Science1 distinct publisher3 min readUpdated
Cornell researchers identified the species of 1.8 million NYC trees at 82% accuracy, including the two-thirds of canopy nobody had surveyed. Planting targets now have to name names.
The Scientist · Science desk

Compiled by The ScientistSomething wrong?How this is made
Cornell researchers identified the species of 1.8 million NYC trees at 82% accuracy, including the two-thirds of canopy nobody had surveyed. Planting targets now have to name names.
Researchers have published an interactive map identifying 1.8 million individual trees in New York City by type, using satellite imagery, ground data sets and lidar, with an overall accuracy of 82% [1][2][3]. It is the first "wall-to-wall" citywide map of its kind, and it covers trees on private property, in natural areas and in other unsurveyed places that together make up an estimated 65% of the city's canopy and were absent from previous maps [4][5].
That gap is the whole point. Senior author Daniel Katz, an assistant professor in Cornell's School of Integrative Plant Science, said the map adds 1.4 million trees beyond the street trees that had already been surveyed [6][7]. By subtraction, the pre-existing street tree survey accounted for roughly 400,000 trees, meaning the city's operational picture of its own forest covered about a fifth of the individual trees now identified [8].
The technical unlock was timing rather than resolution. The team, with first author David Miller, used the volume of images from Planet's PlanetScope satellite constellations, which circle Earth every 90 minutes, to watch leaves turn in autumn and buds break in spring, using that seasonal signature to separate species [9][10][11]. Katz called satellite-based tree identification a "holy grail" in his field for decades, held back because the images were hard to access and not at the scale identification requires [12]. Training and verification came from New York State lidar, a crown-delineation map from The Nature Conservancy and the University of Vermont, and on-the-ground data from the NYC Department of Parks and Recreation [13]. The study appeared in Scientific Data [14].
The policy relevance is immediate. New York recently set a goal of raising tree cover from 22% to 30% by 2040, an eight-point increase and a 36% relative expansion of existing canopy [15][16]. A count-based target says plant more; a species-level inventory makes it possible to ask which plantings actually reduce temperature. The map is part of the Cool Trees project, led by Dr. Arnab Ghosh, associate professor of medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine, which is working on the relationship between tree density and type, temperature, and heat-related health risk as heat waves in the city become more frequent and intense [17][18][19]. Katz described the goal as being able to say that a given planting or management decision will change temperature by some amount and change the number of people arriving at emergency rooms during a heat wave [20].
Two honest limits. The map does not yet say which trees cool best; the team says it will use the data to work that out, alongside applications from allergen reduction to invasive pest management [21]. And 82% overall accuracy, which is higher for common New York species and therefore lower for uncommon ones, implies on the order of 324,000 trees carrying the wrong label if error were spread evenly [3][22]. Katz himself said the approach "isn't perfect, but it's a really good start at showing you what's where" [23].
What to watch: whether the species-to-temperature-to-hospitalisation chain gets quantified with enough confidence for a parks department to write it into planting specifications, and whether the method transfers. The team has compiled a database of 405 medium and large U.S. cities it hopes to map with the same ubiquitous imagery [24]. A separate Cornell project, "The Generative Canopy," is using street-tree data to identify where shade is most needed for vulnerable residents [25]. If the accuracy holds outside the city that supplied the training data, the cost of knowing what a municipal forest contains drops sharply.
Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
The approach was 82% accurate overall and more accurate for common types of New York City trees.
Because PlanetScope satellites collect information across the country and globe, the team hopes to apply the approach elsewhere and has compiled a database of 405 medium and large U.S. cities it hopes to map; Katz said the accuracy came 'from images which are ubiquitous.'
Researchers created an interactive map identifying 1.8 million individual trees in New York City.
The researchers identified tree types using satellite imagery, on-the-ground data sets and 3D lidar data.
It is the first 'wall-to-wall,' citywide map identifying trees.
The map includes trees on private property, in natural areas and other unsurveyed areas, which together constitute an estimated 65% of the city's canopy and had not been accounted for on previous maps.
Evidence-backed comparisons of source perspectives and observed adoption signals. Read the methodology
Which Builder, Operator, and Investor concerns the observed source mix emphasized—not a truth score.
Evidence, demonstrated adoption, hype gap, incentives, and confidence are assessed independently, each on its own current evidence. How these are measured.
Peer-reviewed artifact, single-publisher relay
The core technical claims rest on a named, DOI-identified paper in Scientific Data with disclosed inputs (PlanetScope time series, state lidar, crown-edge map, NYC Parks ground truth) and a stated overall accuracy figure, which is stronger than a bare announcement. It is nonetheless one publisher relaying institutional research communication, with no independent replication, no per-genus error reporting, and no external audit of the 65%-of-canopy estimate.
Released and public, no documented users yet
Adoption evidence stops at the artifact itself: the map and dataset are published and stated to be publicly available, and the authoring team says it will use the map for cooling analysis. No supplied material shows NYC agencies, other cities, or third parties actually using it, and the 405-city expansion is an ambition list with no completed second city.
Modestly overstated reach
The measured artifact is a genus-level map of one city at 82% overall accuracy whose authors call it imperfect, while the surrounding framing reaches toward cooling cities worldwide, species-level policy targeting, and 405 additional cities. The gap is moderate rather than severe because the underlying numbers are peer-reviewed, disclosed, and accompanied by an explicit limitation quote from the senior author.
Institutional promotion, single channel
The only cluster source is a research-institution communication relayed by an aggregator: the authoring university and project have a direct interest in emphasizing breakthrough framing ('holy grail'), scale (1.8 million trees, 405 cities), and public-good positioning, and a commercial imagery supplier is named as the enabling input. No adversarial or independent voice is present to discount those incentives.
Solid facts, unverified reach
Confidence is moderate: the factual core (counts, accuracy, inputs, publication venue, city canopy target) is specific and internally consistent, and derived arithmetic follows directly from reported figures. It is capped by single-publisher sourcing, no independent replication, no per-class error data, and zero documented adoption beyond release.
science
No country is on track to cut food system emissions by 2030, first goal-referenced audit finds1 distinct publisher
product
The "24 million cars" data centre stat is a unit error, and citing it costs you the argument1 distinct publisher
science
NASA's COFFIES model flags solar active regions before they surface, averaging 9.24 hours2 distinct publishers
science
Patent-likeness scoring leaves the lab, and your abstract becomes the interface1 distinct publisher
Distinct publishers with included, body-backed reporting in this cluster.
1 article · August 20, 2026