Content Server
Content Server
Content Server
Abstract
Analyzing time series data with remote sensing provides a better understanding of
vegetation dynamics, since previous conditions and changes that have occurred over a
given period are known. The objective of this paper was to analyze the current status
and recent advances in the use of time series data obtained from remote sensors for
vegetation monitoring. A systematic search of scientific papers was performed and
167 papers were found, published during the period 1996 to 2017. No significant
difference in the amount of years analyzed was found between time series analyzed with
a single sensor and those analyzed with a combination of several sensors (i.e. Landsat
and SPOT, Landsat and Sentinel, among others). However, the combination of data
from different sensors (fusion of images) can improve the quality of the results. Special
attention must also be given to the fusion of optical and radar data, since this offers more
unique spectral and structural information for land cover and land use assessments.
Keywords
phenology • land cover • analysis of multi-temporal remote sensing • spatio-temporal
analysis • image fusion
Resumen
Palabras clave
fenología • cobertura de la tierra • análisis multi-temporal de teledetección • análisis
espacio-temporal • fusión de imágenes
Introduction
trends for a single sensor (e.g. Landsat) The papers were classified into two
(4, 46), while other remote sensors have groups: those using one sensor and those
not been the subject of extensive review. presenting a combination of two or more
It is therefore necessary to report trends sensors (e.g. Landsat sensors and SPOT
in the use of time series data for the sensors combination, Landsat sensors
monitoring of vegetation with respect and Sentinel sensors combination, among
to more sensors, greater periodicity and others). A means test (Kruskal-Wallis test,
involving the study of more ecosystems. p ≤ 0.05) was performed in R Studio (2013)
For this reason, the main objective of this between these groups in order to identify
research was to analyze the current status which group featured the most robust time
and recent advances in the use of time series (more years analyzed). To ensure
series data obtained from remote sensors coherence of the results in this review,
for vegetation monitoring. Systemati- opinions were sought from experts.
zation of this collection in a database
will provide an overview with which to
identify the background, knowledge gaps Results
and trends of the current research.
Temporal trend
Initially, 186 papers were detected by
Materials and Methods the search, of which 167 were chosen for
analysis (see supplementary material).
A search of scientific papers exploring Studies of all types of vegetation and
the topic of "monitoring of vegetation climate were included. The rest of papers
using time series data" was carried out did not study vegetation, and some
using the Web of Science website (http:// articles even belonged to other branches
apps.webofknowledge.com). A database of science. The 167 papers analyzed were
of published papers was constructed published in the period 1996 to 2017
containing the following information (August). No papers were found for the
fields: reference, year of publication, year 1998, and the highest number of
paper title, journal, impact factor, source papers on the study topic was published
of funding, spatialized (mapped) results, in 2012. Three periods of research output
number of authors, number of institu- productivity were identified: the first was
tions involved, study objective, area of observed during the period 1996-2002,
influence, country, size and location of with an average of 1 to 3 papers published
the study area, vegetation and land use, per year; the second covered the period
climate, platform/sensor, number of 2003-2010, with an average of 3 to 10
sensors used, spatial resolution, number papers published per year; and the third
of images analyzed, years analyzed, was identified for the period 2011-2017,
main data, ancillary data, software, main with an average of 11 to 18 papers. This
algorithms used and purpose of algorithm revealed a clear and increasing trend in
and variables of interest. The data were the number of papers published per year
subsequently grouped into ranges and from 1996 to 2017 (figure 1, page 178).
categories of similar data in order to
facilitate their representation and statis-
tical description.
21
18
15
N° Papers
12
2014
2015
2011
2012
2013
2009
2010
2006
2007
2008
2004
2005
2001
2002
2003
1999
2000
1996
1997
2016
2017
Year
Most preferred journal for publication the main ecosystem and climate studied
The published papers were mainly worldwide are forests and the tropical
distributed among 70 journals, where the climate, respectively.
lowest impact factor was 0.2442 for the
"Iranian Journal of Science & Technology", Most used approach/methodology
and the highest was 8.502 for the journal The main methodologies found are
"Global Change Biology". In addition, based on classification of plant cover and
there were journals that were prominent monitoring of phenological states. Most of
in terms of quantity of publications these methods use the vegetation index
(table 1, page 179). NDVI as the main element. These, in combi-
nation with other algorithms, help the
Papers published per country extraction of results. An interesting aspect
While time series data analysis for found was that the research mostly utilized
monitoring vegetation has been conducted climatic information as ancillary data. In
practically worldwide, China and Brazil table 2 (page 181), vegetation monitoring
are the prominent countries in terms of is summarized. The NDVI is the most
the number of studies published (figure 2, reported algorithm in the literature.
page 179).
Sensors used
Most studied ecosystems The most used satellites were SPOT,
The main ecosystems studied, as well followed by Landsat, although it should
as the main types of climate that occur be noted that a combination of data from
in the data analyzed, are shown in figure several different satellites is used in some
3 (page 180). It should be noted that studies (table 3, page 181).
Figure 2. Global studies published in the field of vegetation monitoring using time
series data, grouped by country (167 papers consulted).
Figura 2. Estudios publicados a nivel global en el campo del monitoreo de vegetación
usando datos de series de tiempo, agrupados por país (167 documentos consultados).
80 a
70
60
50
N° Papers
40
30
20
10
0
Forest Grasslands Agriculture Global Other Not reported
100 b
90
80
70
60
N° Papers
50
40
30
20
10
0
Tropical Sub-tropical Temperate Semi-arid Cold Not reported
Climate
Figure 3. Papers published on vegetation monitoring using time series data, grouped
by type of ecosystem (a) and by type of climate (b), from a total of 167 papers analyzed.
Figura 3. Documentos publicados sobre el monitoreo de la vegetación usando
datos de series de tiempo, agrupados por tipo de ecosistema (a) y por tipo de clima
(b) estudiado, 167 artículos analizados.
Others 58 -
It was also found that most of the Specifically, the most analyzed period
studies featured analysis of periods from 1 was from 2000 to 2010 (figure 5) since it
to 10 years, while only one study analyzed was observed that the time series studies
a period of more than 40 years (110 years) mainly analyzed the period from the year
(figure 4). 1980 to date.
120
100
Number of studies
80
60
40
20
0
1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 > 40
Years analyzed per class
Time series
Papers consulted
50
Average number of years analized
40
30
20
10
0
Studies that used a1single sensor Studies thah2used a combination
of two/more sensors
The journals that published the greatest A further important factor in vegetation
number of papers in the field of vegetation monitoring using time series data, is that
monitoring using time series data were of the satellites utilized. Landsat satellites
Remote Sensing of Environment and are the most commonly used in remote
International Journal of Remote Sensing. sensing; however, in the analyzed data,
Likewise, Zhuang et al. (2013) reported SPOT satellites appear as the most used
that these two journals are among those in multi-temporal studies. This could be
with the most papers published in the explained by some limitations of Landsat,
field of remote sensing over recent years. (e.g. temporal resolution or images
In terms of the geographic location of contaminated by cloud and shadow)
scientific production, China and Brazil are (12). For this reason, the suite of SPOT
the leaders in this field (48). These two sensors is the most widely used alter-
countries are in the group of 20 countries native to Landsat (32) and some authors
with the highest scientific production state that it is particularly suitable for
(published papers) in the field of remote vegetation mapping at global and regional
sensing. Indeed, China is the second most scales (44). With regards to Landsat, it
productive country in the world, after the should be noted that most studies that use
United States (48). Landsat data correspond to more recent
The most studied ecosystem is forest, years, since initiation of the free and open
followed by grassland and then by Landsat data policy in 2008 (47). This
general global monitoring of vegetation. is therefore a satellite of great potential
This is logical, since forests are the for the future given its availability (i.e.
most widely distributed ecosystems free and open access). In recent decades,
on the planet (42). However, it should be the cost of data storage has dramatically
noted that the study of other ecosystems decreased, providing a viable basis for
is also of great importance. time series analysis that demands Landsat
Of the 167 papers reviewed, the data (46).
methodologies used for vegetation Most studies have analyzed time series
monitoring most commonly featured the of between 1 and 10 years. However,
Normalized Difference Vegetation Index since 2010, more complex investiga-
(NDVI). The NDVI, developed by Rouse tions have been carried out. This could
et al. (1974), stands out in that, since also be strongly influenced by the free
its appearance, it has quickly become access policies of Landsat, as mentioned
the most dominant satellite observable above, as well as the launch of the MODIS
metric for spatio-temporal changes (18) sensor onboard the Aqua/ Terra satellites
and has been successfully used to explore notable for its temporal resolution (28).
vegetation dynamics (20), although Remote sensing is a rapidly advancing
in recent years there has also been an technology (40) and has now reached a
attempt to improve and evaluate the price point where the images acquired by
performance of algorithms and indices these systems are truly accessible (36).
to improve vegetation monitoring (35).
Some notable studies were also found,
using a considerable number of indices
(6, 11, 19, 23).
New trends for the analysis of time beneficial for vegetation monitoring. Since
series data optical and SAR image data respond to crop
Advances in remote sensing technology, characteristics differently, their comple-
in terms of software, processes and infor- mentary information can be valuable to
mation acquisition, mean that it is now support vegetation monitoring (39).
possible to conduct research with data Another aspect of great interest, at
from several different sensors (2, 15, 24, present and for the future, is the use of
29, 31). While this could in theory produce free access data and software. According
more robust time series, statistical to Wulder et al. (2012), open access to data
testing shows that there is no significant promotes greater international collabo-
difference between time series analyzed ration to meet the land observation needs
with data from a single sensor and those of the twenty-first century. In this sense,
analyzed with a combination of data from the Landsat satellite network stands out
several sensors. Nevertheless, the combi- for both the long history and free access
nation of data (image fusion) improves of its data set (25). It is also important to
the quality of the results (13) since this mention the establishment of a Landsat-9
technique can integrate different image Architecture Study Team that define
data and provide more information than capabilities and implementation strategy.
the derived from a single sensor (39). Landsat-9 has been authorized and is
In this sense, K. de Beurs (personal proceeding towards a December 2020
communication, February 16, 2018) launch. Planning for missions beyond
indicates that special attention should be Landsat-9 is also underway, with the USGS
given to the use of fusion of optical and radar defining future Landsat measurement
data, since this offers more unique spectral needs (e.g., Landsat-10 and -11) (43).
and structural information for land cover While the ability to use a multitude
and land use assessments. This coincides of images acquired in a single region has
with Joshi et al. (2016), who indicate changed the perception on the Landsat
that future research should focus on the value, some properties of this satellite
development of robust optical and radar are currently critical (41). One limitation
data fusion techniques, including those that of Landsat is that the satellites can only
test the frequency with which time series revisit the same area every 16 days, and
and variable spatial resolution data sets can the acquired Landsat data for specific
be combined in a significant manner with a areas can be contaminated by cloud and
minimum loss of information. shadow. The temporally sparse time-series
The main difference between these Landsat data are, therefore, unsuitable for
types of data is that, compared to optical global monitoring of rapid changes in the
satellite images, synthetic aperture vegetation and terrestrial surface (12).
radars (SARs) have certain advantages A potential approach for utilization of
for vegetation monitoring due to the Landsat data is represented by data fusion
fact that microwave sensors have longer techniques that integrate imagery across
wavelengths, can penetrate vegetation sensors, effectively leveraging the most
canopies, and are not influenced by the desirable characteristics from multiple
presence of clouds or haze (16, 17). sensors. The spatial, spectral and temporal
Some SARs have a short revisit time and resolution of any given sensor can thus
high spatial resolution, which could be potentially be enhanced by merging bands
within or across sensors (32).
References
1. Albornoz, L.; Rodríguez Plaza, L.; Navarro, A.; López, M.; Bageta, C.; Mercado, L. 2019. Vineyard
zoning of cv Bonarda argentine (Vitis vinífera L.), from Sentinel satellite images and
three vegetation indexes. Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Universidad
Nacional de Cuyo. Mendoza. Argentina. 51(2): 167-176.
2. Arino, O.; Casadio, S.; Serpe, D. 2012. Global night-time fire season timing and fire count trends
using the ATSR instrument series. Remote Sensing of Environment. 116: 226-238.
3. Baeza, S.; Baldassini, P.; Bagnato, C.; Pinto, P.; Paruelo, J. 2014. Caracterización del uso/cobertura
del suelo en Uruguay a partir de series temporales de imágenes MODIS. Agrociencia
Uruguay. 18(2): 95-105.
4. Banskota, A.; Kayastha, N.; Falkowski, M. J.; Wulder, M. A.; Froese, R. E.; White, J. C. 2014. Forest
monitoring using Landsat time series data: A review. Canadian Journal of Remote
Sensing. 40(5): 362-384.
5. Camps-Valls, G.; Tuia, D.; Bruzzone, L.; Benediktsson, J. A. 2014. Advances in hyperspectral
image classification: Earth monitoring with statistical learning methods. IEEE Signal
Processing Magazine. 31(1): 45-54.
6. Chen, B.; Cao, J.; Wang, J.; Wu, Z.; Tao, Z.; Chen, J.; Yang, C.; Xie, G. 2012. Estimation of rubber
stand age in typhoon and chilling injury afflicted area with Landsat TM data: a case
study in Hainan Island, China. Forest Ecology and Management. 274: 222-230.
7. Chen, J.; Chen, J.; Liao, A.; Cao, X.; Chen, L.; Chen, X.; Chaoying, H.; Gang, H.; Shu, P.; Miao, L.;
Weiwei, Z.; Xiaohua, T.; Jon, M. 2015. Global land cover mapping at 30 m resolution:
A POK-based operational approach. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote
Sensing. 103: 7-27.
8. Claverie, M.; Ju, J.; Masek, J. G.; Dungan, J. L.; Vermote, E. F.; Roger, J.-C.; Skakun, S. V; Justice, C.
2018. The Harmonized Landsat and Sentinel-2 surface reflectance data set. Remote
Sens. Environ. 219: 145-161.
9. Di Bella, C. M.; Beget, M. E.; Campos, A. N.; Viglizzo, E.; Jobbágy, E.; García, A. G.; Sycz, A.; Cotroneo,
C. 2019. Changes in vegetation seasonality and livestock stocking rate in La Pampa
Province (Argentina). Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Universidad Nacional
de Cuyo. Mendoza. Argentina. 51(1): 79-92.
10. Drusch, M.; Del Bello, U.; Carlier, S.; Colin, O.; Fernandez, V.; Gascon, F.; Hoersch, B.; Isola, C.;
Laberinti, P.; Martimort, P.; Meygret, A.; Spoto, F.; Sy, O.; Marchese, F.; Bargellini, P.
2012. Sentinel-2: ESA's optical high-resolution mission for GMES operational services.
Remote Sensing of Environment. 120: 25-36.
11. Einzmann, K.; Immitzer, M.; Böck, S.; Bauer, O.; Schmitt, A.; Atzberger, C. 2017. Windthrow
detection in European forests with very high-resolution optical data. Forests. 8(1): 21.
12. Gao, F.; Hilker, T.; Zhu, X.; Anderson, M.; Masek, J.; Wang, P.; Yang, Y. 2015. Fusing Landsat
and MODIS data for vegetation monitoring. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Magazine. 3(3): 47-60.
13. Ghassemian, H. 2016. A review of remote sensing image fusion methods. Information Fusion.
32: 75-89.
14. Gómez, C.; White, J. C.; Wulder, M. A. 2016. Optical remotely sensed time series data for land
cover classification: A review. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.
116: 55-72.
15. Hardtke, L. A.; Blanco, P. D.; del Valle, H. F.; Metternicht, G. I.; Sione, W. F. 2015. Semi-automated
mapping of burned areas in semi-arid ecosystems using MODIS time-series imagery.
International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation. 38: 25-35.
16. Herold, N. D.; Haack, B. N. 2002. Fusion of radar and optical data for land cover mapping.
Geocarto International. 17(2): 21-30.
17. Herold, N. D.; Haack, B. N. 2006. Comparison and integration of radar and optical data for land
use/cover mapping. Geocarto International. 21(4): 9-19.
18. Houborg, R.; Fisher, J. B.; Skidmore, A. K. 2015. Advances in remote sensing of vegetation function
and traits. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation.1-6.
19. Huang, H.; Roy, D. P.; Boschetti, L.; Zhang, H. K.; Yan, L.; Kumar, S. S.; Gomez-Dans J.; Li, J. 2016.
Separability analysis of Sentinel-2A multi-spectral instrument (MSI) data for burned
area discrimination. Remote Sensing. 8(10): 873.
20. Hutchinson, J. M. S.; Jacquin, A.; Hutchinson, S. L.; Verbesselt, J. 2015. Monitoring vegetation
change and dynamics on US Army training lands using satellite image time series
analysis. Journal of Environmental Management. 150: 355-366.
21. Joshi, N.; Baumann, M.; Ehammer, A.; Fensholt, R.; Grogan, K.; Hostert, P.; Jepsen, M. R.;
Kuemmerle, T.; Meyfroidt, P.; Mitchard, E. T. A.; Reiche, J.; Ryan, C.; Waske, B. 2016. A
review of the application of optical and radar remote sensing data fusion to land use
mapping and monitoring. Remote Sensing. 8(1): 70.
22. Khatami, R.; Mountrakis, G.; Stehman, S. V. 2016. A meta-analysis of remote sensing research on
supervised pixel-based land-cover image classification processes: General guidelines
for practitioners and future research. Remote Sensing of Environment. 177: 89-100.
23. Kim, J.; Grunwald, S.; Rivero, R. G.; Robbins, R. 2012. Multi-scale modeling of soil series using
remote sensing in a wetland ecosystem. Soil Science Society of America Journal.
76(6): 2327-2341.
24. Kim, Y.; Huete, A. R.; Miura, T.; Jiang, Z. 2010. Spectral compatibility of vegetation indices across
sensors: band decomposition analysis with Hyperion data. Journal of Applied Remote
Sensing. 4(1): 043520.
25. Loveland, T. R.; Dwyer, J. L. 2012. Landsat: Building a strong future. Remote Sensing of
Environment. 122: 22-29.
26. Malhi, Y.; Phillips, O. L.; Lloyd, J.; Baker, T.; Wright, J.; Almeida, S.; Arroyo, l.; Frederiksen, T.; Grace,
J.; Higuchi, N.; Killeen, T.; Laurance, W. F.; Leaño, C.; Lewis, S.; Meir, P.; Monteagudo, A.;
Neill, D.; Núñez-Vargas, P.; Panfil, S. N.; Patiño, S.; Pitman, N.; Quesada, C. A.; Rudas‐Ll,
A.; Salomão, R.; Saleska, S.; Silva, N.; Silveira, M.; Sombroek, W. G.; Valencia, R.; Vásquez-
Martínez, R.; Vieira, I. C.; Vinceti, B. 2002. An international network to monitor the
structure, composition and dynamics of Amazonian forests (RAINFOR). Journal of
Vegetation Science. 13(3): 439-450.
27. Martimor, P.; Arino, O.; Berger, M.; Biasutti, R.; Carnicero, B.; Del Bello, U.; Fernandez, V.; Gascon,
F.; Silvestrin, P.; Sy, O. 2007. Sentinel-2 optical high-resolution mission for GMES
operational services. In Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IGARSS 2007.
IEEE International. 2677-2680.
28. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). (2019). Moderate Resolution Imaging
Spectroradiometer (MODIS). Available online: https://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/
components.php (Accessed on May 24, 2019).
29. Nyamugama, A.; Kakembo, V. 2015. Estimation and monitoring of aboveground carbon stocks
using spatial technology. South African Journal of Science. 111(9-10): 01-07.
30. Pajares, G. 2015. Overview and current status of remote sensing applications based on
unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing.
81(4): 281-329.
31. Pickett-Heaps, C. A.; Canadell, J. G.; Briggs, P. R.; Gobron, N.; Haverd, V.; Paget, M. J.; Pinty,
B.; Raupach, M. R. 2014. Evaluation of six satellite-derived Fraction of Absorbed
Photosynthetic Active Radiation (FAPAR) products across the Australian continent.
Remote Sensing of Environment. 140: 241-256.
32. Powell, S. L.; Pflugmacher, D.; Kirschbaum, A. A.; Kim, Y.; Cohen, W. B. 2007. Moderate resolution
remote sensing alternatives: a review of Landsat-like sensors and their applications.
Journal of Applied Remote Sensing. 1(1): 012506.
33. R Development Core Team. 2013. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R
Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
34. Rouse, Jr. J.; Haas, R. H.; Schell, J. A.; Deering, D. W. 1974. Monitoring vegetation systems in
the Great Plains with ERTS. In Third Earth Resources Technology Satellite (ERTS)
symposium. Washington. DC: NASA. 309-317.
35. Schultz, M.; Clevers, J. G.; Carter, S.; Verbesselt, J.; Avitabile, V.; Quang, H. V.; Herold, M.
2016. Performance of vegetation indices from Landsat time series in deforestation
monitoring. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation.
52: 318-327.
36. Toth, C.; Jóźków, G. 2016. Remote sensing platforms and sensors: A survey. ISPRS Journal of
Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 115: 22-36.
37. Volante, J.; Mosciaro, J.; Morales, P. M.; Vale, L.; Castrillo, S.; Sawchik, J.; Tiscorna, G.; Fuente, M.;
Maldonado, I.; Vega, A.; Trujillo, R.; Cortéz, L.; Paruelo, J. 2015. Expansión agrícola en
Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay y Chile entre 2000-2010. Caracterización espacial
mediante series temporales de índices de vegetación. Revista de Investigaciones
Agropecuarias. 41(2): 1.
38. Wang, Q.; Blackburn, G. A.; Onojeghuo, A. O.; Dash, J.; Zhou, L.; Zhang, Y.; Atkinson, P. M. 2017.
Fusion of Landsat 8 OLI and Sentinel-2 MSI data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and
Remote Sensing. 55(7): 3885-3899.
39. Wang, X. L.; Chen, C. X. 2016. Image fusion for synthetic aperture radar and multispectral
images based on sub-band-modulated non-subsampled contourlet transform and
pulse coupled neural network methods. The Imaging Science Journal. 64(2): 87-93.
40. Watts, A. C.; Ambrosia, V. G.; Hinkley, E. A. 2012. Unmanned aircraft systems in remote sensing
and scientific research: Classification and considerations of use. Remote Sensing.
4(6): 1671-1692.
41. Wulder, M. A.; Masek, J. G.; Cohen, W. B.; Loveland, T. R.; Woodcock, C. E. 2012. Opening the
archive: How free data has enabled the science and monitoring promise of Landsat.
Remote Sensing of Environment. 122: 2-10.
42. Wulder, M. A.; Coops, N. C. 2014. Make Earth observations open access. Nature. 7516 (513):
30-31. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/513030a
43. Wulder, M. A.; Loveland, T. R.; Roy, D. P.; Crawford, C. J.; Masek, J. G.; Woodcock, C. E.; Allen, R. G.;
Anderson, M. C.; Belward, A. S.; Cohen, W. B.; Dwyer, J.; Erb, A.; Gao, F.; Griffiths, P.;
Helder, D.; Hermosilla, T.; Hipple, J. D.; Hostert, P.; Hughes, M. J.; Huntington, J.; Johnson,
D. M.; Kennedy, R.; Kilic, A.; Li, Z.; Lymburner, L.; McCorkel, J.; Pahlevan, N.; Scambos,
T. A.; Schaaf, C.; Schott, J. R.; Sheng, Y.; Storey, J.; Vermote, E.; Vogelmann, J.; White,
J. C.; Wynne, R. H.; Zhu, Z. 2019. Current status of Landsat program, science, and
applications. Remote Sensing of Environment. 225: 127-147.
44. Xie, Y.; Sha, Z.; Yu, M. 2008. Remote sensing imagery in vegetation mapping: a review. Journal
of Plant Ecology. 1(1): 9-23.
45. Zhang, J. 2010. Multi-source remote sensing data fusion: status and trends. International
Journal of Image and Data Fusion. 1(1): 5-24.
46. Zhu, Z. 2017. Change detection using landsat time series: A review of frequencies, preprocessing,
algorithms, and applications. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.
130: 370-384.
47. Zhu, Z.; Wulder, M. A.; Roy, D. P.; Woodcock, C. E.; Hansen, M. C.; Radeloff, V. C.; Healey, S.; Schaaf,
C.; Hostert, P.; Strobl, P.; Pekel, J. F.; Lymburner, L.; Pahlevan, N.; Scambos, T. A. 2019.
Benefits of the free and open Landsat data policy. Remote Sensing of Environment.
224: 382-385.
48. Zhuang, Y.; Liu, X.; Nguyen, T.; He, Q.; Hong, S. 2013. Global remote sensing research trends
during 1991-2010: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics. 96(1): 203-219.