Estimating tree mortality timing using PlanetScope satellite image time series

Climate warming is increasing forest disturbances, with hotter summers and longer droughts causing widespread tree mortality. Yet the timing of these deaths remains unclear. While standing dead trees can be delineated from high‑resolution aerial imagery, their infrequent updates limit temporal analysis. Although satellite images have been used to map dead trees, few studies have estimated when trees died using time series data. We present a method to estimate mortality timing within known mortality areas using PlanetScope (3 m) time series in a boreal forest (Finland) and a temperate forest (Luxembourg). We used summer imagery (June–August) from 2021 to 2022 for Helsinki and 2020–2022 for Luxembourg. The reference dataset contained 468 standing dead trees in Helsinki and 3070 in Luxembourg, mapped from very high-resolution aerial (5–10 cm) and satellite images (50 cm). The Helsinki study area was characterized by scattered tree mortality with isolated and small clusters of dead trees, whereas the Luxembourg study area had more clustered tree mortality and larger clusters of dead trees. We evaluated four vegetation indices: kNDVI, GNDVI, SR 800/550, and PSSRc2, and used the Kernelized Change Point Detection (PELT) algorithm to identify sustained declines in pixel values. kNDVI performed best, detecting spectral change for 80% (2832 of 3538) of the dead trees across both areas, with detection increasing with cluster size. In Helsinki, kNDVI detected 204 dead trees (43.6%), while in Luxembourg, 2628 dead trees (86%). The differences in performance between the study areas were mainly attributed to the spatial distribution of tree mortality (scattered vs. clustered). Detection was most reliable for clusters of ≥ 3 trees, while isolated trees were rarely detected, likely due to mixed pixels (only 19% detected). For timing estimation, the overall RMSE across both areas was 245 days with a mean bias of + 6 days (i.e., six days later than visual confirmation). In Helsinki RMSE = 211, bias = − 103; Luxembourg RMSE = 254, bias = +40. The relatively high RMSE alongside a small overall bias indicates variability among individual timing estimates due to reference‑date lags and mixed pixels. With further improvements to change‑point detection and spectral inputs, PlanetScope time series show initial promise for estimating mortality timing in clusters (≥3 trees) of standing deadwood.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
Published
2026-03-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2026.03.007
Primary Topic
Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Estimating tree mortality timing using PlanetScope satellite image time series

Jesse C. Nowak, Markus Holopainen, Samuli Junttila, Teja Kattenborn
ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
article

Estimating tree mortality timing using PlanetScope satellite image time series

Jesse C. Nowak, Markus Holopainen, Samuli Junttila, Teja Kattenborn
article en

Abstract

Climate warming is increasing forest disturbances, with hotter summers and longer droughts causing widespread tree mortality. Yet the timing of these deaths remains unclear. While standing dead trees can be delineated from high‑resolution aerial imagery, their infrequent updates limit temporal analysis. Although satellite images have been used to map dead trees, few studies have estimated when trees died using time series data. We present a method to estimate mortality timing within known mortality areas using PlanetScope (3 m) time series in a boreal forest (Finland) and a temperate forest (Luxembourg). We used summer imagery (June–August) from 2021 to 2022 for Helsinki and 2020–2022 for Luxembourg. The reference dataset contained 468 standing dead trees in Helsinki and 3070 in Luxembourg, mapped from very high-resolution aerial (5–10 cm) and satellite images (50 cm). The Helsinki study area was characterized by scattered tree mortality with isolated and small clusters of dead trees, whereas the Luxembourg study area had more clustered tree mortality and larger clusters of dead trees. We evaluated four vegetation indices: kNDVI, GNDVI, SR 800/550, and PSSRc2, and used the Kernelized Change Point Detection (PELT) algorithm to identify sustained declines in pixel values. kNDVI performed best, detecting spectral change for 80% (2832 of 3538) of the dead trees across both areas, with detection increasing with cluster size. In Helsinki, kNDVI detected 204 dead trees (43.6%), while in Luxembourg, 2628 dead trees (86%). The differences in performance between the study areas were mainly attributed to the spatial distribution of tree mortality (scattered vs. clustered). Detection was most reliable for clusters of ≥ 3 trees, while isolated trees were rarely detected, likely due to mixed pixels (only 19% detected). For timing estimation, the overall RMSE across both areas was 245 days with a mean bias of + 6 days (i.e., six days later than visual confirmation). In Helsinki RMSE = 211, bias = − 103; Luxembourg RMSE = 254, bias = +40. The relatively high RMSE alongside a small overall bias indicates variability among individual timing estimates due to reference‑date lags and mixed pixels. With further improvements to change‑point detection and spectral inputs, PlanetScope time series show initial promise for estimating mortality timing in clusters (≥3 trees) of standing deadwood.

ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote SensingVol. 235
University of Helsinki (FI), University of Eastern Finland (FI), Helsinki Institute of Physics (FI), Finnish Geospatial Research Institute (FI), Finland University (FI), GeoInformation (United Kingdom) (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
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.