Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2010 Jun;186(4):795-816.
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03284.x.

Remote sensing of plant functional types

Affiliations
Free article
Review

Remote sensing of plant functional types

Susan L Ustin et al. New Phytol. 2010 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Conceptually, plant functional types represent a classification scheme between species and broad vegetation types. Historically, these were based on physiological, structural and/or phenological properties, whereas recently, they have reflected plant responses to resources or environmental conditions. Often, an underlying assumption, based on an economic analogy, is that the functional role of vegetation can be identified by linked sets of morphological and physiological traits constrained by resources, based on the hypothesis of functional convergence. Using these concepts, ecologists have defined a variety of functional traits that are often context dependent, and the diversity of proposed traits demonstrates the lack of agreement on universal categories. Historically, remotely sensed data have been interpreted in ways that parallel these observations, often focused on the categorization of vegetation into discrete types, often dependent on the sampling scale. At the same time, current thinking in both ecology and remote sensing has moved towards viewing vegetation as a continuum rather than as discrete classes. The capabilities of new remote sensing instruments have led us to propose a new concept of optically distinguishable functional types ('optical types') as a unique way to address the scale dependence of this problem. This would ensure more direct relationships between ecological information and remote sensing observations.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Abrams MD, Kubiske ME. 1990. Leaf structural characteristics of 31 hardwood and conifer tree species in central Wisconsin - influence of light regime and shade-tolerance rank. Forest Ecology and Management 31: 245-253.
    1. Agarwal D, Baldocchi D, Goode M, Humphrey M, Van Ingen C, Papale D, Reichstein M, Rodriguez M, Ryu Y, Vargas R. 2008. An evolving La Thuile Fluxnet dataset and support infrastructure. Geophysical Research Abstracts 10, EGU2008-A-04835, 2008, EGU General Assembly 2008.
    1. Anderson JE, Plourde LC, Martin ME, Braswell BH, Smith M-L, Dubayah RO, Hofton MA, Blair JB. 2008. Integrating waveform LiDAR with hyperspectral imagery for inventory of a northern temperate forest. Remote Sensing of Environment 112: 1856-1870.
    1. Anderson JR, Hardy EE, Roach JR, Witmer RE. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. US Geological Survey Professional Paper #964, revising US Geological Survey Circular 671. Washington, D.C., USA: U.S. Government Printing Office.
    1. Anderson MC, Norman JM, Kustas WP, Houborg R, Starks PJ, Agam N. 2008. A thermal-based remote sensing technique for routine mapping of land-surface carbon, water and energy fluxes from field to regional scales. Remote Sensing of Environment 112: 4227-4241.

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources