See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261322378

Journal of Remote Sensing & GIS Study on Land Use/Land Cover Change
Dynamics through Remote Sensing and GIS – A Case Study of Kamrup District,
North East India

Article · January 2014

CITATIONS READS

3 2,131

3 authors:

Jyotishman Deka Om Prakash Tripathi

Gauhati University North Eastern Regional Institute of Science and Technology (Deemed to be Univer…
18 PUBLICATIONS   109 CITATIONS    64 PUBLICATIONS   498 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Mohammed Latif Khan

Dr. Harisingh Gour University
190 PUBLICATIONS   2,353 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Forest Ecology View project

Impact of bamboo flowering on ecological and socio-economic accounts of Northeast India View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammed Latif Khan on 03 April 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Remote Sensing & GIS
ISSN: 2230-7990

www.stmjournals.com

Study on Land Use/Land Cover Change Dynamics

through Remote Sensing and GIS – A Case Study of
Kamrup District, North East India
Jyotishman Deka1*, Om Prakash Tripathi2, Mohamed Latif Khan3
1
Department of Botany, Delhi University, Delhi - 110007, India
2
Department of Forestry, NERIST, Arunachal Pradesh-7911093, India
3
Head, Department of Biotechnology, Dr. Hari Singh Gour Central University,
Madhaya Pradesh-470003, India

Abstract
The study describes the land use and land cover dynamics in Kamrup district of Assam
from 1991 to 2011 using remote sensing and Geographical Information System (GIS).
Satellite remote sensing and GIS acts as an effective approach for analyzing the
direction, rate and spatial pattern of land use dynamics. Landsat-TM and ETM+ for the
period 1991, 2001 and 2011 were used to prepare the land use/land cover (LULC) map
for different periods. The methodology employed consists of an object-oriented
classification approach for LULC mapping and a post-classification change-detection
technique for quantifying the changes for twelve major land use and land cover types.
The results indicated that severe land cover changes have occurred in built-up
(+ 45.82%), wetlands (−39.45%), croplands (+ 4.16%) and forest cover (−3.09%) areas.
Most of the areas have been compensated to expansion in areas under built-up and
cultivated lands.

Keywords: Change detection, change matrix, land-use, land-cover, accuracy

assessment

*Author for Correspondence E-mail: jyotishmandeka@gmail.com

INTRODUCTION and infrastructures, managing natural

Land use/land cover (LULC) pattern of a
region is an outcome of both natural and
socio-economic factors and their utilization by
man in time and space. Land is becoming a
scarce resource due to immense anthropogenic
pressures, e.g., agricultural expansion, forest
logging, commercial plantation, mining,
industry, urbanization, road hydropower, etc.
All of these are responsible for damaging the
land cover [1]. It has already been widely
accepted that the LULC play a very important
role at local to global scales on ecosystem
functioning, ecosystem services, and
biophysical and human variables such as
climate and government policies [2]. Hence,
land-cover classification and change detection
analysis have become one of the most
important and typical applications of remote
sensing data [3]. Over the past years, data
from earth remote sensing satellites have
become vital in mapping the earth’s features
resources and studying environmental change
[4]. Collection of remotely sensed data
facilitates the synoptic analysis of earth system
function, pattern, and change at local, regional
and global scales over time [5]. As such,
utilization of multispectral-multitemporal
remotely sensed data has been widely used to
generate thematic LULC inventories for a
range of applications including urban
planning, agricultural extension and forest
ecosystem classification [6–9]. Since 1972, the
Landsat satellites have provided repetitive,
synoptic, global coverage of high-resolution
multispectral imagery. The most popular
instrument in the early days of Landsat was
the Multi-Spectral Scanner (MSS) and later
the Thematic Mapper (TM) and the latest
satellite in the series is Enhanced Thematic
Mapper (ETM+). With repetitive satellite
coverage, the rapid evolution of computer
technology, and the integration of satellite and

JoRSG (2014) 55-62 © STM Journals 2014. All Rights Reserved Page 55
Remote Sensing and GIS – A Case Study
spatial data with geographic information
systems (GIS), and development of
environmental monitoring applications,
change-detection analysis over time have
become ubiquitous [10–13]. Remote sensing
technology also provides a cost-effective way
of assessing the land change studies at
different scales with better accuracy [14, 15].
In northeast India, only a few studies have
been attempted to monitor the land cover
change till date. Change detection and LULC
mapping of Tripura [16], forest cover mapping
of northeast India [10, 17], and habitat
mapping in Kaziranga National Park [18] were
conducted using remotely sensed data and
found it to be an effective tool. Sarma et al.
[19] made an attempt to study the LULC
change and future implication analysis in
Manas National Park, using multitemporal
satellite data. Recently, Chakraborty [20] used
moderate-resolution imaging spectro-
radiometer (MODIS) to study the change in
forest cover of Barak basin, in the northeastern
part of India. This study aims to analyze and
monitor the spatio-temporal LULC change
patterns using multitemporal Landsat
imageries from the past 20 years (1991–2011)
in Kamrup District of Assam, Northeast India.
STUDY AREA
Kamrup district is situated between 25.43° and
26.51° N latitude and between 90.36° and
92.12° E longitude and covers an area of
4337 km2 (Figure 1). The district is bounded in
the north by foot hills of Bhutan and Nalbari
district, south by the state of Meghalaya, east
by Nagaon and Darrang districts and in the
west by Goalpara and Nalbari districts. The
district falls under the lower Brahmaputra
Valley zone and it is bisected from east to west
by the river Brahmaputra. The northern
portion of the district is bifurcated by two
important rivers, the Puthimari and the Baralia
and the southern portion by many rivers
(Kulsi, Singra, Boko, Digaru, Basistha, and
Bharalu). Topologically, the district has a vast
alluvial plain towards the northern and
southern and hilly towards the eastern and
southern part with altitude range of 31 to
1117 m asl. Forest types in the study area also
change along the altitude from grasslands,
tropical to subtropical. The average annual
rainfall in the study area ranges from 1500 to
JoRSG (2014) 55-62 © STM Journals 2014. All Rights Reserved
Deka et al.
2600 mm with a mean annual temperature of 7
to 37 °C.
Fig. 1: Location of the Study Area Showing in
Landsat TM FCC (432).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Satellite Data and Image Processing
Satellite data of Landsat TM and ETM+ for
the period 1991, 2001 and 2010 were utilized
in order to understand the dynamics of LULC
change. Image preprocessing, mainly
geometric rectification and atmospheric
calibration, are two important aspects in any
remote sensing analysis. Both ETM+ and TM
image were geometrically rectified into a
Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)
projection using ground control points
collected from field data and SOI topographic
maps of 1:50000 scale. A nearest neighbor re-
sampling technique was used and rms error of
0.5 pixel was obtained during image
rectification. In radiometric correction, the DN
of the data was first converted to Top of
Atmospheric Radiance (TOA); after that the
TOA was converted to surface reflectance
[21]. Proper subset of the study area is
prepared to reduce the extra data and also the
computation time.
Object-Based Image Classification
Object-based image classification, which is
based on fuzzy logic, allows the integration of
a broad spectrum of different object features
such as spectral values, shape and texture.
Such classification techniques, incorporating
contextual and semantic information, can be
performed using not only image object
attributes, but also the relationship among
Page 56
Journal of Remote Sensing & GIS
Volume 5, Issue 1, ISSN: 2230-7990
different image objects. In this approach, a
two-step process is involved: (1) segmentation
and (2) classification [22, 23].
Segmentation is the prerequisite to object-
based classification. Segmentation is an
iterative process in which objects are created.
Segmentation subdivides the image into
groups of pixels having a similar local contrast
value [24]. A segmentation scale level setting
of 65 was found to delineate the features of
interest properly while minimizing the number
of segments. A merge-level setting of 82 was
found to be sufficient to group similar adjacent
segments without grouping dissimilar
segments. The vector layer produced during
segmentation was saved, which was further
edited based on the extensive ground truth data
for preparation of final LULC map. Features
of interest interpreted in the study were built-
up and cultivated land, mixed deciduous and
Sal forest, plantation forest and plantation,
water bodies, wetlands, wastelands,
grasslands, scrublands and barren lands.
Aforesaid methodology was adopted to
produce the LULC map of 2011(Figure 2a).
Preparation of LULC Map of 2001 and
1991
Fig. 2: Classified LULC Map of (a), 1991 (b) 2001 and (c) 2011.
JoRSG (2014) 55-62 © STM Journals 2014. All Rights Reserved
The LULC map for the year 2011 has been
used as the base map for generation of LULC
map of 2001. During the process, a copy of
this map is overlaid on the satellite data of
2001. Uniform projection parameter has been
maintained for both the vector as well as the
raster layer. The 2011 maps’ LULC class
polygons fall over the same LULC class on to
the satellite data of 2001. After careful
observation, it is found that in a few cases, the
area of the polygons of an LULC class varies.
Depending upon the variability, the LULC
polygon on the map has been edited to
generate a new set of polygons. While editing
the polygons, it has been ensured that the
changes observed are properly discernible at
1:50,000 scale. Thus, the base map polygon
was edited to create a new polygon for
different LULC categories from the image.
Hence, the edited copy is now treated as the
LULC map for 2001 (Figure 2b). Similarly,
for generation of 1991 LULC map, 2001
vector layer has been used as the base map.
After careful observation and depending upon
the variability of LULC feature on the satellite
data of 1991, the LULC polygon on the 2001
maps has been edited to generate a new set of
polygons for 1991 (Figure 2c).
Page 57
Remote Sensing and GIS – A Case Study Deka et al.

Accuracy Assessment adopted as the standard reporting convention

Accuracy was determined empirically by
selecting a sample of pixels from the image
and checking their labels against classes
determined from ground truth data. The
percentage of pixels from each class labeled in
the image correctly by the classifier was
estimated as well as the proportion of pixels
from each class erroneously labeled into every
other class. These results were expressed in a
tabular form refined to as the “error matrix”
[23].
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Accuracy Assessment
The overall accuracy provides an overall result
for the error matrix. Using error matrix to
represent accuracy is recommended and
[25]. The overall accuracies for the land cover
map of the study area in 1991, 2001 and 2011
were 83.48, 84.65 and 85.02%, respectively
(Table 1). Procedure’s accuracy of this work
revealed that the value of accuracy in 1991
land cover map ranged from the lowest 73.3 to
the highest 100%, while 69.1 to 100% for
2001 and 77.4 to 100% for 2011. User’s
accuracy of individual classes ranged from
78.2 to 100% for 1991 LULC map, 64.0 to
100% for 2001 and 72.0 to 100% for 2011.
Again, the level of accuracy (K value) was
calculated to be 0.81 and 0.82 and 0.82 in
1991, 2001 and 2011 land cover maps,
respectively, which was considered to be an
excellent result [26].

Table 1: Accuracy Assessment Statistics.

Year 1991 2001 2011
PA UA PA UA PA UA
LULC
1991 1991 2001 2001 2011 2011
BU 97.8 81.8 90.6 87.3 91.3 93.3
CL 73.3 80 69.1 85.5 83.1 83.6
BL 85.7 80 100 80 80.9 85
GL 86.6 86.7 100 66.7 80.4 94.3
MD 75.7 81.5 79.7 84.6 88.6 85.5
PL 100 100 100 100 100 100
PF 91.4 78.2 92.2 85.5 86.6 83.2
SL 100 92 95.8 92 80 90
SF 79.4 83.1 86.4 87.7 77.4 72
WB 86.2 100 89.3 100 100 100
WL 77.7 84 80 64 87.7 86
WS 76.1 80 73.7 70 79.5 86.7
KAPPA 0.81 0.82 0.82
OA 83.48% 84.65% 85.02%
PA = Procedure’s accuracy, UA = User’s accuracy, OA = Overall accuracy, BU = built-up;
CL = cultivated; BL = barren; GL = grassland; MD = mixed deciduous; PF = plantation forest;
PL = plantation; SL = scrubland; SF = Sal forest; WB = Water bodies; WL = Wetlands;
WS = wastelands.

JoRSG (2014) 55-62 © STM Journals 2014. All Rights Reserved Page 58
Journal of Remote Sensing & GIS
Volume 5, Issue 1, ISSN: 2230-7990
Area Statistics
The area statistics of LULC maps is presented
in Figure 3. In 1991, cultivation seems to be
practiced at large scale, i.e., 1592.1 km2
(36.71%) followed by mixed deciduous forest
(1262.5 km2) and household plantation or
plantation forest of 710.15 km2. Sal forest
occupies only an area of 161.65 km2 (3.73%);
however, mixed deciduous and Sal forest
together contribute to 1424.2 km2 (32.84%) of
the total area. Water bodies cover a
considerable area (220.2 km2) in the study site
mainly due to the presence of the mighty river
Brahmaputra which flows through the middle
of the district. Scrubland is represented by
11.3 km2 (0.26%) only in the study area.
During 2001, cultivated land still occupied the
maximum area (1619.4 km2, 37.34%) and
resulted in an increase of 27.2 km2 (0.63%)
while mixed forest was co-dominant land
cover (Figure 2). Mixed deciduous forest and
Sal forest together resulted into decline of
31.2 km2 between 1991 and 2001, while area
under scrubland increased by 0.03% of the
total area. LULC distribution pattern for the
year 2011 follows the similar pattern to that of
1991 and 2001. There was an increase of 66.4
and 49.8 km2 in cultivated and built-up areas,
respectively in the last 20 years. Again, mixed
deciduous forest occupies an area of
1210.8 km2 (27.92%) with a decrement of
28.2 km2 (0.65%). However, area under forest
and barren land reduced by 32.9 km2 and
barren land by 65.8 km2, respectively. There
was also slight increase or decrease in other
LULC in the study area in the past 20 years.
Fig. 3: Area Statistics of LULC in 1991, 2001
and 2011.
JoRSG (2014) 55-62 © STM Journals 2014. All Rights Reserved
BU=Built-up; CL = Cultivated; BL = Barren;
GL = Grassland; MD = Mixed deciduous;
PF = Plantation forest; PL = Plantation;
SL = Scrubland; SF = Sal forest; WB = Water
bodies; WL = Wetlands; WS = Wastelands.
LULC Change and Land Migration
from 1991 to 2011
In order to understand as to how various
LULC classes of the study area have changed
over two decades, change detection matrix for
the time period between 1991 and 2011 was
produced both on decadal and bi-decadal
periods (Tables 2–4). Change matrix on
decadal period was produced for time between
1991 and 2001 and between 2001 and 2011
while for the bi-decadal change matrix time
period is between 1991 and 2011. It shows that
the built-up area has increased by 19.5 km2
between 1991 and 2001 and by 30.3 km2
between 2001 and 2011. The rate of change
has been different during the two decades. The
built-up has experienced more increase in the
recent past and resulted altogether 45.8%
increase in area since 1991. Of the total
migrated land into built-up from 1991 to 2011,
mixed deciduous forest was encroached to a
large extent (23.6 km2) followed by cultivated
land, wasteland, plantation forest, wastelands,
etc. Built-up expansion has been largely driven
by population growth and economic
development [27]. Substantial growth of built-
up areas results in significant decrease in the
area under water bodies, cultivated land, forest
cover and wetlands [28].
The area under cultivated land has increased
by 27.3 km2 between 1991 and 2001 and by
39 km2 between 2001 and 2011. Almost
126.5 km2 of land from other land use classes
is damaged and at the same time 60.1 km2 of
cultivated land is migrated to other land use
classes. Of the total gained area, forest
contributed almost 32.19%, while 43.2% was
contributed by the wastelands and wetland
areas. Total conversion of water bodies and
wetlands to cultivated land was found to be
52.3 km2 (Table 4).
The decline in mixed deciduous forest was
variable between 1991 and 2001 (23.5 km2)
and between 2001 and 2011 (28.2 km2). Bi-
decadal change matrix from 1991 to 2011
Page 59
Remote Sensing and GIS – A Case Study Deka et al.

shows migration of deciduous forest land to
built-up and cultivated land. Similarly, decline
in Sal forest was also observed. Mixed
deciduous and Sal forest both show a
decrement of 0.54 and 0.18% of the total area,
respectively. The relation between agricultural
and build-up expansion and the forest cover
decrease was found to be consistent as was
also reported elsewhere by different workers
[27, 29, 30].
Plantation forest increased by 6.6 km2 between
1991 and 2001, while it decreased by 8.5 km2
between 2001 and 2011. Of the total loss,
majority (92.02%) of the area has migrated to
cultivated and built-up areas only and
remaining has migrated to water bodies,
grasslands and barren lands. Of the total
gained areas, about 92% was contributed only
by mixed deciduous and Sal forest and rest
from cultivated areas. Plantation areas remain
almost stable throughout the period. Scrubland
increased by 13.2 km2 in 2001 as compared to
1991 while it further increased by 2.1 km2 in
2011.Wastelands showed a sharp decline from
1991 to 2011. During 1991 to 2001, there has
been a net decline of 11.7 km2 which further
decreased by 10.9 km2 between 2001 and
2011. Change matrix between 1991 and 2011
shows that of the total area migrated, 18.3 km2
was converted into cultivated area and 7.3 km2
to built-up area. The remaining areas were
shifted to water bodies (2.8 km2), barren lands
(7.8 km2) and plantation forests (2.8 km2).
Chaudhary et al. [31] have also reported that
increase in settlement and agricultural lands
are the major cause of wasteland decrease.
Area under water bodies has decreased by
16.6 km2 from 1991 to 2001 and increased by
14.5 km2 from 2001 to 2011. Altogether, on
bi-decadal basis it decreased by 2.1 km2.
Migration pattern to and from water bodies of
the study area also resulted in a similar pattern
to that of other land use classes. During 1991
to 2001, 67.8 km2 of water bodies have
migrated to other land use classes. Similarly,
wetland showed a marked decrease in both the
periods. During 1991 to 2011, wetland has
decreased by 29.8 km2. Of the total areas lost,
almost 83.2% areas are diverted to cultivated
lands and 7.04% to built-up areas. Degradation
and loss of wetlands are directly linked to
rapid urbanization, illegal settlements and
cropland expansion [32]. Increase in grassland
cover (153.5%) and decrease in barren land
(61.0%) during the period can be attributed to
change in the course of river channel in
temporal scale. Hence in the present study,
these two land covers have been given less
attention.

Table 2: Change Matrix between Time Period 1991 and 2001.

LULC BU CL BL GL MD PF PL SL SF WB WL WS Total area
1991 (km2)

BU 108.7 - - - - - - - - - - - 108.7
CL 3.6 1549.7 15.8 8.9 0.2 2.7 - - 0.1 11.2 - - 1592.2
BL - 8.4 51.7 13.0 0.3 - - - - 29.7 - 4.7 107.8
GL - 3.7 8.4 12.6 - 0.2 - - - 6.2 - - 31.1
MD 11.7 5.6 - - 1238.1 5.6 - 1.3 - - - 0.2 1262.6
PF 1.2 3.9 - 0.3 - 703.6 - - - 1.0 - - 710.2
PL - - - - - - 11.8 - - - - - 11.8
SL - - - - - - - 11.4 - - - - 11.4
SF - 3.4 - - - 3.7 0.7 - 153.9 - - - 161.6
WB 0.1 14.0 41.7 6.6 0.4 0.6 - - - 152.4 1.4 3.1 220.3
WL 1.3 15.3 2.4 0.4 - 0.2 - - - 1.9 54.1 - 75.6
WS 1.7 15.5 1.2 - - 0.1 - - - 1.2 - 24.6 44.3
Total 128.3 1619.4 121.2 41.9 1239.0 716.8 12.5 12.7 154.0 203.6 55.6 32.6 4337
area
2001
(km2)

JoRSG (2014) 55-62 © STM Journals 2014. All Rights Reserved Page 60
Journal of Remote Sensing & GIS
Volume 5, Issue 1, ISSN: 2230-7990

Table 3: Change Matrix between Time Period 2001 and 2011.

LULC BU CL BL GL MD PF PL SL SF WB WL WS Total
area
2001
(km2)
BU 128.3 - - - - - - - - - - - 128.3
CL 9.5 1593.9 0.9 2.7 - - - - - 11.4 - 1.2 1619.5
BL - 16.8 26.2 34.8 - - - - - 43.4 - - 121.2

GL - 1.6 1.7 35.6 - 0.3 - - - 2.7 - - 41.9

MD 11.4 9.2 - - 1210.8 4.5 - 3.1 - - - - 1239.0

PF 1.2 12.9 - - - 702.7 - - - - - - 716.8

PL - - - - - - 12.5 - - - - - 12.5
SL 1.0 - - - - - - 11.8 - - - - 12.7
SF - 4.0 - - - 0.7 - - 149.2 - - - 154.0

WB 0.4 7.4 13.3 24.2 - - - - - 158.4 - - 203.6

WL 0.9 8.9 - - - - - - - - 45.8 - 55.6
WS 5.9 3.9 - - - - - - - 2.3 - 20.5 32.6
Total
area 2011 158.5 1658.6 42.0 97.2 1210.8 708.3 12.5 14.9 149.2 218.2 45.8 21.6 4337
(km2)

Table 4: Change Matrix between Time Period 1991 and 2011.

LULC BU CL BL GL MD PF PL SL SF WB WL WS Total area
1991 (km2)
BU 108.7 - - - - - - - - - - - 108.7
CL 13.0 1532.0 9.1 12.3 0.2 2.7 - - 0.1 21.5 - 1.2 1592.2
BL - 14.2 14.8 40.4 0.3 - - - - 34.8 - 3.4 107.8
GL - 2.7 2.8 18.4 - 0.6 - - - 6.6 - - 31.1
MD 23.6 14.8 - - 1209.9 10.1 - 4.2 - - - - 1262.6
PF 2.4 16.7 0.2 0.3 - 689.6 - - - 0.9 - - 710.2
PL - - - - - - 11.8 - - - - - 11.8
SL 0.7 - - - - - - 10.7 - - - - 11.4
SF - 7.4 - - - 4.4 0.7 - 149.1 - - - 161.6
WB 0.5 27.5 12.6 25.4 0.4 0.6 - - - 149.7 1.4 2.2 220.3
WL 2.1 24.8 1.9 0.4 - 0.2 - - - 1.9 44.4 - 75.6
WS 7.4 18.4 0.6 - - 0.1 - - - 2.8 - 15.0 44.3
Total 158.5 1658.5 42.0 97.2 1210.8 708.3 12.5 14.9 149.2 218.2 45.8 21.6 4337
area
2011
(km2)
BU = Built-up; CL = Cultivated; BL = Barren; GL = Grassland; MD = Mixed deciduous;
PF = Plantation forest; PL = Plantation; SL = Scrubland; SF = Sal forest; WB = Water Bodies;
WL = Wetlands; WS = Wastelands.

CONCLUSIONS to 2011. The analyses also provide valuable

The study has confirmed that image objects in
object-oriented post-classification carry more
information and are more suitable as
ecological units for change-detection purposes.
LULC change detection analysis derived from
Landsat imagery has provided an accurate
status of the study area during the period 1991
insight into the extent and nature of changes
that have taken place in the past.
Land use activities were more towards
agricultural encroachments and built-up
expansions at the cost of forest cover and
wetlands. The results indicated that severe
land cover changes occurred in built-up areas

JoRSG (2014) 55-62 © STM Journals 2014. All Rights Reserved Page 61
 Remote Sensing and GIS – A Case Study
(+ 45.82%), wetlands (−39.45%) and
scrublands (+ 30.70%) areas have been
common. Relative to highest area cover and
increase of + 4.16% in croplands over the
period indicated that agriculture is an age-old
practice in the district. Further, depletion of
forest cover (−3.09%) revealed that it was not
severely affected, except in few areas which
have compensated to expansion of built-up
areas and cultivated lands.
This study also highlights the importance of
digital change detection in apprehending the
environmental situation in Kamrup district of
Assam. Further research would be important to
understand more about variations in land cover
across the district, as well as the conversion
and modification mechanisms of the above
classified land use/land cover types in order to
maintain a proper ecological balance.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors are grateful to GLCF for free
distribution of the Landsat imageries. The
authors are also grateful to the Department of
Forestry, NERIST, for facilitating remote
sensing and GIS laboratory.
REFERENCES
1. Geist HJ, Lambin EF. BioScience. 2002;
52: 143–50p.
2. Meyer WB, Turner BL II. Changes in
Land Use and Land Cover: A Global
Perspective. Cambridge University Press;
1994.
3. Jensen J, Cowen D. Photogramm Eng
Rem S. 1999; 65: 611–22p.
4. Arimoro AO, et al. AJEAM/RAGEE.
2002; 4: 16–27p.
5. Rajeshwari D. Journal of Human
Ecology. 2006; 20: 269–77p.
6. Ulaby FT. IEEE Transactions on
Geoscience and Remote Sensing. 1982;
20: 518–28p.
7. Khorram S. IEEE Transactions on
Geoscience and Remote Sensing. 1987;
25: 238–43p.
8. Haack BN. Remote Sens Environ. 1987;
21: 201–13p.
9. Solberg AHS. IEEE Transactions on
Geoscience and Remote Sensing. 1994;
32: 768–78p.
JoRSG (2014) 55-62 © STM Journals 2014. All Rights Reserved
View publication stats
Deka et al.
10. Singh A. Int J Remote Sens. 1989; 10:
989–1003p.
11. Jensen JR. Introductory Digital Image
Processing: A Remote Sensing
Perspective. 2nd Edn. Upper Saddle
River: Prentice Hall; 1996.
12. Macleod, Congalton. Photogramm Eng
Rem S. 1998; 64: 207–16p.
13. Ryznar RM, Wagner TW. J Am Plann
Assoc. 2001; 67: 327–36p.
14. Kachhwaha TS. Proceedings of the Sixth
Asian Conference on Remote Sensing.
Hyderabad, India. 1985.
15. Lunetta RS, et al. Remote Sens Environ.
2002; 82: 258–70p.
16. Gautam NC, Chennaiah GC. Int J Remote
Sens. 1985; 6: 517–28p.
17. Lele NV, et al. Indian Journal of
Forestry. 2005; 28: 217–24p.
18. Kushwaha SPS, et al. Tigerpaper. 2000;
27: 9–17p.
19. Sarma PK, et al. Curr Sci India. 2008;
95: 23–227p.
20. Chakraborty K. Curr Sci India. 2009; 96:
1236–42p.
21. Chavez PS. Photogramm Eng Rem S.
1996; 62: 1025–36p.
22. Gitas IZ, et al. Remote Sens Environ.
2004; 92: 409–13p.
23. Lillesand TM. Remote Sensing and Image
Interpretation. 111 River Street,
Hoboken: NJ. John Wiley and Sons, Inc;
2008.
24. Lewinski S, Zaremski K. Miscellanea
Geographica. 2004; 11: 349–58p.
25. Congalton R. Int J Remote Sens. 1991;
37: 35–46p.
26. Landis JR, Koch GG. Biometrics. 1977;
3: 159–74p.
27. Fanan U, et al. Journal of Ecology and
Natural Environment. 2011; 3: 1–10p.
28. Dewan AM, Yamaguchi Y. Applied
Geography. 2009; 29: 390–401p.
29. Mengistu DA, Salami AT. African
Journal of Environmental Science and
Technology. 2007; 1: 99–109p.
30. Diallo Y, et al. Journal of American
Science. 2009; 5: 157–66p.
31. Chaudhary BS, et al. Journal of Human
Ecology. 2008; 23: 243–252p.
32. Deka J, et al. Journal of Wetland
Ecology. 2011; 5: 40–47p.
Page 62