B6/B5 (potential includes: pyrophyllite, alunite, well-ordered kaolinite) Blue is low content, Red is high content Useful for mapping: (1) different clay-type stratigraphic horizons; (2) lithology-overprinting hydrothermal alteration, e.g. high sulphidation, "advanced argillic" alteration comprising pyrophyllite, alunite, kaolinite/dickite; and (3) well-ordered kaolinite (warmer colours) versus poorly-ordered kaolinite (cooler colours) which can be used for mapping in situ versus transported materials, respectively.

1. Band ratio: B7/B8 Blue-cyan is magnesite-dolomite, amphibole, chlorite Red is calcite, epidote, amphibole useful for mapping: (1) exposed parent material persisting through "cover"; (2) "dolomitization" alteration in carbonates - combine with Ferrous iron in MgOH product to help separate dolomite versus ankerite; (3) lithology-cutting hydrothermal (e.g. propyllitic) alteration - combine with FeOH content product and ferrous iron in Mg-OH to isolate chlorite from actinolite versus talc versus epidote; and (4) layering within mafic/ultramafic intrusives. useful for mapping: (1) exposed parent material persisting through "cover"; (2) "dolomitization" alteration in carbonates - combine with Ferrous iron in MgOH product to help separate dolomite versus ankerite; (3) lithology-cutting hydrothermal (e.g. propyllitic) alteration - combine with FeOH content product and ferrous iron in Mg-OH to isolate chlorite from actinolite versus talc versus epidote; and (4) layering within mafic/ultramafic intrusives. useful for mapping: (1) exposed parent material persisting through "cover"; (2) "dolomitization" alteration in carbonates - combine with Ferrous iron in MgOH product to help separate dolomite versus ankerite; (3) lithology-cutting hydrothermal (e.g. propyllitic) alteration - combine with FeOH content product and ferrous iron in Mg-OH to isolate chlorite from actinolite versus talc versus epidote; and (4) layering within mafic/ultramafic intrusives.

A Multi-scale topographic position image of Australia has been generated by combining a topographic position index and topographic ruggedness. Topographic Position Index (TPI) measures the topographic slope position of landforms. Ruggedness informs on the roughness of the surface and is calculated as the standard deviation of elevations. Both these terrain attributes are therefore scale dependent and will vary according to the size of the analysis window. Based on an algorithm developed by Lindsay et al. (2015) we have generated multi-scale topographic position model over the Australian continent using 3 second resolution (~90m) DEM derived from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM). The algorithm calculates topographic position scaled by the corresponding ruggedness across three spatial scales (window sizes) of 0.2-8.1 Km; 8.2-65.2 Km and 65.6-147.6 Km. The derived ternary image captures variations in topographic position across these spatial scales (blue local, green intermediate and red regional) and gives a rich representation of nested landform features that have broad application in understanding geomorphological and hydrological processes and in mapping regolith and soils over the Australian continent. Lindsay, J, B., Cockburn, J.M.H. and Russell, H.A.J. 2015. An integral image approach to performing multi-scale topographic position analysis, Geomorphology 245, 51–61.

<b>This record was retired 29/03/2022 with approval from S.Oliver as it has been superseded by eCat 132317 GA Landsat 8 OLI/TIRS Analysis Ready Data Collection 3</b> The PQ25 product facilitates interpretation and processing of Surface Reflectance (SR-N/NT), Fractional Cover 25 (FC25) and all derivative products. PQ25 is an assessment of each image pixel to determine if it is an unobscured, unsaturated observation of the Earth's surface and also whether the pixel is represented in each spectral band. The PQ product allows users to produce masks which can be used to exclude pixels which don't meet their quality criteria from analysis . The capacity to automatically exclude such pixels is essential for emerging multi-temporal analysis techniques that make use of every quality assured pixel within a time series of observations. Users can choose to process only land pixels, or only sea pixels depending on their analytical requirements, leading to enhanced computationally efficient.

<b>Please Note:</b> The data related to this Abstract can be obtained by contacting <a href = "mailto: clientservices@ga.gov.au">Manager Client Services</a> and quoting Catalogue number 144231. The data are arranged by regions, so please download the Data Description document found in the Downloads tab to determine your area of interest. Remotely sensed datasets provide fundamental information for understanding the chemical, physical and temporal dynamics of the atmosphere, lithosphere, biosphere and hydrosphere. Satellite remote sensing has been used extensively in mapping the nature and characteristics of the terrestrial land surface, including vegetation, rock, soil and landforms, across global to local-district scales. With the exception of hyper-arid regions, mapping rock and soil from space has been problematic because of vegetation that either masks the underlying substrate or confuses the spectral signatures of geological materials (i.e. diagnostic mineral spectral features), making them difficult to resolve. As part of the Exploring for the Future program, a new barest earth Landsat mosaic of the Australian continent using time-series analysis significantly reduces the influence of vegetation and enhances mapping of soil and exposed rock from space. Here, we provide a brief background on geological remote sensing and describe a suite of enhanced images using the barest earth Landsat mosaic for mapping surface mineralogy and geochemistry. These geological enhanced images provide improved inputs for predictive modelling of soil and rock properties over the Australian continent. In one case study, use of these products instead of existing Landsat TM band data to model chromium and sodium distribution using a random forest machine learning algorithm improved model performance by 28–46%.

1. Band ratio: (B6+B8)/B7 Blue is low content, Red is high content (potentially includes: chlorite, epidote, jarosite, nontronite, gibbsite, gypsum, opal-chalcedony) Useful for mapping: (1) jarosite (acid conditions) - in combination with ferric oxide content (high); (2) gypsum/gibbsite - in combination with ferric oxide content (low); (3) magnesite - in combination with ferric oxide content (low) and MgOH content (moderate-high) (4) chlorite (e.g. propyllitic alteration) - in combination with Ferrous in MgOH (high); and (5) epidote (calc-silicate alteration) - in combination with Ferrous in MgOH (low).

1. Band ratio: B4/B3 Blue is low abundance, Red is high abundance (1) Exposed iron ore (hematite-goethite). Use in combination with the "Opaques index" to help separate/map dark (a) surface lags (e.g. maghemite gravels) which can be misidentified in visible and false colour imagery; and (b) magnetite in BIF and/or bedded iron ore; and (3) Acid conditions: combine with FeOH Group content to help map jarosite which will have high values in both products. Mapping hematite versus goethite mapping is NOT easily achieved as ASTER's spectral bands were not designed to capture diagnostic iron oxide spectral behaviour. However, some information on visible colour relating in part to differences in hematite and/or goethite content can be obtained using a ratio of B2/B1 especially when this is masked using a B4/B3 to locate those pixels with sufficient iro oxide content.

1. Band ratio: B1/B4 Blue is low abundance, Red is high abundance (potentially includes carbon black (e.g. ash), magnetite, Mn oxides, and sulphides in unoxidised envornments Useful for mapping: (1) magnetite-bearing rocks (e.g. BIF); (2) maghemite gravels; (3) manganese oxides; (4) graphitic shales. Note 1: (1) and (4) above can be evidence for "reduced" rocks when interpreting REDOX gradients. Combine with AlOH group Content (high values) and Composition (high values) products, to find evidence for any invading "oxidised" hydrothermal fluids which may have interacted with reduced rocks evident in the Opaques index product.

Band ratio: B3/B2 Blue is low content Red is high content Use this image to help interpret the amount of "obscuring/complicating" green vegetation cover.

<b>This record was retired 29/03/2022 with approval from S.Oliver as it has been superseded by eCat 145498 Geoscience Australia Landsat Fractional Cover Collection 3</b> The Fractional Cover (FC) algorithm was developed by the Joint Remote Sensing Research Program and is described in described in Scarth et al. (2010). It has been implemented by Geoscience Australia for every observation from Landsat Thematic Mapper (Landsat 5), Enhanced Thematic Mapper (Landsat 7) and Operational Land Imager (Landsat 8) acquired since 1987. It is calculated from surface reflectance (SR-N_25_2.0.0). FC_25 provides a 25m scale fractional cover representation of the proportions of green or photosynthetic vegetation, non-photosynthetic vegetation, and bare surface cover across the Australian continent. The fractions are retrieved by inverting multiple linear regression estimates and using synthetic endmembers in a constrained non-negative least squares unmixing model. For further information please see the articles below describing the method implemented which are free to read: - Scarth, P, Roder, A and Schmidt, M 2010, 'Tracking grazing pressure and climate interaction - the role of Landsat fractional cover in time series analysis', Proceedings of the 15th Australasian Remote Sensing and Photogrammetry Conference, Schmidt, M, Denham, R and Scarth, P 2010, 'Fractional ground cover monitoring of pastures and agricultural areas in Queensland', Proceedings of the 15th Australasian Remote Sensing and Photogrammetry Conference A summary of the algorithm developed by the Joint Remote Sensing Centre is also available from the AusCover website: http://data.auscover.org.au/xwiki/bin/view/Product+pages/Landsat+Fractional+Cover Fractional cover data can be used to identify large scale patterns and trends and inform evidence based decision making and policy on topics including wind and water erosion risk, soil carbon dynamics, land management practices and rangeland condition. This information could enable policy agencies, natural and agricultural land resource managers, and scientists to monitor land conditions over large areas over long time frames.