‹ back to GIS Glossary

MSAVI (Modified Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index)

Definition

The Modified Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index (MSAVI) is an iterative improvement of the Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index (SAVI) designed to further reduce the influence of soil background, particularly in extremely sparse vegetation conditions. Instead of using a constant soil adjustment factor (L), MSAVI employs a variable, self-adjusting factor based on the relationship between the NIR and red reflectances for each pixel, making it more robust across a wider range of vegetation densities and soil types.

Application

MSAVI is exceptionally useful in environments with very low and heterogeneous vegetation cover, such as deserts, severely degraded lands, post-fire landscapes, and early-stage agricultural fields. It is applied in precision agriculture for monitoring crop emergence, in ecological studies of arid ecosystems, and in land degradation assessment projects where accurately detecting small amounts of vegetation against a dominant soil background is critical.

FAQ

What is the formula for MSAVI and how does it work?

The most common form of MSAVI is: MSAVI = (2 * NIR + 1 - sqrt((2 * NIR + 1)^2 - 8 * (NIR - Red))) / 2. This formula is derived by solving for the optimal soil adjustment factor iteratively, effectively allowing the index to self-adjust on a per-pixel basis rather than relying on a single, predetermined L value as in SAVI.

What is the key advantage of MSAVI over SAVI?

The key advantage is its automatic adaptation. SAVI requires the user to select an appropriate, constant L factor for the entire scene, which is often an estimate. MSAVI dynamically determines a pixel-specific adjustment, theoretically providing a more accurate minimization of soil background influence across varying conditions of vegetation density and soil brightness within a single image.

In what situations is MSAVI clearly superior to SAVI or NDVI?

MSAVI is clearly superior in regions with extremely sparse and patchy vegetation (<15% cover) and where soil brightness varies greatly (e.g., a mix of dark organic soil and bright sandy soil). In these challenging conditions, MSAVI's self-adjusting mechanism provides a more consistent and reliable measure of green vegetation than indices with fixed parameters.

Are there any downsides to using MSAVI?

Potential downsides include:

1) Increased computational complexity compared to SAVI or NDVI;

2) The formula can be more difficult to interpret and implement;

3) In dense vegetation, where soil influence is negligible, its added complexity offers little benefit over simpler indices;

4) Like its predecessors, it does not address atmospheric correction.