Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 169

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effects of minimum mapping unit on land cover data spatial configuration and composition

Saura, S.·2002·International Journal of Remote Sensing

Abstract

A key issue when generating a land cover map from remotely sensed data is the selection of the minimum mapping unit (MMU) to be employed, which determines the extent of detail contained in the map. This study analyses the effects of MMU in land cover spatial configuration and composition, by using simulated landscape thematic patterns generated by the Modified Random Clusters method. This approach allows a detailed control of the different factors influencing landscape metrics behaviour, as well as taking into account a wide range of land cover pattern possibilities. Land cover classes that are sparse and fragmented can be considerably misrepresented in the final map when increasing MMU, while the classes that occupy a large percentage of map area tend to become more dominant. Mean Patch Size and Number of Patches are very poor indicators of pattern fragmentation in this context. In contrast, Landscape Division (LD) and related indices (Splitting Index and Effective Mesh Size) are clearly suitable for comparing the fragmentation of landscape data with different MMUs. We suggest that the Mean Shape Index, the most sensitive to MMU of those considered in this study, should not be used in further landscape studies if land cover data with different MMU or patch size frequency distribution are to be compared. In contrast, the Area Weighted Mean Shape Index presents a very robust behaviour, which advocates the use of this index for the quantification of the overall irregularity of patch shapes in landscape spatial patterns. The results presented allow quantifying the biases resulting from selecting a certain MMU when generating a land cover dataset. In general, a bigger MMU implies underestimating landscape diversity and fragmentation, as well as over-estimating animal population dispersal success. Guidelines are provided for the proper use and comparison of spatial pattern indices measured in maps with different MMUs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01431160110114493

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 169

Metadata

Authors
Saura, S.
Venue
International Journal of Remote Sensing
Published
2002-01
Volume
23
Issue
22
Pages
4853-4880
ISSN
  • 0143-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-5901
OpenAlex
W1986391213
Cited by
169
References
0
FWCI
3.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of minimum mapping unit on land cover data spatial configuration and composition. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01431160110114493
The paper
Saura, S. (2002). Effects of minimum mapping unit on land cover data spatial configuration and composition. International Journal of Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160110114493

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.