Comparative evaluation of operational land imager sensor on board landsat 8 and landsat 9 for land use land cover mapping over a heterogeneous landscape

References

• Abdi AM. 2020. Land cover and land use classification performance of machine learning algorithms in a boreal landscape using Sentinel-2 data. GISci Remote Sens. 57(1):1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adam E, Mutanga O, Odindi J, Abdel-Rahman EM. 2014. Land-use/cover classification in a heterogeneous coastal landscape using RapidEye imagery: evaluating the performance of random forest and support vector machines classifiers. Int J Remote Sens. 35(10):3440–3458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adnan MSG, Abdullah AYM, Dewan A, Hall JW. 2020. The effects of changing land use and flood hazard on poverty in coastal Bangladesh. Land Use Policy. 99:104868.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alam A, Bhat MS, Maheen M. 2020. Using Landsat satellite data for assessing the land use and land cover change in Kashmir valley. GeoJournal. 85(6):1529–1543.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amolins K, Zhang Y, Dare P. 2007. Wavelet based image fusion techniques—An introduction, review and comparison. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens. 62(4):249–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson JR. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. Vol. 964. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964. Washington (DC): US Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• Anselin L, Syabri I, Smirnov O. 2002. Visualizing multivariate spatial correlation with dynamically linked windows. “Visualizing Multivariate Spatial Correlation with Dynamically Linked Windows.” In “New Tools in Spatial Data Analysis.” Proceedings of a Workshop. Center for Spatially Integrated Social Science, University of California, edited by L. Anselin and S. Rey, Santa Barbara: CDROM.
   Google Scholar
• Arvidson T, Goward S, Gasch J, Williams D. 2006. Landsat-7 long-term acquisition plan. Photogramm Eng Remote Sensing. 72(10):1137–1146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azeez A, Gnanappazham L, Muraleedharan KR, Revichandran C, John S, Seena G, Thomas J. 2022. Multi-decadal changes of mangrove forest and its response to the tidal dynamics of thane creek, Mumbai. J Sea Res. 180:102162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balha A, Mallick J, Pandey S, Gupta S, Singh CK. 2021. A comparative analysis of different pixel and object-based classification algorithms using multi-source high spatial resolution satellite data for LULC mapping. Earth Sci Inform. 14(4):2231–2247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barati S, Rayegani B, Saati M, Sharifi A, Nasri M. 2011. Comparison the accuracies of different spectral indices for estimation of vegetation cover fraction in sparse vegetated areas. Egyptian J Remote Sens Space Sci. 14(1):49–56.
   Google Scholar
• Bauer ME. 2020. Remote sensing of environment: history, philosophy, approach and contributions, 1969–2019. Remote Sens Environ. 237:111522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Census of India. 2011. Mumbai (Greater Mumbai) Metropolitan Population 2011 – 2022. Census. https://www.census2011.co.in/census/metropolitan/305-mumbai.html.
   Google Scholar
• Chachondhia P, Shakya A, Kumar G. 2021. Performance evaluation of machine learning algorithms using optical and microwave data for LULC classification. Remote Sens Appl: Soc Environ. 23:100599.
   Google Scholar
• Chander G, Coan MJ, Scaramuzza PL. 2008. Evaluation and comparison of the IRS-P6 and the Landsat sensors. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sensing. 46(1):209–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaves MED, Picoli MCA, Sanches ID. 2020. Recent applications of Landsat 8/OLI and Sentinel-2/MSI for land use and land cover mapping: a systematic review. Remote Sens. 12(18):3062.
   Google Scholar
• Chen W, Li X, He H, Wang L. 2017. A review of fine-scale land use and land cover classification in open-pit mining areas by remote sensing techniques. Remote Sens. 10(2):15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen XL, Zhao HM, Li PX, Yin ZY. 2006. Remote sensing image-based analysis of the relationship between urban heat island and land use/cover changes. Remote Sens Environ. 104(2):133–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choate MJ, Rengarajan R, Storey JC, Lubke M. 2022. Landsat 9 geometric characteristics using underfly data. Remote Sens. 14(15):3781.
   Google Scholar
• Congalton RG. 1991. A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of remotely sensed data. Remote Sens Environ. 37(1):35–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Congalton RG. 2010. Remote sensing: an overview. GIScience & Remote Sens. 47(4):443–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Das N, Mondal P, Sutradhar S, Ghosh R. 2021. Assessment of variation of land use/land cover and its impact on land surface temperature of Asansol subdivision. Egyptian J Remote Sens Space Sci. 24(1):131–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dwyer JL, Roy DP, Sauer B, Jenkerson CB, Zhang HK, Lymburner L. 2018. Analysis ready data: enabling analysis of the Landsat archive. Remote Sens. 10(9):1363.
   Google Scholar
• Egorov AV, Roy DP, Zhang HK, Li Z, Yan L, Huang H. 2019. Landsat 4, 5 and 7 (1982 to 2017) Analysis Ready Data (ARD) observation coverage over the conterminous United States and implications for terrestrial monitoring. Remote Sens. 11(4):447.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis EC, Gauthier N, Goldewijk KK, Bird RB, Boivin N, Díaz S, Fuller DQ, Gill JL, Kaplan JO, Kingston N, et al. 2021. People have shaped most of terrestrial nature for at least 12,000 years. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 118(17):e2023483118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forkuor G, Dimobe K, Serme I, Tondoh JE. 2018. Landsat-8 vs. Sentinel-2: examining the added value of sentinel-2’s red-edge bands to land-use and land-cover mapping in Burkina Faso. GIScience & Remote Sens. 55(3):331–354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu W, Ma J, Chen P, Chen F. 2020. Remote sensing satellites for digital earth. In: Manual of digital earth. Singapore: Springer; p. 55–123.
   Google Scholar
• Ghayour L, Neshat A, Paryani S, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Chen W, Al-Ansari N, Geertsema M, Amiri MP, Gholamnia M, et al. 2021. Performance evaluation of sentinel-2 and landsat 8 OLI data for land cover/use classification using a comparison between machine learning algorithms. Remote Sens. 13(7):1349.
   Google Scholar
• Goward SN, Masek JG, Williams DL, Irons JR, Thompson RJ. 2001. The Landsat 7 mission: terrestrial research and applications for the 21st century. Remote Sens Environ. 78(1-2):3–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemati M, Hasanlou M, Mahdianpari M, Mohammadimanesh F. 2021. A systematic review of landsat data for change detection applications: 50 years of monitoring the earth. Remote Sens. 13(15):2869.
   Google Scholar
• Huete AR. 1988. A soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI). Remote Sens Environ. 25(3):295–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hütt C,Koppe W,Miao Y,Bareth G. 2016. Best Accuracy Land Use/land Cover (LULC) Classification to Derive Crop Types Using Multitemporal, Multisensor, and Multi-Polarization SAR Satellite Images. Remote Sensing. 8(8):684.doi:10.3390/rs8080684.
   Google Scholar
• Jin S, Sader SA. 2005. Comparison of time series tasseled cap wetness and the normalized difference moisture index in detecting forest disturbances. Remote Sens Environ. 94(3):364–372.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamaraj NP, Shekhar S, Sivashankari V, Balasubramani K, Prasad KA. 2021. Detecting heat-inducing urban built-up surface material with multi remote sensing datasets using reflectance and emission spectroscopy. Remote Sens Environ. 264:112591.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaur H, Koundal D, Kadyan V. 2021. Image fusion techniques: a survey. Arch Comput Methods Eng. 28(7):4425–4447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotthaus S, Smith TE, Wooster MJ, Grimmond CSB. 2014. Derivation of an urban materials spectral library through emittance and reflectance spectroscopy. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens. 94:194–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kriegler FJ, Malila WA, Nalepka RF, Richardson W. 1969. Preprocessing transformations and their effects on multi-spectral recognition. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Remote Sensing of Environment. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan; p. 97–131.
   Google Scholar
• Lambin EF, Meyfroidt P. 2011. Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 108(9):3465–3472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lulla K, Nellis MD, Rundquist B, Srivastava PK, Szabo S. 2021. Mission to earth: LANDSAT 9 will continue to view the world. Geocarto Int. 36(20):2261–2263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahyari AG, Yazdi M. 2011. Panchromatic and multispectral image fusion based on maximization of both spectral and spatial similarities. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sensing. 49(6):1976–1985.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malleswara Rao J, Siddiqui A, Maithani S, Kumar P. 2020. Hyperspectral and multispectral data fusion using fast discrete curvelet transform for urban surface material characterization. Geocarto Int. 37(7):2018-2030.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mallick J, Talukdar S, Pal S, Rahman A, Shahfahad  . 2021. A novel classifier for improving wetland mapping by integrating image fusion techniques and ensemble machine learning classifiers. Ecol Inf. 65:101426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masek JG, Wulder MA, Markham B, McCorkel J, Crawford CJ, Storey J, Jenstrom DT. 2020. Landsat 9: empowering open science and applications through continuity. Remote Sens Environ. 248:111968.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFeeters SK. 1996. The use of the Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) in the delineation of open water features. Int J Remote Sens. 17(7):1425–1432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mhangara P, Mapurisa W, Mudau N. 2020. Comparison of image fusion techniques using satellite pour l’Observation de la Terre (SPOT) 6 satellite imagery. Appl Sci. 10(5):1881.
   Google Scholar
• Naikoo MW, Rihan M, Peer AH, Talukdar S, Mallick J, Ishtiaq M, Rahman A. 2022. Analysis of peri-urban land use/land cover change and its drivers using geospatial techniques and geographically weighted regression. Environ Sci Pollut Res:1–19. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-18853-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nandam V, Patel PL. 2021. A novel hybrid approach using SVM and spectral indices for enhanced land use land cover mapping of coastal urban plains. Geocarto Int. 37(16):4714–4736.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noble WS. 2006. What is a support vector machine? Nat Biotechnol. 24(12):1565–1567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NRSC. 1995. Natural resource census- land use land cover database. Technical Report–Ver.1. [accessed 2022 April]. https://bhuvan-app1.nrsc.gov.in/2dresources/thematic/2LULC/lulc1112.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Oldoni LV, Mercante E, Antunes JFG, Cattani CEV, Silva Junior CAD, Caon IL, Prudente VHR. 2021. Extraction of crop information through the spatiotemporal fusion of OLI and MODIS images. Geocarto Int:1–25. doi:10.1080/10106049.2021.2000648
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overmars KD, De Koning GHJ, Veldkamp A. 2003. Spatial autocorrelation in multi-scale land use models. Ecol Modell. 164(2–3):257–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pethe A, Nallathiga R, Gandhi S, Tandel V. 2014. Re-thinking urban planning in India: Learning from the wedge between the de jure and de facto development in Mumbai. Cities. 39:120–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phan DC, Trung TH, Truong VT, Sasagawa T, Vu TPT, Bui DT, Hayashi M, Tadono T, Nasahara KN. 2021. First comprehensive quantification of annual land use/cover from 1990 to 2020 across mainland Vietnam. Sci Rep. 11(1):1–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phiri D, Morgenroth J, Xu C, Hermosilla T. 2018. Effects of pre-processing methods on Landsat OLI-8 land cover classification using OBIA and random forests classifier. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf. 73:170–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Praveen B, Talukdar S, Mahato S, Mondal J, Sharma P, Islam ARMT, Rahman, A, Shahfahad  . 2020. Analyzing trend and forecasting of rainfall changes in India using non-parametrical and machine learning approaches. Sci Rep. 10(1):1–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahman A, Aggarwal SP, Netzband M, Fazal S. 2011. Monitoring urban sprawl using remote sensing and GIS techniques of a fast growing urban centre, India. IEEE J Sel Top Appl Earth Observations Remote Sens. 4(1):56–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasul A, Balzter H, Ibrahim GRF, Hameed HM, Wheeler J, Adamu B, Ibrahim S, Najmaddin PM. 2018. Applying built-up and bare-soil indices from Landsat 8 to cities in dry climates. Land. 7(3):81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rihan M, Naikoo MW, Ali MA, Usmani TM, Rahman A. 2021. Urban heat island dynamics in response to land-use/land-cover change in the coastal city of Mumbai. J Indian Soc Remote Sens. 49(9):2227–2247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritchie JC, Zimba PV, Everitt JH. 2003. Remote sensing techniques to assess water quality. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens. 69(6):695–704.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy DP, Wulder MA, Loveland TR, Woodcock CE, Allen RG, Anderson MC, Helder D, Irons JR, Johnson DM, Kennedy R, Scambos TA, et al. 2014. Landsat-8: science and product vision for terrestrial global change research. Remote Sens Environ. 145:154–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahfahad  , Kumari B, Tayyab M, Ahmed IA, Baig MRI, Khan MF, Rahman A. 2020. Longitudinal study of land surface temperature (LST) using mono-and split-window algorithms and its relationship with NDVI and NDBI over selected metro cities of India. Arab J Geosci. 13(19):1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahfahad  , Naikoo MW, Towfiqul Islam ARM, Mallick J, Rahman A. 2022. Land use/land cover change and its impact on surface urban heat island and urban thermal comfort in a metropolitan city. Urban Climate. 41:101052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shang M, Wang SX, Zhou Y, Du C. 2018. Effects of training samples and classifiers on classification of landsat-8 imagery. J Indian Soc Remote Sens. 46(9):1333–1340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shih HC, Stow DA, Chang KC, Roberts DA, Goulias KG. 2021. From land cover to land use: applying random forest classifier to Landsat imagery for urban land-use change mapping. Geocarto Int. 37(19):5523-5546.
   Google Scholar
• Singh RK, Singh P, Drews M, Kumar P, Singh H, Gupta AK, Govil H, Kaur A, Kumar M. 2021. A machine learning-based classification of LANDSAT images to map land use and land cover of India. Remote Sens Appl: soc Environ. 24:100624.
   Google Scholar
• Song C, Woodcock CE, Seto KC, Lenney MP, Macomber SA. 2001. Classification and change detection using Landsat TM data: when and how to correct atmospheric effects? Remote Sens Environ. 75(2):230–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens L, Fuller D, Boivin N, Rick T, Gauthier N, Kay A, Marwick B, Armstrong CG, Barton CM, Denham T, et al. 2019. Archaeological assessment reveals Earth’s early transformation through land use. Science. 365(6456):897–902.,
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talukdar S, Mankotia S, Shamimuzzaman M, Mahato S. 2021b. Wetland‐inundated area modeling and monitoring using supervised and machine learning classifiers. In: Pandey PC, Sharma LK, editors. Advances in remote sensing for natural resource monitoring. United States: Wiley-Blackwell; p. 346–365.
   Google Scholar
• Talukdar S, Salam R, Samad A, Rihan M, Rahman A. 2021a. Improving wetland mapping techniques using the integration of image fusion techniques and artificial neural network (ANN). In: Shit PK, Das P, Bhunia GS, Dutta D, editors. Mapping, monitoring, and modeling land and water resources. United States: CRC Press; p. 149–164.
   Google Scholar
• Talukdar S, Singha P, Mahato S, Pal S, Liou Y-A, Rahman, A, Shahfahad  . 2020. Land-use land-cover classification by machine learning classifiers for satellite observations—A review. Remote Sens. 12(7):1135.
   Google Scholar
• Ullah S, Shafique M, Farooq M, Zeeshan M, Dees M. 2017. Evaluating the impact of classification algorithms and spatial resolution on the accuracy of land cover mapping in a mountain environment in Pakistan. Arab J Geosci. 10(3):1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• USGS. 2021. Landsat 9 data users handbook. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey. https://www.usgs.gov/media/files/landsat-9-data-users-handbook.
   Google Scholar
• Wentz EA, Anderson S, Fragkias M, Netzband M, Mesev V, Myint SW, Quattrochi D, Rahman A, Seto KC. 2014. Supporting global environmental change research: a review of trends and knowledge gaps in urban remote sensing. Remote Sensing. 6(5):3879–3905.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkler K, Fuchs R, Rounsevell M, Herold M. 2021. Global land use changes are four times greater than previously estimated. Nat Commun. 12(1):1–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wulder MA, Loveland TR, Roy DP, Crawford CJ, Masek JG, Woodcock CE, Allen RG, Anderson MC, Belward AS, Cohen WB, et al. 2019. Current status of Landsat program, science, and applications. Remote Sens Environ. 225:127–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wulder MA, White JC, Loveland TR, Woodcock CE, Belward AS, Cohen WB, Fosnight EA, Shaw J, Masek JG, Roy DP. 2016. The global Landsat archive: status, consolidation, and direction. Remote Sens Environ. 185:271–283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu H. 2006. Modification of normalised difference water index (NDWI) to enhance open water features in remotely sensed imagery. Int J Remote Sens. 27(14):3025–3033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xue J, Su B. 2017. Significant remote sensing vegetation indices: a review of developments and applications. J Sensors, 2017:1353691. doi:10.1155/2017/1353691
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yılmaz A, Küçüker A, Bayrak G, Ertekin D, Shafie-Khah M, Guerrero JM. 2022. An improved automated PQD classification method for distributed generators with hybrid SVM-based approach using un-decimated wavelet transform. Int J Electr Power & Energy Syst. 136:107763.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young NE, Anderson RS, Chignell SM, Vorster AG, Lawrence R, Evangelista PH. 2017. A survival guide to Landsat preprocessing. Ecology. 98(4):920–932.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yunhao C, Lei D, Jing L, Xiaobing L, Peijun S. 2006. A new wavelet‐based image fusion method for remotely sensed data. Int J Remote Sens. 27(7):1465–1476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zha Y, Gao J, Ni S. 2003. Use of normalized difference built-up index in automatically mapping urban areas from TM imagery. Int J Remote Sens. 24(3):583–594.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhai K, Wu X, Qin Y, Du P. 2015. Comparison of surface water extraction performances of different classic water indices using OLI and TM imageries in different situations. Geo-Spatial Inform Sci. 18(1):32–42.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou G, Chen W, Gui Q, Li X, Wang L. 2021. Split depth-wise separable graph-convolution network for road extraction in complex environments from high-resolution remote-sensing Images. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens. 60:1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar