glc2000

Two of the most widely used land-cover data sets for the United States are the National Land-Cover Data (NLCD) at 30-m resolution and the Global Land- Cover Characteristics (GLCC) at 1-km nominal resolution. Both data sets were produced around 1992 and expected to provide similar land-cover information. This study investigated the spatial distribution of NLCD within major GLCC classes at 1-km unit over a total of 11 agricultural-related eco-regions across the continental United States. Our results exhibited that data agreement or relationship between the GLCC and NLCD was higher for the eco-regions located in the corn belt plains with homogeneous or less complicated land-cover distributions. The GLCC cropland primarily corresponded to NLCD row crops, pasture/hay and small grains, and was occasionally related to NLCD forest, grassland and shrubland in the remaining eco-regions due to high land-cover diversity. The unique GLCC classes of woody savanna and savanna were mainly related to the NLCDorchard and grassland, respectively, in the eco-region located in the Central Valley of California. The GLCC urban/built-up among vegetated areas strongly agreed to the NLCD urban for the eco-regions in the corn belt plains. A set of subclass land-cover information provided through this study is valuable to understand the degrees of spatial similarity for the major global vegetated classes. The subclass information from this study provides reference for substituting less-detailed global data sets for detailed NLCD to support national environment studies.

Many investigators need and use global land cover maps for a wide variety of purposes. Ironically, after many years of very limited availability, there are now multiple global land cover maps and it is not readily apparent (1) which is most useful for particular applications or (2) how to combine the different maps to provide an improved dataset. The existing global land cover maps at 1 km spatial resolution have arisen from different initiatives and are based on different remote sensing data and employed different methodologies. Perhaps more significantly, they have different legends. As a result, comparison of the different land cover maps is difficult and information about their relative utility is limited. In an attempt to compare the datasets and assess their strengths and weaknesses we harmonized the thematic legends of four available coarse-resolution global land cover maps (IGBP DISCover, UMD, MODIS 1-km, and GLC2000) using the LCCS-based land cover legend translation protocols. Analysis of the agreement among the global land cover maps and existing validation information highlights general patterns of agreement, inconsistencies and uncertainties. The thematic classes of Evergreen broadleaf trees, Snow and Ice, and Barren show high producer and user accuracy and good agreement among the datasets, while classes of mixed tree types show high commission errors. Overall, the results show a limited ability of the four global products to discriminate mixed classes characterized by a mosaic of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation. There is a strong relationship between class accuracy, spatial agreement among the datasets, and the heterogeneity of landscapes. Suggestions for future mapping projects include careful definition of mixed unit classes, and improvement in mapping heterogeneous landscapes.

Accurate and up-to-date global land cover data sets are necessary for various global change research studies including climate change, biodiversity conservation, ecosystem assessment, and environmental modeling. In recent years, substantial advancement has been achieved in generating such data products. Yet, we are far from producing geospatially consistent high-quality data at an operational level. We compared the recently available Global Land Cover 2000 (GLC-2000) and MODerate resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MODIS) global land cover data to evaluate the similarities and differences in methodologies and results, and to identify areas of spatial agreement and disagreement. These two global land cover data sets were prepared using different data sources, classification systems, and methodologies, but using the same spatial resolution (i.e., 1 km) satellite data. Our analysis shows a general agreement at the class aggregate level except for savannas/shrublands, and wetlands. The disagreement, however, increases when comparing detailed land cover classes. Similarly, percent agreement between the two data sets was found to be highly variable among biomes. The identified areas of spatial agreement and disagreement will be useful for both data producers and users. Data producers may use the areas of spatial agreement for training area selection and pay special attention to areas of disagreement for further improvement in future land cover characterization and mapping. Users can conveniently use the findings in the areas of agreement, whereas users might need to verify the informaiton in the areas of disagreement with the help of secondary information. Learning from past experience and building on the existing infrastructure (e.g., regional networks), further research is necessary to (1) reduce ambiguity in land cover definitions, (2) increase availability of improved spatial, spectral, radiometric, and geometric resolution satellite data, and (3) develop advanced classification algorithms.