4.7 Article

Estimation of Alpine Forest Structural Variables from Imaging Spectrometer Data

Journal

REMOTE SENSING
Volume 7, Issue 12, Pages 16315-16338

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs71215830

Keywords

forest structural variables; imaging spectrometer data; empirical approach; narrow-band vegetation indices; band depth indices; APEX; Swiss National Park

Funding

  1. University of Kurdistan
  2. University Research Priority Program on Global Change and Biodiversity (URPP GCB) of the University of Zurich

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Spatial information of forest structural variables is crucial for sustainable forest management planning, forest monitoring, and the assessment of forest ecosystem productivity. We investigate a complex alpine forest ecosystem located in the Swiss National Park (SNP) and apply empirical models to retrieve the structural variables canopy closure, basal area, and timbervolume at plot scale. We used imaging spectrometer (IS) data from the Airborne Prism EXperiment (APEX) in combination with in-situ measurements of forest structural variables to develop empirical models. These models are based on simple and stepwise multiple regressions, while all potential two narrow-band combinations of the Simple Ratio (SR), the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), the perpendicular vegetation index (PVI), the second soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI2), and band depth indices were tested. The accuracy of the estimated structural attributes was evaluated using a leave-one-out cross-validation technique. Using stepwise multiple regression models, we obtained a moderate to good accuracy when estimating canopy closure (R-2 = 0.81, rRMSE = 10%), basal area (R-2 = 0.68, rRMSE = 20%), and timber volume (R-2 = 0.73, rRMSE = 22%). We discuss the reliability of empirical approaches for estimates of canopy structural parameters considering the causality of light interaction and surface information.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available