ALS-based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory data

Airborne laser scanning (ALS) based standing wood volume models were analysed in two contrasting test sites with different forest types in Estonia. In Aegviidu test site main tree species are Scots pine and Norway spruce and Laeva test site is mainly dominated by deciduous species. ALS data measurem...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Arumäe Tauri, Lang Mait
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sciendo 2016-06-01
Series:Metsanduslikud Uurimused
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1515/fsmu-2016-0001
_version_ 1818744682949115904
author Arumäe Tauri
Lang Mait
author_facet Arumäe Tauri
Lang Mait
author_sort Arumäe Tauri
collection DOAJ
description Airborne laser scanning (ALS) based standing wood volume models were analysed in two contrasting test sites with different forest types in Estonia. In Aegviidu test site main tree species are Scots pine and Norway spruce and Laeva test site is mainly dominated by deciduous species. ALS data measurements were carried out for Aegviidu in 2008 and for Laeva in 2013. Approximately 450 sample plots were established additionally to the forest inventory dataset in both test sites. Exclusive to the sample plots, 46 stands were measured in 2012 in Aegviidu for stand level model. The sample plot-based model standard error in Aegviidu was Se = 59.8 m3/ha (22%) and in Laeva Se = 69.2 m3/ha (29%). The stand-level model based on 46 measured stands from Aegviidu had Se = 38.4 m3/ha. Based on the models a cross-validation between the two test sites was carried out and systematic differences between the two test sites were found. The reasons are related to differences in optical properties of trees, crown shapes, flight configuration and canopy cover even though the sample plot based models included ALS-based canopy cover variable. The ALS-based wood volume estimate was also compared to forest inventory (FI) data and systematically larger estimates compared to FI dataset in both test sites were found. This average systematic error increased substantially (by 100 m3/ha) for stands with volume over 250 m3/ha. It was also detected that a model developed on small point clouds drawn for sample plots may produce systematic errors when applied to stand-level point clouds.
first_indexed 2024-12-18T02:48:12Z
format Article
id doaj.art-1964bc7073e34da69696ab9defcb411e
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1736-8723
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-18T02:48:12Z
publishDate 2016-06-01
publisher Sciendo
record_format Article
series Metsanduslikud Uurimused
spelling doaj.art-1964bc7073e34da69696ab9defcb411e2022-12-21T21:23:31ZengSciendoMetsanduslikud Uurimused1736-87232016-06-0164151610.1515/fsmu-2016-0001ALS-based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory dataArumäe Tauri0Lang Mait1Institute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 5, 51014 Tartu, EstoniaInstitute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 5, 51014 Tartu, EstoniaAirborne laser scanning (ALS) based standing wood volume models were analysed in two contrasting test sites with different forest types in Estonia. In Aegviidu test site main tree species are Scots pine and Norway spruce and Laeva test site is mainly dominated by deciduous species. ALS data measurements were carried out for Aegviidu in 2008 and for Laeva in 2013. Approximately 450 sample plots were established additionally to the forest inventory dataset in both test sites. Exclusive to the sample plots, 46 stands were measured in 2012 in Aegviidu for stand level model. The sample plot-based model standard error in Aegviidu was Se = 59.8 m3/ha (22%) and in Laeva Se = 69.2 m3/ha (29%). The stand-level model based on 46 measured stands from Aegviidu had Se = 38.4 m3/ha. Based on the models a cross-validation between the two test sites was carried out and systematic differences between the two test sites were found. The reasons are related to differences in optical properties of trees, crown shapes, flight configuration and canopy cover even though the sample plot based models included ALS-based canopy cover variable. The ALS-based wood volume estimate was also compared to forest inventory (FI) data and systematically larger estimates compared to FI dataset in both test sites were found. This average systematic error increased substantially (by 100 m3/ha) for stands with volume over 250 m3/ha. It was also detected that a model developed on small point clouds drawn for sample plots may produce systematic errors when applied to stand-level point clouds.https://doi.org/10.1515/fsmu-2016-0001airborne lidar datastanding wood volumeforest inventory datapoint cloud size
spellingShingle Arumäe Tauri
Lang Mait
ALS-based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory data
Metsanduslikud Uurimused
airborne lidar data
standing wood volume
forest inventory data
point cloud size
title ALS-based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory data
title_full ALS-based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory data
title_fullStr ALS-based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory data
title_full_unstemmed ALS-based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory data
title_short ALS-based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory data
title_sort als based wood volume models of forest stands and comparison with forest inventory data
topic airborne lidar data
standing wood volume
forest inventory data
point cloud size
url https://doi.org/10.1515/fsmu-2016-0001
work_keys_str_mv AT arumaetauri alsbasedwoodvolumemodelsofforeststandsandcomparisonwithforestinventorydata
AT langmait alsbasedwoodvolumemodelsofforeststandsandcomparisonwithforestinventorydata