...
首页> 外文期刊>Carbon balance and management >Impact of data model and point density on aboveground forest biomass estimation from airborne LiDAR
【24h】

Impact of data model and point density on aboveground forest biomass estimation from airborne LiDAR

机译:数据模型和点密度对机载LiDAR估算地上森林生物量的影响

获取原文
           

摘要

BackgroundAccurate estimation of aboveground forest biomass (AGB) and its dynamics is of paramount importance in understanding the role of forest in the carbon cycle and the effective implementation of climate change mitigation policies. LiDAR is currently the most accurate technology for AGB estimation. LiDAR metrics can be derived from the 3D point cloud (echo-based) or from the canopy height model (CHM). Different sensors and survey configurations can affect the metrics derived from the LiDAR data. We evaluate the ability of the metrics derived from the echo-based and CHM data models to estimate AGB in three different biomes, as well as the impact of point density on the metrics derived from them. ResultsOur results show that differences among metrics derived at different point densities were significantly different from zero, with a larger impact on CHM-based than echo-based metrics, particularly when the point density was reduced to 1 point m?2. Both data models-echo-based and CHM-performed similarly well in estimating AGB at the three study sites. For the temperate forest in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, California, USA, R2 ranged from 0.79 to 0.8 and RMSE (relRMSE) from 69.69 (35.59%) to 70.71 (36.12%) Mg?ha?1 for the echo-based model and from 0.76 to 0.78 and 73.84 (37.72%) to 128.20 (65.49%) Mg?ha?1 for the CHM-based model. For the moist tropical forest on Barro Colorado Island, Panama, the models gave R2 ranging between 0.70 and 0.71 and RMSE between 30.08 (12.36%) and 30.32 (12.46) Mg?ha?1 [between 0.69–0.70 and 30.42 (12.50%) and 61.30 (25.19%) Mg?ha?1] for the echo-based [CHM-based] models. Finally, for the Atlantic forest in the Sierra do Mar, Brazil, R2 was between 0.58–0.69 and RMSE between 37.73 (8.67%) and 39.77 (9.14%) Mg?ha?1 for the echo-based model, whereas for the CHM R2 was between 0.37–0.45 and RMSE between 45.43 (10.44%) and 67.23 (15.45%) Mg?ha?1. ConclusionsMetrics derived from the CHM show a higher dependence on point density than metrics derived from the echo-based data model. Despite the median of the differences between metrics derived at different point densities differing significantly from zero, the mean change was close to zero and smaller than the standard deviation except for very low point densities (1 point m?2). The application of calibrated models to estimate AGB on metrics derived from thinned datasets resulted in less than 5% error when metrics were derived from the echo-based model. For CHM-based metrics, the same level of error was obtained for point densities higher than 5 points m?2. The fact that reducing point density does not introduce significant errors in AGB estimates is important for biomass monitoring and for an effective implementation of climate change mitigation policies such as REDD?+?due to its implications for the costs of data acquisition. Both data models showed similar capability to estimate AGB when point density was greater than or equal to 5 point m?2.
机译:背景技术准确估算地上森林生物量(AGB)及其动态对于了解森林在碳循环中的作用以及有效实施减缓气候变化政策至关重要。 LiDAR是目前最准确的AGB估算技术。 LiDAR度量可以从3D点云(基于回波)或树冠高度模型(CHM)得出。不同的传感器和测量配置可能会影响从LiDAR数据得出的指标。我们评估了从基于回波和CHM数据模型得出的指标评估三个不同生物群系中AGB的能力,以及点密度对从它们得出的指标的影响。结果我们的结果表明,在不同点密度下得出的度量之间的差异显着不同于零,对基于CHM的度量的影响要大于基于回声的度量,特别是当将点密度降低到1点m ?2 。在三个研究地点,基于回波的数据模型和基于CHM的数据模型在估计AGB方面表现相似。对于美国加利福尼亚内华达山脉的温带森林,R 2 的范围为0.79至0.8,RMSE(relRMSE)的范围为69.69(35.59%)至70.71(36.12%)的Mg?ha ?1 ;对于基于CHM的模型,从Mg?ha ?1 从0.76到0.78,从73.84(37.72%)到128.20(65.49%)。对于巴拿马巴罗科罗拉多岛上的潮湿热带森林,模型给出的R 2 介于0.70和0.71之间,RMSE介于30.08(12.36%)和30.32(12.46)Mg?ha ?1之间 [在0.69–0.70和30.42(12.50%)和61.30(25.19%)Mg?ha ?1 之间]用于基于回波的[基于CHM]模型。最后,对于巴西塞拉杜马尔的大西洋森林,R 2 在0.58-0.69之间,RMSE在37.73(8.67%)和39.77(9.14%)之间Mg?ha ?1 对于基于回波的模型,而CHM R 2 在0.37–0.45之间,RMSE在45.43(10.44%)和67.23(15.45%)之间。 1 。结论与基于回波的数据模型得出的指标相比,从CHM得出的指标对点密度的依赖性更高。尽管在不同点密度下得出的度量之间的差异的中位数与零显着不同,但除非常低的点密度(1点m ?2 以外,平均变化接近零且小于标准偏差)。 )。当从基于回声的模型中得出指标时,使用校准模型来估计从精简后的数据集得出的指标上的AGB时,误差不到5%。对于基于CHM的度量,对于高于5个点m ?2 的点密度,将获得相同级别的误差。降低点密度不会在AGB估算中引入严重误差这一事实对于生物量监控以及有效实施减灾政策(如REDD +)非常重要,因为这会影响数据获取成本。当点密度大于或等于5点m ?2 时,两个数据模型都具有相似的估计AGB的能力。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号