Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 706

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Global Mangrove Watch—A New 2010 Global Baseline of Mangrove Extent

Open access
Bunting, Pete, Rosenqvist, Ake, Lucas, Richard M., Rebelo, Lisa-Maria, Hilarides, Lammert, Thomas, Nathan, Hardy, Andy, Itoh, Takuya, Shimada, Masanobu, Finlayson, C. Max·2018·Remote Sensing

Abstract

This study presents a new global baseline of mangrove extent for 2010 and has been released as the first output of the Global Mangrove Watch (GMW) initiative. This is the first study to apply a globally consistent and automated method for mapping mangroves, identifying a global extent of 137,600 km 2 . The overall accuracy for mangrove extent was 94.0% with a 99% likelihood that the true value is between 93.6–94.5%, using 53,878 accuracy points across 20 sites distributed globally. Using the geographic regions of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, Asia has the highest proportion of mangroves with 38.7% of the global total, while Latin America and the Caribbean have 20.3%, Africa has 20.0%, Oceania has 11.9%, North America has 8.4% and the European Overseas Territories have 0.7%. The methodology developed is primarily based on the classification of ALOS PALSAR and Landsat sensor data, where a habitat mask was first generated, within which the classification of mangrove was undertaken using the Extremely Randomized Trees classifier. This new globally consistent baseline will also form the basis of a mangrove monitoring system using JAXA JERS-1 SAR, ALOS PALSAR and ALOS-2 PALSAR-2 radar data to assess mangrove change from 1996 to the present. However, when using the product, users should note that a minimum mapping unit of 1 ha is recommended and that the error increases in regions of disturbance and where narrow strips or smaller fragmented areas of mangroves are present. Artefacts due to cloud cover and the Landsat-7 SLC-off error are also present in some areas, particularly regions of West Africa due to the lack of Landsat-5 data and persistence cloud cover. In the future, consideration will be given to the production of a new global baseline based on 10 m Sentinel-2 composites.

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 · 10.3390/rs10101669

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 23 references

Cited by

See all 706

Metadata

Authors
Bunting, P., Rosenqvist, A., Lucas, R. M., Rebelo, L.-M., Hilarides, L., Thomas, N., Hardy, A., Itoh, T., Shimada, M., & Finlayson, C. M.
Venue
Remote Sensing
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2018-10-22
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
1669
ISSN
2072-4292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2896252587
Cited by
706
References
23
FWCI
39.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: The Global Mangrove Watch—A New 2010 Global Baseline of Mangrove Extent. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/rs10101669
The paper
Bunting, P., Rosenqvist, A., Lucas, R. M., Rebelo, L.-M., Hilarides, L., Thomas, N., Hardy, A., Itoh, T., Shimada, M., & Finlayson, C. M. (2018). The Global Mangrove Watch—A New 2010 Global Baseline of Mangrove Extent. Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10101669

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.