Open Access

Consistency of the presentation of forests on topographic maps

Paweł Cebrykow
Paweł Cebrykow
 and 
Piotr Petrzak
Piotr Petrzak
   | Oct 31, 2020
Miscellanea Geographica's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Published Online: Oct 31, 2020
Page range: 202 - 217
Received: May 11, 2020
Accepted: Jun 19, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0024
Keywords
© 2020 Paweł Cebrykow, Piotr Petrzak, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Figure 1

Range of test polygons A, B, C, and DSource: Own work based on the 1:250 000 map from the website – Geoportal 2
Range of test polygons A, B, C, and DSource: Own work based on the 1:250 000 map from the website – Geoportal 2

Figure 2

Test polygon A, map of the differences in forests coverage between the aerial photograph and the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon A, map of the differences in forests coverage between the aerial photograph and the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work

Figure 3

Study polygon A, relative errors for the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work
Study polygon A, relative errors for the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work

Figure 4

Test polygon A, absolute errors for the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon A, absolute errors for the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work

Figure 5

Test polygon A, map of the differences in forest coverage between the aerial photograph and the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon A, map of the differences in forest coverage between the aerial photograph and the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work

Figure 6

Test polygon A, relative errors for the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon A, relative errors for the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work

Figure 7

Test polygon A, absolute errors for the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon A, absolute errors for the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work

Figure 8

Test polygon B, map of the differences in forest coverage between the aerial photograph and the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon B, map of the differences in forest coverage between the aerial photograph and the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work

Figure 9

Test polygon B, relative errors for the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon B, relative errors for the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work

Figure 10

Test polygon B, absolute errors for the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon B, absolute errors for the 1:50 000 GUGIK 65 mapSource: Own work

Figure 11

Test polygon B, map of the differences in forest coverage between the aerial photograph and the1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon B, map of the differences in forest coverage between the aerial photograph and the1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work

Figure 12

Test polygon B, relative errors for the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon B, relative errors for the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work

Figure 13

Test polygon B, absolute errors for the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon B, absolute errors for the 1:100 000 GUGIK 80 mapSource: Own work

Figure 14

Test polygon C, differences in the forest coverage between the aerial photograph and topographic maps: to the left the 92 1:10 000 map, and to the right the 1:50 000 VMap Level2 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon C, differences in the forest coverage between the aerial photograph and topographic maps: to the left the 92 1:10 000 map, and to the right the 1:50 000 VMap Level2 mapSource: Own work

Figure 15

Test polygon C, relative errors for the 1:10 000 in the 92 standard mapSource: Own work
Test polygon C, relative errors for the 1:10 000 in the 92 standard mapSource: Own work

Figure 16

Test polygon C, absolute errors for the 1:10 000 in the 92 standard mapSource: Own work
Test polygon C, absolute errors for the 1:10 000 in the 92 standard mapSource: Own work

Figure 17

Test polygon C, relative errors for the VMap L2 1:50 000 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon C, relative errors for the VMap L2 1:50 000 mapSource: Own work

Figure 18

Test polygon C, absolute errors for the VMap L2 1:50 000 mapSource: Own work
Test polygon C, absolute errors for the VMap L2 1:50 000 mapSource: Own work

Figure 19

Test polygon D, differences in the forest coverage between the aerial photograph and topographic maps: the 92 1:10 000 map to the left, and the 1:50 000 VMap Level2 map to the rightSource: Own work
Test polygon D, differences in the forest coverage between the aerial photograph and topographic maps: the 92 1:10 000 map to the left, and the 1:50 000 VMap Level2 map to the rightSource: Own work

Figure 20

Test polygon D, errors for the 1:10 000 in 92 map system: map of relative errors to the left, map of absolute errors to the rightSource: Own work
Test polygon D, errors for the 1:10 000 in 92 map system: map of relative errors to the left, map of absolute errors to the rightSource: Own work

Figure 21

Test polygon D, errors for the VMap L2 1:50 000 map: map of relative errors to the left, map of absolute errors to the rightSource: Own work
Test polygon D, errors for the VMap L2 1:50 000 map: map of relative errors to the left, map of absolute errors to the rightSource: Own work

Total errors in the test polygons for the analysed maps (Source: Own work)

MapPolygon APolygon BPolygon CPolygon D
%ha%ha%ha%ha
Standard 651.3856.424.17125.76----
GUGIK 801.9278.509.85362.97----
Standard 92-----4.9-100.36-1.64-72.27
VMap L2-----9.85-201.93-2.64-116.22
eISSN:
2084-6118
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
4 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Geosciences, Geography, other
Journal RSS Feed