Précédent|Prochain

Estimation of forest leaf area index based on spectrally corrected airborne LiDAR pulse penetration index by intensity of point cloud

  • role： First author第一作者
  • Affiliation：

    State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

    Beijing Engineering Research Center for Global Land Remote Sensing Products, Institute of Remote Sensing Science and Engineering, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

  • Email：tianluo@mail.bnu.edu.cn
  • Introduction：田罗，1991年生,男,博士研究生, 研究方向为激光雷达植被遥感。E-mail: tianluo@mail.bnu.edu.cn
TIAN Luo12,  
  • role： Corresponding author通信作者
  • Affiliation：

    State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

    Beijing Engineering Research Center for Global Land Remote Sensing Products, Institute of Remote Sensing Science and Engineering, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

  • Email：qyh@bnu.edu.cn
  • Introduction：屈永华，1972年生,男,副教授, 研究方向为定量遥感。E-mail: qyh@bnu.edu.cn
QU Yonghua12*,  
  • Affiliation：

    University of Eastern Finland, School of Forest Sciences, 70210 Finland

KORHONEN Lauri3,  
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, 00100 Finland

    Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research, Faculty of Science, University of Helsinki, 00100 Finland

KORPELA Ilkka45,  
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, 00100 Finland

    Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research, Faculty of Science, University of Helsinki, 00100 Finland

HEISKANEN Janne45

résumé

Canopy gap fraction and extinction coefficient are two primary variables to retrieve Leaf Area Index (LAI) from light transmittance-based model. Currently, for the difficulty of calculating gap fraction from discrete LiDAR Point Cloud Data (PCD), LiDAR Penetration Index (LPI) is used as the alternative of gap fraction to estimate LAI. However, LPI ignores the target spectral difference which is an important factor affecting the number of canopy and background echoes. Therefore, the backscattering coefficient of the background and canopy, μ=ρg/ρv, is required to correct the LPI to GF. We extracted μ from intensity of the PCD data, which achieved by using a linear regression between the intensity of background and that of canopy in each pulse intensity groups, then the mean μ of all valid groups was used to transform LPI to gap. Given there was a dominant species of vegetation in study area, the light extinction coefficient (k) was extracted using constrained optimization method to obtain the ellipsoidal model parameter χ from multi-angle gap fraction at the large spatial scale (tile scale) under the assumption that the leaf angle distribution can be modeled by a ellipsoidal model and the leaf mean tilt angle is constant through study area. Finally, LiDAR LAI was estimated using retrieved gap fraction and extinction coefficient. Meanwhile, the impact of tile scale (Rxy_Tile), sample scale Rxy_Plot and height threshold (Ht) were also investigated. The results showed that the μ value was close to unit, and it is contributed by the extensive coverage of lichen vegetation in the area, which is consistent with the actual field characteristics. The gap fraction corrected by μ has a good ability to reflect the field measured data (R2=0.78, RMSE=0.09), and the leaf angle distribution parameter χ, is affected mainly by the large gap between the crowns for areas with dominant species. In terms of size of tile, the retrieval χ, the parameter of ellipsoidal model, was sensitive to the spatial size of tile, which means that attention should be paid to select tile size. An ill-suited tile size would result in a systematic underestimation of LAI. For the target parameter of LAI, the result revealed that it was highly consistent with the ground measurement (R2=0.84, RMSE=0.51) under the condition of Rxy_Tile, Rxy_Plot and Ht of 950 m, 10 m and 2.6 m respectively. It was concluded that the retrieved LAI was more sensitive to the choice of Ht, and it was noted that more attention would be paid to select appropriate Ht to ensuring the consistent result of LiDAR LAI and field measurements in the further work direction. We conclude that it is feasible to retrieve μ and further to produce LAI using ALS PCD data only. The significance of the proposed method is that it can produce reliable remotely sensed LAI from ALS PCD even with no ancillary spectral data.

mots-clés

remote sensing;leaf area index;LiDAR;gap fraction;extinction coefficient;target spectral property

References

  1. 1.
    Armston J, Disney M, Lewis P, Scarth P, Phinn S, Lucas R, Bunting P and Goodwin N. 2013. Direct retrieval of canopy gap probability using airborne waveform lidar. Remote Sensing of Environment, 134: 24-38
  2. 2.
    Beer. 1852. Bestimmung der Absorption des rothen Lichts in farbigen Flüssigkeiten. Annalen der Physik, 162(5): 78-88
  3. 3.
    Black T A, Chen J M, Lee X H and Sagar R M. 1991. Characteristics of shortwave and longwave irradiances under a Douglas-fir forest stand. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 21(7): 1020-1028
  4. 4.
    Campbell G S. 1986. Extinction coefficients for radiation in plant canopies calculated using an ellipsoidal inclination angle distribution. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 36(4): 317-321
  5. 5.
    Cui Y K, Zhao K G, Fan W J and Xu X R. 2011. Retrieving crop fractional cover and LAI based on airborne Lidar data. Journal of Remote Sensing, 15(6): 1276-1288
  6. 6.
    Griffin A M R, Popescu S C and Zhao K G. 2008. Using LIDAR and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index to remotely determine LAI and percent canopy cover // Proceedings of SilviLaser 2008. Edinburgh, UK: [s.n.]:446-455
  7. 7.
    Hanssen K H and Solberg S. 2007. Assessment of defoliation during a pine sawfly outbreak: calibration of airborne laser scanning data with hemispherical photography. Forest Ecology and Management, 250(1/2): 9-16
  8. 8.
    Heiskanen J, Korhonen L, Hietanen J and Pellikka P K E. 2015. Use of airborne lidar for estimating canopy gap fraction and leaf area index of tropical montane forests. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 36(10): 2569-2583
  9. 9.
    Höfle B and Pfeifer N. 2007. Correction of laser scanning intensity data: data and model-driven approaches. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 62(6): 415-433
  10. 10.
    Hopkinson C and Chasmer L. 2007. Using discrete laser pulse return intensity to model canopy transmittance. The Photogrammetric Journal of Finland, 20(2): 16-26
  11. 11.
    Hopkinson C and Chasmer L. 2009. Testing LiDAR models of fractional cover across multiple forest ecozones. Remote Sensing of Environment, 113(1): 275-288
  12. 12.
    Hovi A. 2015. Towards an enhanced understanding of airborne LiDAR measurements of forest vegetation // Dissertationes Forestales 200. Vantaa, Finland: Finnish Society of Forest Science
  13. 13.
    Jensen J L R, Humes K S, Vierling L A and Hudak A T. 2008. Discrete return lidar-based prediction of leaf area index in two conifer forests. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112(10): 3947-3957
  14. 14.
    Kaasalainen S and Rautiainen M. 2005. Hot spot reflectance signatures of common boreal lichens. Journal of Geophysical Research, 110(D20): D20102
  15. 15.
    Korhonen L, Heiskanen J and Korpela I. 2013. Modelling lidar-derived boreal forest canopy cover with SPOT 4 HRVIR data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 34(22): 8172-8181
  16. 16.
    Korhonen L, Korpela I, Heiskanen J and Maltamo M. 2011. Airborne discrete-return LIDAR data in the estimation of vertical canopy cover, angular canopy closure and leaf area index. Remote Sensing of Environment, 115(4): 1065-1080
  17. 17.
    Korpela I, Hovi A and Morsdorf F. 2012. Understory trees in airborne LiDAR data — Selective mapping due to transmission losses and echo-triggering mechanisms. Remote Sensing of Environment, 119: 92-104
  18. 18.
    Korpela I, Ørka H O, Hyyppä J, Heikkinen V and Tokola T. 2010. Range and AGC normalization in airborne discrete-return LiDAR intensity data for forest canopies. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 65(4): 369-379
  19. 19.
    Korpela I S. 2008. Mapping of understory lichens with airborne discrete-return LiDAR data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112(10): 3891-3897
  20. 20.
    Lang A R G. 1987. Simplified estimate of leaf area index from transmittance of the sun’s beam. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 41(3/4): 179-186
  21. 21.
    Lang A R G, Xiang Y Q and Norman J M. 1985. Crop structure and the penetration of direct sunlight. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 35(1/4): 83-101
  22. 22.
    Li-Cor I. 1992. LAI-2000 Plant Canopy Analyzer Operating Manual. Lincoln, Nebraska, USA: LI-COR Inc.
  23. 23.
    Lovell J L, Jupp D L B, Culvenor D S and Coops N C. 2003. Using airborne and ground-based ranging lidar to measure canopy structure in Australian forests. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 29(5): 607-622
  24. 24.
    Luo S Z, Chen J M, Wang C, Gonsamo A, Xi X H, Lin Y, Qian M J, Peng D L, Nie S and Qin H M. 2018. Comparative performances of airborne LiDAR height and intensity data for leaf area index estimation. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 11(1): 300-310
  25. 25.
    Luo S Z, Wang C, Zhang G B, Xi X H and Li G C. 2013. Forest leaf area index (LAI) inversion using airborne lidar data. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 56(5): 1467-1475
  26. 26.
    Miller J B. 1967. A formula for average foliage density. Australian Journal of Botany, 15(1): 141-144
  27. 27.
    Morsdorf F, Kötz B, Meier E, Itten K I and Allgöwer B. 2006. Estimation of LAI and fractional cover from small footprint airborne laser scanning data based on gap fraction. Remote Sensing of Environment, 104(1): 50-61
  28. 28.
    Nilson T. 1999. Inversion of gap frequency data in forest stands. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 98-99: 437-448
  29. 29.
    Ni-Meister W, Jupp D L B and Dubayah R. 2001. Modeling lidar waveforms in heterogeneous and discrete canopies. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 39(9): 1943-1958
  30. 30.
    Pearse G D, Morgenroth J, Watt M S and Dash J P. 2017. Optimising prediction of forest leaf area index from discrete airborne lidar. Remote Sensing of Environment, 200: 220-239
  31. 31.
    Qin Y, Yao W, Vu T T, Li S, Niu Z and Ban Y. Characterizing radiometric attributes of point cloud using a normalized reflective factor derived from small footprint LiDAR waveform. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Observations Remote Sensing. 2015, 8, 740-749.　
  32. 32.
    Qu Y H, Shaker A, Korhonen L, Silva C A, Jia K, Tian L and Song J L. 2020. Direct estimation of forest leaf area index based on spectrally corrected airborne LiDAR pulse penetration ratio. Remote Sensing, 12(2): 217
  33. 33.
    Qu Y H, Shaker A, Silva C A, Klauberg C and Pinagé E R. 2018. Remote sensing of leaf area index from LiDAR height percentile metrics and comparison with MODIS product in a selectively logged tropical forest area in eastern Amazonia. Remote Sensing, 10(6): 970
  34. 34.
    Riaño D, Valladares F, Condés S and Chuvieco E. 2004. Estimation of leaf area index and covered ground from airborne laser scanner (Lidar) in two contrasting forests. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 124(3/4): 269-275
  35. 35.
    Richardson J J, Moskal L M and Kim S H. 2009. Modeling approaches to estimate effective leaf area index from aerial discrete-return LIDAR. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 149(6/7): 1152-1160
  36. 36.
    Roberts S D, Dean T J, Evans D L, McCombs J W, Harrington R L and Glass P A. 2005. Estimating individual tree leaf area in loblolly pine plantations using LiDAR-derived measurements of height and crown dimensions. Forest Ecology and Management, 213(1/3): 54-70
  37. 37.
    Solberg S. 2010. Mapping gap fraction, LAI and defoliation using various ALS penetration variables. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 31(5): 1227-1244
  38. 38.
    Solberg S, Brunner A, Hanssen K H, Lange H, Næsset E, Rautiainen M and Stenberg P. 2009. Mapping LAI in a Norway spruce forest using airborne laser scanning. Remote Sensing of Environment, 113(11): 2317-2327
  39. 39.
    Solberg S, Næsset E, Hanssen K H and Christiansen E. 2006. Mapping defoliation during a severe insect attack on Scots pine using airborne laser scanning. Remote Sensing of Environment, 102(3/4): 364-376
  40. 40.
    Su W, Zhan J G, Zhang M Z, Wu D Y and Zhang R. 2016. Estimation method of crop leaf area index based on airborne lidar data. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 47(3): 272-277
  41. 41.
    Tang H, Dubayah R, Swatantran A, Hofton M, Sheldon S, Clark D B and Blair B. 2012. Retrieval of vertical LAI profiles over tropical rain forests using waveform lidar at La Selva, Costa Rica. Remote Sensing of Environment, 124: 242-250
  42. 42.
    Tesfamichael S G, van Aardt J, Roberts W and Ahmed F. 2018. Retrieval of narrow-range LAI of at multiple lidar point densities: application on Eucalyptus grandis plantation. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 70: 93-104
  43. 43.
    Wagner W, Ullrich A, Melzer T, Briese C and Kraus K. 2004. From single-pulse to full-waveform airborne laser scanners: potential and practical challenges. International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 35: 201-206
  44. 44.
    Yan G J, Hu R H, Luo J H, Mu X H, Xie D H and Zhang W M. 2016. Review of indirect methods for leaf area index measurement. Journal of Remote Sensing, 20(5): 958-978
  45. 45.
    Yan W Y and Shaker A. 2014. Radiometric correction and normalization of airborne LiDAR intensity data for improving land-cover classification. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 52(12): 7658-7673
  46. 46.
    You H T, Wang T J, Skidmore A K and Xing Y Q. 2017. Quantifying the effects of normalisation of airborne LiDAR intensity on coniferous forest leaf area index estimations. Remote Sensing, 9(2): 163
  47. 47.
    Zhao F, Li Z Y, Wang Y S and Pang Y. 2008. The application of lidar data in forest. Remote Sensing Information, (1): 106-110, 53
  48. 48.
    Zhao K G and Popescu S. 2009. Lidar-based mapping of leaf area index and its use for validating GLOBCARBON satellite LAI product in a temperate forest of the southern USA. Remote Sensing of Environment, 113(8): 1628-1645
  49. 49.
    Zheng G, Ma L X, Eitel J U H, He W, Magney T S, Moskal L M and Li M S. 2017. Retrieving directional gap fraction, extinction coefficient, and effective leaf area index by incorporating scan angle information from discrete aerial lidar data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 55(1): 577-590

Lire l'article complet

The above content is generated by Large Model Translation. The translated content is for reference only. We do not assume any commercial or legal responsibilty for any consequences arising from the use of our website