Aquatic vegetation is an important component of wetland and coastal ecosystems, playing a key role in the ecological functions of these environments. Surveys of macrophyte communities are commonly hindered by logistic problems, and remote sensing represents a powerful alternative, allowing comprehensive assessment and monitoring. Also, many vegetation characteristics can be estimated from reflectance measurements, such as species composition, vegetation structure, biomass, and plant physiological parameters. However, proper use of these methods requires an understanding of the physical processes behind the interaction between electromagnetic radiation and vegetation, and remote sensing of aquatic plants have some particular difficulties that have to be properly addressed in order to obtain successful results. The present paper reviews the theoretical background and possible applications of remote sensing techniques to the study of aquatic vegetation.

No abstract

There is growing interest in the use of Unoccupied Aerial Systems (UAS) for mapping and monitoring of seagrass habitats. UAS provide flexibility with timing of imagery capture, are relatively inexpensive, and obtain very high spatial resolution imagery compared to imagery acquired from sensors mounted on satellite or piloted aircraft. However, research to date has focused on UAS applications for exposed intertidal areas or clear tropical waters. In contrast, submerged seagrass meadows in temperate regions are subject to high cloud cover and water column turbidity, which may limit the application of UAS imagery for coastal habitat mapping. To test the constraints on UAS seagrass mapping, we examined the effects of five environmental conditions at the time of UAS image acquisition (sun angle, tidal height, cloud cover, Secchi depth and wind speed) and five site characteristics (eelgrass patchiness and density, presence and density of non‐eelgrass submerged aquatic vegetation, sediment tone, eelgrass deep edge and site exposure) at 26 eelgrass (Zostera marina) monitoring sites in British Columbia, Canada. Eelgrass was delineated in UAS orthomosaics using object‐based image analysis, combining image segmentation with manual classification. Each site was ranked according to the analysts’ confidence in the delineated eelgrass. Robust Linear Regression revealed sun angle and ‘theoretical visibility’ (an aggregate of tidal height, Secchi depth, and eelgrass deep edge conditions) to be the most important variables affecting mapping confidence. In general, ideal environmental conditions to obtain high confidence eelgrass mapping included: (1) sun angles below 40°; (2) positive theoretical visibility with Secchi depths >5 m; (3) cloud cover conditions of <10% or >90%; and (4) wind speeds less than 5 km h−1. Additionally, high mapping confidence was achieved for sites with dense, continuous, and homogeneous eelgrass meadows. The results of this analysis will guide implementation of UAS mapping technologies in coastal temperate regions.

No abstract

An intercomparison of radiance and irradiance ocean color radiometers (the second laboratory comparison exercise—LCE-2) was organized within the frame of the European Space Agency funded project Fiducial Reference Measurements for Satellite Ocean Color (FRM4SOC) May 8–13, 2017 at Tartu Observatory, Estonia. LCE-2 consisted of three sub-tasks: (1) SI-traceable radiometric calibration of all the participating radiance and irradiance radiometers at the Tartu Observatory just before the comparisons; (2) indoor, laboratory intercomparison using stable radiance and irradiance sources in a controlled environment; (3) outdoor, field intercomparison of natural radiation sources over a natural water surface. The aim of the experiment was to provide a link in the chain of traceability from field measurements of water reflectance to the uniform SI-traceable calibration, and after calibration to verify whether different instruments measuring the same object provide results consistent within the expected uncertainty limits. This paper describes the third phase of LCE-2: The results of the field experiment. The calibration of radiometers and laboratory comparison experiment are presented in a related paper of the same journal issue. Compared to the laboratory comparison, the field intercomparison has demonstrated substantially larger variability between freshly calibrated sensors, because the targets and environmental conditions during radiometric calibration were different, both spectrally and spatially. Major differences were found for radiance sensors measuring a sunlit water target at viewing zenith angle of 139° because of the different fields of view. Major differences were found for irradiance sensors because of imperfect cosine response of diffusers. Variability between individual radiometers did depend significantly also on the type of the sensor and on the specific measurement target. Uniform SI traceable radiometric calibration ensuring fairly good consistency for indoor, laboratory measurements is insufficient for outdoor, field measurements, mainly due to the different angular variability of illumination. More stringent specifications and individual testing of radiometers for all relevant systematic effects (temperature, nonlinearity, spectral stray light, etc.) are needed to reduce biases between instruments and better quantify measurement uncertainties.