Effect of Terrestrial LiDAR Point Sampling Density in Ephemeral Gully Characterization

Henrique G. Momm, Ronald L. Bingner, Robert R. Wells, Seth M. Dabney, Lyle D. Frees

Department of Geosciences, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, USA.
National Sedimentation Laboratory, United States Department of Agriculture—Agricultural Research Service, Oxford, USA.
United States Department of Agriculture—Natural Resources Conservation Service, Salina, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ojmh.2013.31006                

Abstract

Gully erosion can account for significant volumes of sediment exiting agricultural landscapes, but is difficult to monitor and quantify its evolution with traditional surveying technology. Scientific investigations of gullies depend on accurate and detailed topographic information to understand and evaluate the complex interactions between field topography and gully evolution. Detailed terrain representations can be produced by new technologies such as terrestrial LiDAR systems. These systems are capable of collecting information with a wide range of ground point sampling densities as a result of operator controlled factors. Increasing point density results in richer datasets at a cost of increased time needed to complete field surveys. In large research watersheds, with hundreds of sites being monitored, data collection can become costly and time consuming. In this study, the effect of point sampling density on the capability to collect topographic information was investigated at individual gully scale. This was performed through the utilization of semi-variograms to produce overall guiding principles for multi-temporal gully surveys based on various levels of laser sampling points and relief variation (low, moderate, and high). Results indicated the existence of a point sampling density threshold that produces little or no additional topographic information when exceeded. A reduced dataset was created using the density thresholds and compared to the original dataset with no major discrepancy. Although variations in relief and soil roughness can lead to different point sampling density requirements, the outcome of this study serves as practical guidance for future field surveys of gully evolution and erosion.

Keywords

Ephemeral Gully; Ground-Based LiDAR; Soil Erosion; Point Sampling Density; Remote Sensing

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	W. H. Wischmeier and D. D. Smith, “Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses,” Agricultural Research Service, Washington DC, 1978, 58 p.
[2]	“CREAMS: A Field-Scale Model for Chemicals, Runoff, and Erosion from Agricultural Management Systems,” In: W. G. Knisel, Ed., USDA Conservation Research Report, No. 26, 1980, p. 640.
[3]	K. G. Renard, G. R. Foster, G. A. Weesies and J. P. Porter, “RUSLE: Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation,” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, Vol. 46, No. 1, 1991, pp. 30-33.
[4]	R. L. Bingner, R. R. Wells, H. G. Momm, F. D. Theurer and L. D. Frees, “Development and Application of Gully Erosion Components within the USDA AnnAGNPS Watershed Model for Precision Conservation,” Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Precision Agriculture, Denver, 18-21 July 2010, pp. 18-21.
[5]	Soil Science Society of America, “Glossary of Soil Terms,” Soil Science Society of America, Madison, 2001, p. 134.
[6]	R. M. B. Quadros, C. Wisneiwski and E. Passos, “Modelagem de Canais Incisivos—Revisao,” RA'EGA, Vol. 8, pp. 69-81. (Portuguese)
[7]	J. Casali, J. Lopez and J. Giráldez, “Ephemeral Gully Erosion in Southern Navarra,” CATENA, Vol. 36, No. 1-2, 1999, pp. 65-84.
[8]	D. Woodward, “Method to Predict Cropland Ephemeral Gully Erosion,” CATENA, Vol. 37, No. 3-4, 1999, pp. 393-399.
[9]	O. Cerdan, V. Souchère, V. Lecomte, A. Couturier and Y. Le Bissonnais, “Incorporating Soil Surface Crusting Processes in an Expert-Based Runoff Model: Sealing and Transfer by Runoff and Erosion Related to Agricultural Management,” CATENA, Vol. 46, No. 2-3, 2002, pp. 189-205.
[10]	C. Parker, C. Thorne, R. Bingner, R. Wells and D. Wilcox, “Automated Mapping of Potential for Ephemeral Gully Formation in Agricultural Watersheds,” National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, 2007.
[11]	T. Schmid, H. Schack-Kirchner and E. Hildebrand, “A Case Study of Terrestrial Laser-Scanning in Erosion Research: Calculation of Roughness Indices and Volume Balance at a Logged Forest Site,” International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol. 36, No. 8, 2004, pp. 114-118.
[12]	R. Perroy, B. Bookhagen, G. Asner and O. Chadwick, “Comparison of Gully Erosion Estimates Using Airborne and Ground-Based LiDAR on Santa Cruz Island, California,” Geomorphology, Vol. 118, No. 3-4, 2010, pp. 288-300. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.01.009
[13]	L. A. James, D. G. Watson and W. F. Hansen, “Using LiDAR Data to Map Gullies and Headwater Streams under Forest Canopy: South Carolina,” CATENA, Vol. 71, No. 1, 2007, pp. 132-144. doi:10.1016/j.catena.2006.10.010
[14]	B. D. Collins, K. M. Brown and H. C. Fairley, “Evaluation of Terrestrial LIDAR for Monitoring Geomorphic Change at Archeological Sites in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona,” U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report, 2008, 60 p. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1384/
[15]	K. H. Hsiao, J. K. Liu, M. F. Yu and Y. H. Tseng, “Change Detection of Landslide Terrains Using Ground-Based LiDAR Data,” 20th ISPRS Congress, Istanbul, 12-23 July 2004.
[16]	J. J. Roering, L. L. Stimely, B. H. Mackey and D. A. Schmidt, “Using DInSAR, Airborne LiDAR, and Archival Air Photos to Quantify Landsliding and Sediment Transport,” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 36, No. 19, 2009, Article ID: L19402.
[17]	A. Wehr and U. Lohr, “Airborne Laser Scanning—An Introduction and Overview,” ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Vol. 54, No. 2-3, 1999, pp. 68-82. doi:10.1016/S0924-2716(99)00011-8
[18]	R. M. Measures, “Laser Remote Sensing Fundamentals and Applications,” John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, 1984.
[19]	S. Wu, J. Li and G. H. Huang, “A Study on DEM-Derived Primary Topography Attributes for Hydrologic Applications: Sensitivity to Elevation Data Resolution,” Applied Geography, Vol. 28, No. 3, 2008, pp. 210-233. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2008.02.006
[20]	Q. Guo, W. Li, H. Yu and O. Alvarez, “Effects of Topographic Variability and Lidar Sampling Density on Several DEM Interpolation Methods,” Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, Vol. 76, No. 6, 2010, pp. 701-712.
[21]	P. I. Curran and P. M. Atkinson, “Geostatistis and Remote Sensing,” Progress in Physical Geography, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1998, pp. 61-78.
[22]	P. K. Kitanidis, “Introduction to Geostatistics: Application in Hydrogeology,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.
[23]	I. Clark, “Practical Geostatistics,” Applied Science, New York, 1979.
[24]	C. E. Woodcock, A. H. Strahler and D. L. B. Jupp, “The Use of Variograms in Remote Sensing: II. Real Digital Images,” Remote Sensing of Environment, Vol. 25, No. 3, 1988, pp. 349-379. doi:10.1016/0034-4257(88)90109-5
[25]	J. C. Davis, “Statistics and Data Analysis in Geology,” John Wiley and Sons, New York, 2002.
[26]	E. H. Isaaks and R. M. Srivastava, “Applied Geostatistics,” Oxford University Press, New York, 1989.
[27]	S. Soudarissanane, R. Lindenbergh, M. Menenti, P. Teunissen and T. Delft, “Incidence Angle Influence on the Quality of Terrestrial Laser Scanning Points,” Proceedings ISPRS Workshop Laser Scanning, 1-2 September 2009, Paris, pp. 183-188.
[28]	C. V. Deutsch and A. G. Journel, “GSLIB: Geostatistical Software Library and User’s Guide,” Oxford University Press, New York, 1998, 369 p.
[29]	K. Levenberg, “A Method for the Solution of Certain Non-Linear Problems in Least Squares,” The Quarterly of Applied Mathematics, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1944, pp. 164-168.