|Title||Yukon River Basin ecosystem performance anomaly mapping|
|Download||Download (whole publication) |
|Author||Murnaghan, K; Brisco, B; Wylie, B; Rover, J; Bliss, N|
|Source||Permafrost science at ESS: a workshop on GSC/CCRS scientific opportunities; by Wolfe, S A (ed.); Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 6531, 2010 p. 21; 1 CD-ROM, https://doi.org/10.4095/263378 (Open Access)|
|Publisher||Natural Resources Canada|
|Meeting||Workshop on GSC/CCRS Scientific Opportunities; Ottawa, ON; CA; November 26, 2009|
|Media||CD-ROM; on-line; digital|
|Related||This publication is contained in Wolfe, S A; (2010).
Permafrost science at ESS: a workshop on GSC/CCRS scientific opportunities, Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 6531|
|Area||Yukon River Basin; Alaska; Canada; United States|
|Lat/Long WENS||-152.0000 -136.0000 68.0000 64.0000|
|Subjects||surficial geology/geomorphology; environmental geology; permafrost; freezing ground; ground ice; ground temperatures; terrain sensitivity; terrain types; terrain analysis; arctic geology; modelling;
ecosystems; mapping techniques; environmental impacts; environmental studies|
|Released||2010 01 01|
|Abstract||The Yukon River Basin (YRB) is contained in Alaska, Yukon Territory and British Columbia. Under Annex 17 of the MOU between NRCan/CCRS and USGS/EROS annual maps of ecosystem performance anomalies were
produced. Growing season average Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) was produced from MODIS with 250 m resolution for years 2000-2005 and used as a proxy for ecosystem performance. A regression tree model for site potential was generated
using permafrost (Ice Content, Extent and Landform), surface geology, elevation, slope/aspect, Compound Topographic Index (CTI), ecoregions, clusters, solar radiation, and Annual Moisture Index (AMI). A performance model included the site potential
model and weather data including maximum temperature, minimum temperature, precipitation, and growing degree days for four periods each year. The predominant land cover type, boreal forest, was used, and excluded areas burnt in the previous 30 years.
The model was trained using over 15,000 points from different years and different productivities. The residual between measured performance and the modelled performance was calculated. The top 10% was classified as over performing and the bottom 10%
was classified as underperforming. An anomaly map was generated for each year of the study. Comparison of forest fire perimeters and detected anomalies show good correspondence. Further work is required to identify the cause of additional anomalies.
Possible other causes include insect infestation, land cover change, or changes to drainage conditions from permafrost degradation. The annual anomaly maps were analyzed to find persistent or emerging over and under performance areas.|