Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSmart, Douglas D.
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-23T21:02:34Z
dc.date.available2022-03-23T21:02:34Z
dc.date.issued2008-12
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11122/12845
dc.descriptionThesis (M.S.) University of Alaska Fairbanks, 2008en_US
dc.description.abstract"Mapping trembling aspen stands (Populous tremuloides Michx.) versus Alaskan birch (Betula neoalaskana Sarg.) in interior Alaska is possible as a byproduct of remote sensing aspen leaf miner (Phyllocnistis populiella Chamb.) damage. P. populiella is a defoliator of trembling aspen that has been observed in epidemic proportions in Alaska since 2001. Where it is observed it is ubiquitous. Unlike most remote sensing studies of insect damage, I found no significant change in the near-infrared related to leaf miner damage. The feeding morphology of P. populiella is different from most other leaf defoliating insects. P. populiella feeds only in the epidermal tissue of aspen leaves whereas most other leaf mining insect pests consume mesophyll tissue. This means that P. populiella causes no significant change in near-infrared reflectance whereas most other defoliators do. This lack of change in near-infrared range coupled with the timing of leaf miner foraging can be used to discriminate P. populiella damage from that of other leaf defoliators. The ability to remotely sense damage in aspen stands provides an opportunity to identify P. tremuloides in locations where damage is epidemic. If new image acquisition and historic image purchases are timed to correspond with P. populiella outbreak conditions, it will be possible to identify areas that are P. tremuloides stands and not other species"--Leaf iiien_US
dc.description.tableofcontents1. Introduction -- 1.1. Aspen leaf miner -- 1.2. Trembling aspen -- 2. Objectives -- 3. Methods -- 3.1. Study area -- 3.2. Insect surveys -- 3.3. Quickbird imagery -- 3.4. Image processing -- 3.5. Field validation -- 3.6. Data analysis -- 3.6.1. Validation of Quickbird classification -- 3.6.2. Spectral changes -- 4. Results -- 4.1. Quickbird classification accuracy -- 4.2. Mapping comparison -- 4.3. Spectral reflectance changes: aspen leaf miner infestation pixels verses birch pixels -- 4.4. Spectral reflectance changes: aspen leaf miner infestations versus birch stands -- 4.5. Spectral differences from the June 13, 2003 image -- 5. Discussion -- 5.1. Accuracy of Quickbird classifications -- 5.2. Quickbird classification versus aerial sketch mapping polygons -- 5.3. Spectral reflectance changes -- 5.4. Conclusion -- References -- Appendix.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectPopulus tremuloidesen_US
dc.subjectLeafminersen_US
dc.subjectArtificial satellites in forestryen_US
dc.subjectAlaska paper birchen_US
dc.subjectDiseases and pestsen_US
dc.subjectInterior Alaskaen_US
dc.titleRemote sensing aspen leaf miner (Phyllocnistis populiella chamb) infestations near Ester Dome in Fairbanks, Alaskaen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.type.degreemsen_US
dc.identifier.departmentDepartment of Forest Scienceen_US
refterms.dateFOA2022-03-23T21:02:35Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Smart_D_2008.pdf
Size:
7.322Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record