland cover. Satellite-derived maps of vegetation cover provide detailed information about vegetation spatiotemporal patterns and are increasingly used to better understand and manage rangelands. Despite their utility, questions remain regarding the regional and site level accuracy for these maps, especially compared to field-collected data. We conducted an accuracy assessment of the Rangeland Analysis Platform (RAP), using over 17,000 field plots sampled through nationwide rangeland vegetation monitoring programs in the continental U.S. We observed higher overall nationwide map error compared to previous validations of RAP, and absolute error (Mean Absolute Error [MAE] and Root Mean Square Error [RMSE]) was highest for perennial herbaceous and bare ground and lowest for trees (MAE range = 2.98 –10.22 %). There were also differences in map agreement with field data across ecoregions. Generally, map agreement was highest in the Great Basin and lowest in the Great Plains and Desert Southwest. Additionally, we assessed the suitability of using RAP in riparian and wetland areas, which are absent in the current version’s training. Errors for bare ground in riparian areas were lower than errors of upland accuracy assessments (upland MAE = 10.22 %, riparian MAE = 7.22 %), but for all other functional groups, riparian error was higher (ΔMAE range: 0.21 – 20.49 %). We examine how our results could inform regional applications of fractional cover data while considering error and uncertainty and identify areas for potential model improvement. Our findings inform the use of RAP regionally and provide a technique for evaluating other vegetation mapping products for use in rangeland management.

Ecological IndicatorsVol. 172
United States Geological Survey (US), Bureau of Land Management (US), United States Department of Agriculture (US), Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center
U.S. Bureau of Land Management
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Rangeland and Wildlife Management
8.58
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.