Global food and water security analysis and management require precise and accurate global cropland-extent maps. Existing maps have limitations, in that they are (1) mapped using coarse-resolution remote-sensing data, resulting in the lack of precise mapping location of croplands and their accuracies; (2) derived by collecting and collating national statistical data that are often subjective, leading to substantial uncertainties in cropland-area estimates, as well as their locations; and (3) extracted from one or more classes of a land use–land cover product in which cropland classes are not the focus of mapping, leading to their mixing with other classes and creating significant errors of omission and commission. These limitations can be overcome by producing high-resolution cropland-extent maps using satellite-sensor data, such as Landsat 30-m resolution or higher. The most fundamental cropland product is the high-resolution cropland-extent map because all higher level cropland products, such as crop-watering method (that is, whether crops are irrigated or rainfed), crop types, cropping intensities, cropland fallows, crop productivity, and crop-water productivity, are dependent on a precise and accurate cropland-extent product.Given these realities, the overarching goal of this study was to produce a Landsat satellite-derived global cropland-extent product at 30-m resolution. The work, which involved a paradigm shift in how global cropland-extent maps are produced, involved the following five key steps: (1) petabyte-scale computing that involved multiyear, 8- to 16-day, time-series Landsat 30-m resolution data for the global land surface; (2) composition of analysis-ready data (ARD) cubes; (3) creation of a large global-reference data hub for machine learning; (4) use of multiple machine-learning algorithms (MLAs) by writing software and computing in the cloud; and (5) Google Earth Engine (GEE) cloud computing.The five key steps involved nine distinct phases. First, the world was segmented into 74 agroecological zones (AEZs). Second, Landsat 8- to 16-day data were used to time-composite 10-band (blue, green, red, near-infrared, short-wave infrared band 1, short-wave infrared band 2, thermal infrared, enhanced vegetation index, normalized difference water index, and normalized difference vegetation index) Landsat 30-m resolution data cubes for every 2- to 4-month time period during 3- to 4-year periods (stated as nominal-year 2015 or, simply, 2015), along with two additional 30-m resolution bands (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission elevation, and slope) in each of the 74 AEZs. Third, more than 100,000 reference-training data samples were collected using ground data (some of which were collected using a mobile application), as well as submeter- to 5-m-resolution, very high-resolution imagery sourced from other reliable sources. Fourth, reference-training data were used to create a knowledge base for separating cropland from noncropland. Fifth, MLAs such as the pixel-based supervised random forest and support-vector machines were written on the GEE using Python and JavaScript. Sixth, object-based recursive hierarchical segmentation algorithm was used, in addition to MLAs, to overcome uncertainties. Seventh, MLAs used the knowledge base to classify and separate cropland from noncropland. Eighth, accuracy assessment was conducted by generating error matrices for each of the 74 AEZs using 19,171 independent validation-data samples. Ninth, cropland areas were computed for all countries of the world and compared with United Nation’s (UN’s) Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and other national statistics.The outcome was a Landsat-derived global cropland-extent product at 30-m resolution (GCEP30), which has an overall accuracy of 91.7 percent. For the cropland class, producer’s accuracy was 83.4 percent, and user’s accuracy was 78.3 percent. GCEP30 calculated (using direct pixel count) the global net-cropland area (GNCA) for the year 2015 as 1.873 billion hectares (~12.6 percent of the Earth’s terrestrial area). The continental cropland distribution as a percentage of GNCA was Asia, 33 percent; Europe, 25.5 percent; Africa, 16.7 percent; North America, 14.4 percent; South America, 8.1 percent; and Australia and Oceania, 2.4 percent. The worldwide cropland areas in GCEP30 for 2015 were higher by 236 to 299 million hectares (Mha) compared to national statistics reported elsewhere for the same year (for example, in Food and Agriculture Organization’s corporate statistical database [FAOSTAT] and in the monthly irrigated and rainfed crop areas [MIRCA] database). The global cropland area reported for 2015 increased by 344 Mha (22.5 percent), compared to the year 2000. During the same period (2000–2015), the world’s population increased by 20 percent. Whereas some of these areal increases are real increases in cropland areas, others are due to the types of data, methods, and approaches used. Using the highest known resolution (compared to previous coarse-resolution global products) enabled this study to capture fragmented croplands. Coarse-resolution data compute areas on the basis of subpixels, which, for a large proportion of certain land use–land cover classes, will show only a certain percentage of the total pixel area as actual area. Subpixel areas can lead to substantial uncertainties in area computation, as determining the exact fraction of cropland areas within a coarse-resolution pixel is resource intensive and subject to errors. Other innovations in GCEP30 include reference-data hubs, machine learning, and cloud computing.Cropland areas in 214 countries, territories, departments, and regions were calculated for the year 2015 using GCEP30, on the basis of UN’s global administrative unit layers (GAUL) boundaries. The 10 leading countries in terms of cropland area (as a percentage of the GNCA) were India (9.6 percent),...

The overarching goal of this study was to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis of irrigated agricultural Crop Water Productivity (CWP) of the world’s three leading crops: wheat, corn, and rice based on three decades of remote sensing and non-remote sensing-based studies. Overall, CWP data from 148 crop growing study sites (60 wheat, 43 corn, and 45 rice) spread across the world were gathered from published articles spanning 31 different countries. There was overwhelming evidence of a significant increase in CWP with an increase in latitude for predominately northern hemisphere datasets. For example, corn grown in latitude 40–50° had much higher mean CWP (2.45 kg/m³) compared to mean CWP of corn grown in other latitudes such as 30–40° (1.67 kg/m³) or 20–30° (0.94 kg/m³). The same trend existed for wheat and rice as well. For soils, none of the CWP values, for any of the three crops, were statistically different. However, mean CWP in higher latitudes for the same soil was significantly higher than the mean CWP for the same soil in lower latitudes. This applied for all three crops studied. For wheat, the global CWP categories were low (≤0.75 kg/m³), medium (>0.75 to 1.25 to ≤1.75 kg/m³), and high (>1.75 kg/m³). For rice the global CWP categories were low (≤0.70 kg/m³), medium (>0.70 to ≤1.25 kg/m³), and high (>1.25 kg/m³). USA and China are the only two countries that have consistently high CWP for wheat, corn, and rice. Australia and India have medium CWP for wheat and rice. India’s corn, however, has low CWP. Egypt, Turkey, Netherlands, Mexico, and Israel have high CWP for wheat. Romania, Argentina, and Hungary have high CWP for corn, and Philippines has high CWP for rice. All other countries have either low or medium CWP for all three crops. Based on data in this study, the highest consumers of water for crop production also have the most potential for water savings. These countries are USA, India, and China for wheat; USA, China, and Brazil for corn; India, China, and Pakistan for rice. For example, even just a 10% increase in CWP of wheat grown in India can save 6974 billion liters of water. This is equivalent to creating 6974 lakes each of 100 m³ in volume that leads to many benefits such as acting as ‘water banks’ for lean season, recreation, and numerous ecological services. This study establishes the volume of water that can be saved for each crop in each country when there is an increase in CWP by 10%, 20%, and 30%.

As the global population increases, we face increasing demand for food and nutrition. Remote sensing can help monitor food availability to assess global food security rapidly and accurately enough to inform decision-making. However, advances in remote sensing technology are still often limited to multispectral broadband sensors. Although these sensors have many applications, they can be limited in studying agricultural crop characteristics such as differentiating crop types and their growth stages with a high degree of accuracy and detail. In contrast, hyperspectral data contain continuous narrowbands that provide data in terms of spectral signatures rather than a few data points along the spectrum, and hence can help advance the study of crop characteristics. To better understand and advance this idea, we conducted a detailed study of five leading world crops (corn, soybean, winter wheat, rice, and cotton) that occupy 75% and 54% of principal crop areas in the United States and the world respectively. The study was conducted in seven agroecological zones of the United States using 99 Earth Observing-1 (EO-1) Hyperion hyperspectral images from 2008–2015 at 30 m resolution. The authors first developed a first-of-its-kind comprehensive Hyperion-derived Hyperspectral Imaging Spectral Library of Agricultural crops (HISA) of these crops in the US based on USDA Cropland Data Layer (CDL) reference data. Principal Component Analysis was used to eliminate redundant bands by using factor loadings to determine which bands most influenced the first few principal components. This resulted in the establishment of 30 optimal hyperspectral narrowbands (OHNBs) for the study of agricultural crops. The rest of the 242 Hyperion HNBs were redundant, uncalibrated, or noisy. Crop types and crop growth stages were classified using linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and support vector machines (SVM) in the Google Earth Engine cloud computing platform using the 30 optimal HNBs (OHNBs). The best overall accuracies were between 75% to 95% in classifying crop types and their growth stages, which were achieved using 15–20 HNBs in the majority of cases. However, in complex cases (e.g., 4 or more crops in a Hyperion image) 25–30 HNBs were required to achieve optimal accuracies. Beyond 25–30 bands, accuracies asymptote. This research makes a significant contribution towards understanding modeling, mapping, and monitoring agricultural crops using data from upcoming hyperspectral satellites, such as NASA’s Surface Biology and Geology mission (formerly HyspIRI mission) and the recently launched HysIS (Indian Hyperspectral Imaging Satellite, 55 bands over 400–950 nm in VNIR and 165 bands over 900–2500 nm in SWIR), and contributions in advancing the building of a novel, first-of-its-kind global hyperspectral imaging spectral-library of agricultural crops (GHISA: www.usgs.gov/WGSC/GHISA).

Advances in spaceborne hyperspectral (HS) remote sensing, cloud-computing, and machine learning can help measure, model, map and monitor agricultural crops to address global food and water security issues, such as by providing accurate estimates of crop area and yield to model agricultural productivity. Leveraging these advances, we used the Earth Observing-1 (EO-1) Hyperion historical archive and the new generation DLR Earth Sensing Imaging Spectrometer (DESIS) data to evaluate the performance of hyperspectral narrowbands in classifying major agricultural crops of the U.S. with machine learning (ML) on Google Earth Engine (GEE). EO-1 Hyperion images from the 2010–2013 growing seasons and DESIS images from the 2019 growing season were used to classify three world crops (corn, soybean, and winter wheat) along with other crops and non-crops near Ponca City, Oklahoma, USA. The supervised classification algorithms: Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Naive Bayes (NB), and the unsupervised clustering algorithm WekaXMeans (WXM) were run using selected optimal Hyperion and DESIS HS narrowbands (HNBs). RF and SVM returned the highest overall producer’s, and user’s accuracies, with the performances of NB and WXM being substantially lower. The best accuracies were achieved with two or three images throughout the growing season, especially a combination of an earlier month (June or July) and a later month (August or September). The narrow 2.55 nm bandwidth of DESIS provided numerous spectral features along the 400–1000 nm spectral range relative to smoother Hyperion spectral signatures with 10 nm bandwidth in the 400–2500 nm spectral range. Out of 235 DESIS HNBs, 29 were deemed optimal for agricultural study. Advances in ML and cloud-computing can greatly facilitate HS data analysis, especially as more HS datasets, tools, and algorithms become available on the Cloud.

Traditional or content-focused syllabi make clear what the “course will do” and what “students will NOT do.” A lot of bolding, all-capping, italicizing, and underlining are obligatory aesthetic ele...

Thoroughly investigating the characteristics of new generation hyperspectral and high spatial resolution spaceborne sensors will advance the study of agricultural crops. Therefore, we compared the performances of hyperspectral Deutsches Zentrum fur Luftund Raumfahrt- (DLR) Earth Sensing Imaging Spectrometer (DESIS) and high spatial resolution PlanetScope in classifying eight crop types in California's Central Valley during the 2020 growing season. The DESIS sensor onboard the International Space Station collects data at 235 hyperspectral narrowbands (HNB) each with 2.55 nm bandwidth from 400–1000 nm and 30 m spatial resolution. In contrast, PlanetScope Dove-R data have four multispectral broadbands (MBB) with 3–4 m spatial resolution. We obtained best classification accuracies using 14 DESIS HNB from the August 2020 image, with an overall accuracy of 85% and producer's and user's accuracies of 72–100% and 75–100%, respectively, for the eight crops. The best classification accuracies using PlanetScope data were obtained using an image mosaic pair from June and August 2020; this resulted in an overall accuracy of 79% and producer's and user's accuracies of 56–100% and 61–100%, respectively. Combining the best 14 DESIS HNB from August 2020 with the 4 PlanetScope MBB from August 2020 yielded an overall accuracy of 82% and producer's and user's accuracies of 65–100% and 60–94%, respectively. On one-to-one single date comparisons of DESIS versus PlanetScope data, the hyperspectral data always outperformed high spatial resolution data in crop type classification. Nevertheless, high spatial resolution data will remain invaluable in assessing within-field variability and crop biophysical/biochemical modeling in precision agriculture.