Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 381

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Using UAV-Based Photogrammetry and Hyperspectral Imaging for Mapping Bark Beetle Damage at Tree-Level

Open access
Näsi, Roope, Honkavaara, Eija, Lyytikäinen-Saarenmaa, Päivi, Blomqvist, Minna, Litkey, Paula, Hakala, Teemu, Viljanen, Niko, Kantola, Tuula, Tanhuanpää, Topi, Holopainen, Markus·2015·Remote Sensing

Abstract

Low-cost, miniaturized hyperspectral imaging technology is becoming available for small unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) platforms. This technology can be efficient in carrying out small-area inspections of anomalous reflectance characteristics of trees at a very high level of detail. Increased frequency and intensity of insect induced forest disturbance has established a new demand for effective methods suitable in mapping and monitoring tasks. In this investigation, a novel miniaturized hyperspectral frame imaging sensor operating in the wavelength range of 500–900 nm was used to identify mature Norway spruce (Picea abies L. Karst.) trees suffering from infestation, representing a different outbreak phase, by the European spruce bark beetle (Ips typographus L.). We developed a new processing method for analyzing spectral characteristic for high spatial resolution photogrammetric and hyperspectral images in forested environments, as well as for identifying individual anomalous trees. The dense point clouds, measured using image matching, enabled detection of single trees with an accuracy of 74.7%. We classified the trees into classes of healthy, infested and dead, and the results were promising. The best results for the overall accuracy were 76% (Cohen’s kappa 0.60), when using three color classes (healthy, infested, dead). For two color classes (healthy, dead), the best overall accuracy was 90% (kappa 0.80). The survey methodology based on high-resolution hyperspectral imaging will be of a high practical value for forest health management, indicating a status of bark beetle outbreak in time.

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/rs71115467

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 381

Metadata

Authors
Näsi, R., Honkavaara, E., Lyytikäinen-Saarenmaa, P., Blomqvist, M., Litkey, P., Hakala, T., Viljanen, N., Kantola, T., Tanhuanpää, T., & Holopainen, M.
Venue
Remote Sensing
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2015-11-18
Volume
7
Issue
11
Pages
15467-15493
ISSN
2072-4292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2178471458
Cited by
381
References
1
FWCI
26.81
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: Using UAV-Based Photogrammetry and Hyperspectral Imaging for Mapping Bark Beetle Damage at Tree-Level. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/rs71115467
The paper
Näsi, R., Honkavaara, E., Lyytikäinen-Saarenmaa, P., Blomqvist, M., Litkey, P., Hakala, T., Viljanen, N., Kantola, T., Tanhuanpää, T., & Holopainen, M. (2015). Using UAV-Based Photogrammetry and Hyperspectral Imaging for Mapping Bark Beetle Damage at Tree-Level. Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs71115467

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.