Aiken, S. R. 2004. “Runaway fires smoke-haze pollution, and unnatural disasters in
Indonesia.”, Geographical Review, 94(1), 55-79. doi: 10.1111/j.19310846.2004.tb00158.x
Boehm, H.-D. V., Siegert, F., Rieley, J. O., Page, S. E., Jauhiainen, J., Vasander, H., and
Jaya, a. 2001. “Fire impacts and carbon release on tropical peatlands in Central
Kalimantan”, Indonesia. 22nd Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, 5–9. URL:
https://crisp.nus.edu.sg/~acrs2001/pdf/121BOEHM.pdf
Bowers, S. A., and Hanks, R. J. 1965 “Reflection of radiant energy from soils.” Soil
Science,
100(2),
130-138.
URL:
https://journals.lww.com/soilsci/Citation/1965/08000/Reflection_of_Radiant_En
ergy_From_Soils.9.aspx
Carlson, T. N., Gillies, R. R., and Schmugge, T. J. 1995. “An interpretation of
methodologies for indirect measurement of soil water content.” Agricultural and
Forest Meteorology, 77(3–4), 191–205. doi: org/10.1016/0168-1923(95)02261-U
Chen, D., Huang, J., and Jackson, T. 2005. “Vegetation water content estimation for corn
and soybeans using spectral indices derived from MODIS near- and short-wave
infrared bands.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 98(2-3), 225-236. doi:
10.1016/j.rse.2005.07.008
Cloutis, E. A., McCormack, K. A., Bell, J. F., Hendrix, A. R., Bailey, D. T., Craig, M. A.,
Mertzman, S. A., Robinson, M. S., Riner, M. A. 2008. “Ultraviolet spectral
reflectance properties of common planetary minerals.” Icarus, 197(1), 321-347.
doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2008.04.018
Deng, Y., Wu, C., Li, M., and Chen, R. (2015). “RNDSI: A ratio normalized difference
soil index for remote sensing of urban/suburban environments.” International
Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 39, 40–48. doi:
10.1016/j.jag.2015.02.010
Engman, E. T., and Chauhan, N. 1995. “Status of microwave soil moisture measurements
with remote sensing.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 51(1), 189-198. doi:
10.1016/0034-4257(94)00074-W
Eyes on the forest (May 13th, 2017). https://www.eyesontheforest.or.id
Gao, B. C. 1996. “NDWI - A normalized difference water index for remote sensing of
vegetation liquid water from space.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 58(3), 257–
266. doi: 10.1016/S0034-4257(96)00067-3
Gao, Y., Hirose, K., Ohki, T., Osaki, M., Kohyama, T., and Paneque, J. 2013. “Estimation
of Dissolved Organic Carbon concentration in peat water using airborne HyMap
image.” doi: 10.13140/2.1.3511.3923
Gu, Y., Hunt, E., Wardlow, B., Basara, J. B., Brown, J. F., and Verdin, J. P. 2008.
“Evaluation of MODIS NDVI and NDWI for vegetation drought monitoring
using Oklahoma Mesonet soil moisture data.” Geophysical Research Letters,
35(22), 1–5. doi: 10.1029/2008GL035772
Huang, J., Chen, D., and Cosh, M.H. 2009. “Sub-pixel reflectance unmixing in estimating
vegetation water content and dry biomass of corn and soybeans cropland using
normalized difference water index (NDWI) from satellites.” International Journal
of Remote Sensing, 30(8), 2075-2104. doi: 10.1080/01431160802549245
Jackson, T. J., Chen, D., Cosh, M., Li, F., Anderson, M., Walthall, C., Doriaswamy, P.,
and Hunt, E. R. 2004. “Vegetation water content mapping using Landsat data
derived normalized difference water index for corn and soybeans.” Remote
Sensing of Environment, 92(4), 475-482. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2003.10.021
Jacquemoud, S., Baret, F., and Hanocq, J. F. 1992. “Modeling spectraland bidirectional
soil reflectance.” Remote sensing of Environment, 41, 123-132. doi:
10.1016/0034-4257(92)90072-R
Jaiswal, R. K., Mukherjee, S., Raju, K. D., and Saxena, R. 2002. “Forest fire risk zone
mapping from satellite imagery and GIS.” International Journal of Applied Earth
Observation
and
Geoinformation,
4(1),
1-10.
doi:
10.1016/S0303-
2434(02)00006-5
Katsuhama, N., Imai, M., Naruse, N., and Takahashi, Y., 2018. “Discrimination of areas
infected with coffee leafrust using a vegetation index.” Remote Sensing Letters,
9(12), 1186-1194. doi: 10.1080/2150704X.2018.1519269
Laumonier, Y., and Biotrop, S. 1997. The Vegetation and Physiography of Sumatra:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Li, W., Du, Z., Ling, F., Zhou, D., Wang, H., Gui, Y., Sun, B., and Zhang, X. 2013. “A
Comparison of Land Surface Water Mapping Using the Normalized Difference
Water Index from TM, ETM+ and ALI.” remote sensing, 5(11), 5530-5549. doi:
10.3390/rs5115530
Lobell, D. B., and Asner, G. P. 2002. “Moisture effects on soil reflectance.” Soil Science
Society of America Journal, 66(3), 722–727. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2002.7220
Matese, A., Toscano, P., Gennaro, S. F. D., Genesio, L., Vaccari, F. P., Primicerio, J.,
Belli, C., Zaldei, A., Bianconi, R., and Gioli, B. 2015. “Intercomparison of UAV,
Aircraft and Satellite Remote Sensing Platforms for Precision Viticulture.”
remote sensing, 7(3), 2971-2990. doi: 10.3390/rs70302971
McPartland, M. Y., Kane E. S., Falkowski, M. J., Kolka, R., Turetsky, M. R., Palik, B.,
and Montgomery, R. A. 2018 “The response of boreal peatland community
composition and NDVI to hydrologic change, warming, and elevated carbon
dioxide” Global Change Biology, 25(1), 93-107. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14465
Nicholson, S. E., and Farrar, T. J. 1994. “The influence of soil type on the relationships
between NDVI, rainfall, and soil moisture in semiarid Botswana. I. NDVI
response to rainfall.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 50(2), 107–120. doi:
10.1016/0034-4257(94)90038-8
Njoku, E. N., and Entekhabi, D. 1996 “Passive microwave remote sensing of soil
moisture.” Journal of Hydrology, 184(1-2), 101-129. doi: 10.1016/00221694(95)02970-2
Page, S. E., Siegert, F., Rieley, J. O., Boehm, H-D. V., Jaya, A., and Limin, S. 2002. “The
amount of carbon released from peat and forest fires in Indonesia during 1997.”
nature, 420, 61-65. doi: 10.1038/nature01131
Sastry, N. 2002. “Forest Fires, Air Pollution, and Mortality in Southeast Asia.”
Demography, 39, 1-23. doi: 10.2307/3088361
Silveira, E. M. O., Espírito-Santo, F. D. B., Acerbi-Júnior, F. W., Galvão, L. S., Withey,
K. D., Blackburn, G. A., Mello, J. M., Shimabukuro, Y. E., Domingues, T., and
Scolforo, J. R. S. 2019. “Reducing the effects of vegetation phenology on change
detection in tropical seasonal biomes.” GIScience and Remote Sensing, 56(5),
699-717. doi: 10.1080/15481603.2018.1550245
Sumarga, E. 2017 “Spatial indicators for human activities may explain the 2015 fire
hotspot distribution in Central Kalimantan Indonesia.” Tropical Conservation
Science, 10, 1-9. doi: 10.1177/1940082917706168
Spessa, A. C., Field, R. D., Pappenberger, F., Langner, A., Englhart, S., Weber, U.,
Stockdale, T., Siegert, F., Kaiser, J. W., and Moore, J. 2014. “Seasonal forecasting
of fire over Kalimantan, Indonesia.” Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,
15, 429–442. doi: 10.5194/nhess-15-429-2015
Usup, A., Hashimoto, Y., Takahashi, H., Takahashi, H., and Hayasaka, H. 2004.
“Combustion and thermal characteristics of peat fire in tropical peatland in
Central Kalimantan, Indonesia.” Tropics, 14(1), 1–19. doi: 10.3759/tropics.14.1
Verbesselt, J., Somers, B., Lhermitte, S., Jonckheere, I., Aardt, J., and Coppin, P. 2007.
“Monitoring herbaceous fuel moisture content with SPOT VEGETATION timeseries for fire risk prediction in savanna ecosystems.” Remote Sensing of
Environment, 108(4), 357-368. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2006.11.019
Xu, L., Niu, R., Fang, S., and Dong, Y. 2012. “Cloud detection based on decision tree
over Tibetan Plateau with MODIS data.” MIPPR 2013: Remote Sensing Image
Processing, Geographic Information Systems, and Other Applications, 8921,
535–538. doi: 10.1117/12.2030399
Xu, H. 2006. “Modification of normalized difference water index (NDWI) to enhance
open water features in remotely sensed imagery.” International Journal of Remote
Sensing, 27(14), 3025-3033. doi: 10.1080/01431160600589179
Figure 1. Geographical map of (a) the study area in eastern Sumatra, Indonesia and (b)
the magnified image of the inset in (a). The Landsat 8 colour image (b) was taken on 23
September 2015 (dry season). The red circles indicate the hotspots based on MODIS from
the Terra and Aqua satellites (MCD14DL) in 2015. Each grid cell is 15 km2.
Figure 2. Reflectance spectra obtained from peat samples collected at Palangka Raya in
Indonesia with water contents of 0% and 11%, respectively. In the 11% curve, the
reflectance about 1400 nm, and about 1900 nm has characteristic dips due to the
absorbance of water.
Figure 3. Plot illustrating the INI values (absolute value) between wavelengths from 400
to 2500 nm (1 nm resolution) by using the spectra shown in Figure 2. OLI bands of
Landsat 8 are indicated by solid lines (bands 1, 3, 5 to 7).
Figure 4. Plots of the relation between the averaged index values and normalized fire area
to evaluate the influence of vegetation on the estimation of soil moisture. The normalized
fire area is defined as fire pixels per single grid area, as shown in Figure 1 (b) show the
(a) NDPSI1, (b) NDPSI3, (c) NDWI, and (d) NDSI, respectively. Diamond (circle)
symbols indicate regions where NDVI values of 0.5 (0.3) have been excluded. Crosses
indicate the averaged INI values in the respective grid. Correlation coefficients for each
symbol are given to the right of the regression line. (NDPSI1: r1 p < .000, r2 p < .000, r3
p = .082, NDPSI3: r1 p < .000, r2 p = .759, r3 p = .383, NDWI: r1 p = .051, r2 p = .201, r3
p = .036, NDSI: r1 p = .701, r2 p = .383, r3 p = .090).
Figure 5. Comparison of the fire points and various analysis images. (a) to (d) are
enlarged images of the region delineated by the red line in the map at left. The black
pixels in the enlarged images of (a) NDPSI1 have NDCI values above -0.3, indicating
pixels of cloud, cloud shadow, and surface water; (b) black pixels have NDVI values
above 0.5 in addition to (a); In the (c) NDPSI3 and (d) NDSI maps, black pixels indicate
pixels with NDCI values above -0.3.
SM 1. The difference for the index value between dry and wet peat soil. It shows the
same results of Figure 3. Their bands were loaded in Landsat 8.
SM 2. The relationship between the value of indices and fire area like Figure 4. (a)
NDPSI1, (b) NDPSI2, (c) NDPSI3, (d) NDPSI4, (e) NDWI, and (f) NDSI.
SM 3. The correlation coefficient of several thresholds of NDVI in all indices and
analysis pixels and area.
SM 4. p-value of several thresholds of NDVI in all indices.
Supplemental material
SM 1. The difference for the index value between dry and wet peat soil. It shows the
Band
same results of Figure 3. Their bands were loaded in Landsat 8.
Band
0.01
0.003
0.01
0.003
0.1
0.09
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.04
0.07
0.06
0.08
0.09
0.04
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.03
(a)
0.2
NDPSI1
0.0
r1 = 0.56
r2 = 0.63
-0.2
r0 = 0.29
-0.4
-0.2
r2 = 0.42
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.000
Ratio between fire area and unit
0.2
r1 = 0.68
-0.2
r2 = 0.053
-0.4
r0 = -0.15
0.010
0.015
(d)
0.0
NDPSI4
NDPSI3
(c)
0.0
0.005
Ratio between fire area and unit
r1 = 0.57
-0.2
r2 = -0.013
r0 = -0.18
-0.4
-0.6
-0.6
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.000
Ratio between fire area and unit
0.005
0.010
(e)
0.2
(f)
r0 = 0.29
r0 = 0.35
r1 = 0.33
r2 = 0.22
-0.4
-0.6
NDSI
0.0
-0.2
0.015
Ratio between fire area and unit
0.0
NDWI
r0 = 0.048
-0.6
0.000
0.2
r1 = 0.60
-0.4
-0.6
0.2
(b)
0.0
NDPSI2
0.2
r2 = 0.15
-0.2
r1 = -0.066
-0.4
-0.6
0.000
0.005
0.010
Ratio between fire area and unit
0.015
0.000
0.005
0.010
Ratio between fire area and unit
SM 2. The relationship between the value of indices and fire area like Figure 4.
0.015
SM 3. The correlation coefficient of several thresholds of NDVI in all indices and
NDVI
analysis pixels and area.
Threshold
NDPSI1
NDPSI2
NDPSI3
NDPSI4
NDWI
NDSI
Analysis pixels (×106)
Analysis area (×103 km2)
0.20
0.27
0.23
0.33
0.36
0.21
-0.34
0.18
0.16
0.25
0.48
0.51
0.61
0.54
0.27
-0.25
0.52
0.47
0.30
0.56
0.60
0.68
0.57
0.33
-0.07
1.21
1.09
0.35
0.58
0.61
0.60
0.49
0.28
0.03
1.91
1.72
0.40
0.61
0.60
0.39
0.31
0.23
0.07
2.46
2.22
0.45
0.62
0.51
0.16
0.08
0.22
0.13
3.03
2.72
0.50
0.63
0.42
0.05
-0.01
0.22
0.15
3.63
3.26
0.55
0.63
0.32
-0.01
-0.06
0.21
0.16
4.27
3.84
Original
0.29
0.05
-0.15
-0.18
0.35
0.29
6.79
6.11
NDVI
SM 4. p-value of several thresholds of NDVI in all indices.
Threshold
NDPSI1
NDPSI2
NDPSI3
NDPSI4
NDWI
NDSI
0.20
0.112
0.187
0.047
0.033
0.211
0.042
0.25
0.003
0.002
0.000
0.001
0.110
0.143
0.30
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.052
0.701
0.35
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.099
0.885
0.40
0.000
0.000
0.017
0.067
0.171
0.686
0.45
0.000
0.002
0.366
0.655
0.187
0.442
0.50
0.000
0.011
0.759
0.940
0.201
0.383
0.55
0.000
0.060
0.973
0.728
0.225
0.363
Original
0.082
0.781
0.384
0.287
0.037
0.090
...
論文の公開元へ
