As valuable and vulnerable blue carbon ecosystems, salt marshes require adaptable and robust monitoring methods that span a range of spatiotemporal scales. The application of unmanned aerial vehicle ...(UAV) based remote sensing is a key tool in achieving this goal. Due to the particular characteristics of tidal wetlands, however, there are challenges in obtaining research and management relevant data with the requisite level of accuracy. In this study, the spatial patterns in uncertainty stemming from scan angle, binning method, vegetation structure and platform surface morphology are examined in the context of UAV light detection and ranging (LiDAR) derived digital elevation models (DEM). The results demonstrate that overlapping the UAV flight paths sufficiently to avoid sole reliance on LIDAR data with scan angles exceeding 15 degrees is advisable. Furthermore, the spatial arrangement of halophyte species and marsh morphology has a clear influence on DEM accuracy. The largest errors were associated with sudden structural transitions at the marsh channel boundaries. The DEMmean was found to be the most accurate for bare ground, while the DEMmin was the most accurate for channels and the middle to high marsh vegetation (MAEs = −0.01m). For the low to middle vegetation, all the trialled DEMs returned a similar magnitude of mean error (MAE = ± 0.03m). The accuracy difference between the two vegetation associations examined appears to be connected to variations in coverage, height and biomass. Overall, these findings reinforce the link between salt marsh biogeomorphic complexity and the spatial distribution and magnitude of LiDAR DEM error.
Is it better to drive with one foot or with two feet? Although two-foot driving has fostered interminable debate in the media, no scientific and systematic research has assessed this issue and ...federal and local state governments have provided no answers. The current study compared traditional unipedal (one-foot driving, using the right foot to control the accelerator and the brake pedal) with bipedal (two-foot driving, using the right foot to control the accelerator and the left foot to control the brake pedal) responses to a visual stimulus in a driving simulator study. Each of 30 undergraduate participants drove in a simulated driving scenario. They responded to a STOP sign displayed on the centre of the screen by bringing their vehicle to a complete stop. Brake RT was shorter under the bipedal condition, while throttle RT showed advantage under the unipedal condition. Stopping time and distance showed a bipedal advantage, however. We discuss further limitations of the current study and implications in a driving task. Before drawing any conclusions from the simulator study, further on-road driving tests are necessary to confirm these obtained bipedal advantages.
Practitioner Summary: Traditional unipedal (using the right foot to control the accelerator and the brake pedal) with bipedal (using the right foot to control the accelerator and the left foot to control the brake pedal) responses to a visual stimulus in a driving simulator were compared. Our results showed a bipedal advantage.
Promotion: Although two-foot driving has fostered interminable debate in the media, no scientific and systematic research has assessed this issue and federal and local state governments have provided no answers. Traditional (one-foot driving, using the right foot to control the accelerator and the brake pedal) with bipedal (using the right foot to control the accelerator and the left foot to control the brake pedal) responses to a visual stimulus in a simulated driving study were compared. Throttle reaction time was faster in the unipedal condition whereas brake reaction time, stopping time and stopping distance showed a bipedal advantage. We discuss further theoretical issues and implications in a driving task.
PDF
