S, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 7B 
In: Wagner W., Székely, B. (eds.): ISPRS TC VII Symposium - 100 Years ISPRS, Vienna, Austria, July 5-7, 2010, IAPRS, Yol. XXXVIII, Part 7B 
73 
They remain on a level 
crease in October. In 
alues for maize fields 
July. Tobacco, which is 
n April to July to a high 
g this peak, it turns to 
until harvest in October, 
for broad-leaved crops 
ed to the one of HH 
the results for Fuhrberg. 
is comparable to the one 
iach such high values, 
gh backscatter values in 
¡ignificantly lower. HH 
vide range from April to 
most values decrease to 
for wheat and rye. After 
:mber and than decrease 
grain crops in Fuhrberg 
bin a wider range. An 
i observed likewise, but 
lore, there is an explicit 
ns with wide distributed 
lg in Fuhrberg. There is 
I backscatter during the 
intly lower. In June and 
'alues can be found. In 
3 for rye and 3.2 dB for 
;es from 4.1 dB for rye 
ase is less with mean 
i (oat). VV backscatter 
anger than for grains in 
ickscatter for grasslands 
of <-10 dB. The only 
i with clearly higher 
irement in June with - 
ch values as low as the 
t relatively low value 
e Gorajec region. An 
» the one in Fuhrberg, 
Fuhrberg is observable 
hen grain crops or bare 
lower during all month 
month the decrease is 
^arable to the Fuhrberg 
ind meadows. 
4S 
for the different crops 
backscattering patterns 
y using time series of 
e all over the year 
ons, the phenological 
r can be detected. This 
of broad-leaved crops 
¡crimination within the 
beets and maize). The 
fill has some problems, 
to its very specific 
s can be differentiated 
given for applications 
is often not available 
The high resolution of the radar images allow for a fine grained 
description of the inhomogeneities of the soil and/or plant 
structure. This is clearly visible from the different results of the 
German and Polish fields. These differences can be explained 
with the highly diverse conditions in both study areas (higher 
weed content, lower agricultural production standard, 
undulating terrain with resulting differences in local incidence 
angles for the radar signal, and smaller fields in Poland). This 
can be a disadvantage because it results in additional scatterers 
distorting the crop reflection. On the other hand, it might be 
used to derive e.g. the weed content if fields with the same crop 
are compared. Further investigations are necessary to come to 
conclusions. 
These first results about the characteristic backscatter properties 
for different crop types which are comparable for both research 
areas already show the high potential for multi-temporal land- 
use classification with high resolution, satellite based synthetic 
aperture radar. Especially, the possibilities for detecting the 
different crop types provide a first important precondition for 
the derivation of soil erosion risk: crops with a high risk for 
erosion can be separated from those with a lower risk. This 
information can be mapped for the respective regions and 
provides input data for the C factor, an important parameter for 
the calculation of soil erosion with the Universal Soil Loss 
Equation (USLE). The provision of exact information about 
crops and their phonological development during the year is a 
central issue for the quality of erosion risk calculation 
(Meusburger et al., 2010). 
The high resolution of the radar data allows also for the 
detection of smaller structures like hedgerows and field 
margins. It will be the next step to collect respective ground 
truth to compare the backscatter values of these biotope 
structures. 
Further on, enhanced classification approaches have to be tested 
which make use of the information from the time series and the 
polarisations to derive the best classification results. An extent 
of the developed classification method on more subtle habitat 
structures within agricultural areas, e.g. woody landscape 
elements or field margin strips, will follow. Afterwards the 
suitability of the classification results for the assessment of 
biodiversity and soil erosion changes will be evaluated. Thus 
effects of land use and its changes on the selected ecosystem 
services will be elaborated. 
5. REFERENCES 
Borgeaud, M., Noll, J., Bellini, A., 1995. On the use of ERS-1 
multi-temporal SAR data for agricultural applications. IGARSS 
‘95, International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, 
Vol. II: 904-906. 
DeFries, R.S., Foley, J.A., Asner G.P., 2004. Land-use choices: 
balancing human needs and ecosystem function. Frontiers in 
Ecology and the Environment 2 (5), pp. 249-257. 
DLR (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V.),. 
2007. TerraSAR-X: Das deutsche Radar-Auge im All. 
Missions-Broschüre, Raumfahrt-Agentur, Bonn. 
Foody, G.M., Curran, P.J., Groom, G.B., Munro, D.C., 1988. 
Crop Classification with multi-temporal X-band SAR data. 
IGARSS ‘88, International Geoscience and Remote Sensing 
Symposium, Vol. I, pp.217-220. 
Fritz, T.& Eineder, M.. 2009., TerraSar-X Ground Segment 
Basic Product Specification Dokument.,Manuscript,DLR - 
Deutsches Zentrum fur Luft und Raumfahrt. 
Gonzales-Sanpedro, M.C., Le Toan, T., Moreno, J., Kergoat, L., 
Rubio, E., 2008 Seasonal variations of leaf area index of of 
agricultural fields retrieved from Landsat data. Remote Sensing 
of Environment. 112, pp. 810-824. 
INFOTERRA. 2008., Radiometric Calibration of TerraSAR-X 
Data., Manuscript, Infoterra Friedrichshafen. 
Jadzyszyn, J. 1997., Evaluation of soil losses influenced by 
different option of landscape management., Fragmenta 
Agronomica. Proceedings 14 th ISTRO Conference July 27 - 
August 1, 1997, pp. 287-289. 
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and 
Human Well-being: Current State and Trends, Volume 1, Island 
Press, World Resources Institute, Washington D.C.., pp. 25-36. 
Meier, U. & Bleiholder, H. 2006., Growth stages of mono-and 
dicotyledonous plants, Agrimedia GmbH, Clenze. 
Meusburger, K., Konz, N., Schaub, M., Alewell, C., 2010. Soil 
erosion modelled with USLE and PESERA using QuickBird 
derived vegetation parameters in an alpine catchment. 
International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and 
Geoinformation. 12, pp.208-215. 
Myers, J.P., & Reichert, J.S., 1997., Perspective on Nature’s 
Services. In: Daily, G.C.: Nature’s Services. Societal 
Dependence on Ecosystem Services.,. XVII-XX. Island Press, 
Washington D.C. 
Palang, H., Printsmann, A., Gyuro, E.K., Urbane, M., 
Skowronek, E., Woloszyn, W., 2006. The forgotten rural 
landscapes of Central and Eastern Europe. Landscape Ecology 
21, pp.347-357. 
Poh Sze Choo, H, D, Cooper, C. Devendra, J, Dixon, J, Gaskell, 
S, Khan, R, Lai, L, Lipper, J, Pretty, J, Primavera, N, 
Ramankutty, E, Viglizzo, Wiebe,K., 2005. Cultivated Systems. 
In: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Board: Ecosystems and 
Human Well-being: Current State and Trends, , Island Press, 
Volume 1. pp. 747-794. 
Ramankutty, N., Graumlich, L., Achard, F., Alves, D., Chhabra, 
A., DeFries, R. S., Foley, J. A., Geist, H., Houghton, R. A., 
Goldewijk, K. K., Lambin, E. F., Millington, A., Rasmussen, 
K., Reid, R. S., Turner, II B. L., 2006, Global Land-Cover 
Change: Recent Progress, Remaining Challenges. . In: Land- 
use and Land-cover Change. Local Processes and Global 
Impacts, pp. 9-39, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg. 
Schieche, B., Erasmi, S., Schrage, T., Hurlemann, P., 1999. 
Monitoring and Registering of Grassland and Fallow Fields 
with multitemporal ERS Data within a district of Lower 
Saxony, Germany. IGARSS ‘99, International Geoscience and 
Remote Sensing Symposium, Vol. II: pp.759-761. 
Tavakkoli Sabour, S.M., Lohman, P., Soergel, U., 2008. 
Monitoring agricultural activities using multi-temporal ASAR 
ENVISAT data International Archives of Photogrammetry and 
Remote Sensing, Band XXXVII, Teil B7-2, pp. 735-742.