Articles containing the keyword 'forest structure'
Category : Research article
Physically-based reflectance models offer a robust and transferable method to assess biophysical characteristics of vegetation in remote sensing. Forests exhibit explicit structure at many scales, from shoots and branches to landscape patches, and hence present a specific challenge to vegetation reflectance modellers. To relate forest reflectance with its structure, the complexity must be parametrised leading to an increase in the number of reflectance model inputs. The parametrisations link reflectance simulations to measurable forest variables, but at the same time rely on abstractions (e.g. a geometric surface forming a tree crown) and physically-based simplifications that are difficult to quantify robustly. As high-quality data on basic forest structure (e.g. tree height and stand density) and optical properties (e.g. leaf and forest floor reflectance) are becoming increasingly available, we used the well-validated forest reflectance and transmittance model FRT to investigate the effect of the values of the “uncertain” input parameters on the accuracy of modelled forest reflectance. With the state-of-the-art structural and spectral forest information, and Sentinel-2 Multispectral Instrument imagery, we identified that the input parameters influencing the most the modelled reflectance, given that the basic forestry variables are set to their true values and leaf mass is determined from reliable allometric models, are the regularity of the tree distribution and the amount of woody elements. When these parameters were set to their new adjusted values, the model performance improved considerably, reaching in the near infrared spectral region (740–950 nm) nearly zero bias, a relative RMSE of 13% and a correlation coefficient of 0.81. In the visible part of the spectrum, the model performance was not as consistent indicating room for improvement.
-
Halme,
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, P.O. Box 1000, FI-02044 VTT Espoo, Finland
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7517-6663
E-mail:
eelis.halme@vtt.fi
-
Mõttus,
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, P.O. Box 1000, FI-02044 VTT Espoo, Finland
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2745-1966
E-mail:
matti.mottus@vtt.fi
Dead wood profile of a forest is a useful tool for describing forest characteristics and assessing forest disturbance history. Nevertheless, there are few studies on dead wood profiles, including both coarse and fine dead wood, and on the effect of sampling intensity on the dead wood estimates. In a semi-natural boreal forest, we measured every dead wood item over 2 cm in diameter from 80 study plots. From eight plots, we further recorded dead wood items below 2 cm in diameter. Based on these data we constructed the full dead wood profile, i.e. the overall number of dead wood items and their distribution among different tree species, volumes of different size and decay stage categories. We discovered that while the number of small dead wood items was immense, their number dropped drastically from the diameter below 1 cm to diameters 2–3 cm. Different tree species had notably different abundance-diameter distribution patterns: spruce dead wood comprised most strikingly the smallest diameter fractions, whereas aspen dead wood comprised a larger share of large-diameter items. Most of the dead wood volume constituted of large pieces (>10 cm in diameter), and 62% of volume was birch. The variation in the dead wood estimates was small for the numerically dominant tree species and smallest diameter categories, but high for the sub-dominant tree species and larger size categories. In conclusion, the more the focus is on rare tree species and large dead wood items, the more comprehensive should the sampling be.
-
Halme,
Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland; School of Resource Wisdom, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland
E-mail:
panu.halme@jyu.fi
- Purhonen, Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland E-mail: jenna.e.i.purhonen@jyu.fi
- Marjakangas, Centre for Biodiversity Dynamics, Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway E-mail: emma-liina.marjakangas@ntnu.no
- Komonen, Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland; School of Resource Wisdom, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland E-mail: atte.komonen@jyu.fi
- Juutilainen, Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FI-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland E-mail: kjuutilainen@yahoo.com
- Abrego, Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 27, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland E-mail: nerea.abrego@helsinki.fi
-
Tikkanen,
Department of Biology, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland (Current: School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland) & Interdisciplinary Research and Educational Center of Cross-border Communication CARELICA, Institute of History, Political and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, 33 Lenin Prospectus, 185910 Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia, Russia
E-mail:
Olli-Pekka.Tikkanen@uef.fi
- Chernyakova, Interdisciplinary Research and Educational Center of Cross-border Communication CARELICA, Institute of History, Political and Social Sciences, Petrozavodsk State University, 33 Lenin Prospectus, 185910 Petrozavodsk, Republic of Karelia, Russia E-mail: irina.chernyakova@onego.ru
-
Zhu,
Qingyuan Station of Forest Ecology, Institute of Applied Ecology, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, No. 72 Wenhua Road, Shenyang 110016, P.R. China; Faculty of Agriculture, Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181, Japan
E-mail:
jiaojunzhu@iae.ac.cn
- Gonda, Faculty of Agriculture, Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181, Japan E-mail: yg@nn.jp
- Matsuzaki, Faculty of Agriculture, Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181, Japan E-mail: tm@nn.jp
- Yamamoto, Faculty of Agriculture, Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181, Japan E-mail: my@nn.jp
-
Rouvinen,
University of Joensuu, Faculty of Forestry, P.O. Box 111, FIN-80101 Joensuu, Finland
E-mail:
seppo.rouvinen@forest.joensuu.fi
- Kuuluvainen, University of Helsinki, Department of Forest Ecology, P.O. Box 27, FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland E-mail: tk@nn.fi
- Siitonen, Finnish Forest Research Institute, P.O. Box 18, FIN-01301 Vantaa, Finland E-mail: juha.siitonen@metla.fi
