4.7 Article

Highly Local Model Calibration with a New GEDI LiDAR Asset on Google Earth Engine Reduces Landsat Forest Height Signal Saturation

期刊

REMOTE SENSING
卷 12, 期 17, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs12172840

关键词

GEDI; Landsat; Google Earth Engine; forest structure

资金

  1. NASA GEDI Interagency Agreement, NASA [RPO201523, NNL 15AA03C]
  2. NASA Carbon Monitoring System Grant [80HQTR18T0016]
  3. US Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While Landsat has proved to be effective for monitoring many elements of forest condition and change, the platform has well-documented limitations in measuring forest structure, the vertical distribution of the canopy. This is important because structure determines several key ecosystem functions, including: carbon storage; habitat suitability; and timber volume. Canopy structure is directly measured by LiDAR, and it should be possible to train Landsat structure models at a highly local scale with the dense, global sample of full waveform LiDAR observations collected by NASA's Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI). Local models are expected to perform better because: (a) such models may take advantage of localized correlations between structure and canopy surface reflectance; and (b) to the extent that models revert to the mean of the calibration data due to a lack of discrimination, local models will revert to a more representative mean. We tested Landsat-based relative height predictions using a new GEDI asset on Google Earth Engine, described here. Mean prediction error declined by 23% and important prediction biases at the extremes of the range of canopy height dropped as model calibration became more local, minimizing forest structure signal saturation commonly associated with Landsat and other passive optical sensors. Our results suggest that Landsat-based maps of structural variables such as height and biomass may substantially benefit from the kind of local calibration that GEDI's dense sample of LiDAR data supports.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据