IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p3720-d776565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Individual Tree Height Estimated from LiDAR and Digital Aerial Photogrammetry in Young Forests

Author

Listed:
  • Arun Gyawali

    (Laboratory of Bioenergy, Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology LUT, Lönnrotinkatu 7, 50100 Mikkeli, Finland)

  • Mika Aalto

    (Laboratory of Bioenergy, Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology LUT, Lönnrotinkatu 7, 50100 Mikkeli, Finland)

  • Jussi Peuhkurinen

    (Arbonaut Oy, Kaislakatu 2, 80130 Joensuu, Finland)

  • Maria Villikka

    (Arbonaut Oy, Kaislakatu 2, 80130 Joensuu, Finland)

  • Tapio Ranta

    (Laboratory of Bioenergy, Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology LUT, Lönnrotinkatu 7, 50100 Mikkeli, Finland)

Abstract

Biomass stored in young forests has enormous potential for the reduction of fossil fuel consumption. However, to ensure long-term sustainability, the measurement accuracy of tree height is crucial for forest biomass and carbon stock monitoring, particularly in young forests. Precise height measurement using traditional field measurements is challenging and time consuming. Remote sensing (RS) methods can, however, replace traditional field-based forest inventory. In our study, we compare individual tree height estimation from Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) and Digital Aerial Photogrammetry (DAP) with field measurements. It should be noted, however, that there was a one-year temporal difference between the field measurement and LiDAR/DAP scanning. A total of 130 trees (32 Scots Pine, 29 Norway Spruce, 67 Silver Birch, and 2 Eurasian Aspen) were selected for height measurement in a young private forest in south-east Finland. Statistical correlation based on paired t-tests and analysis of variance (ANOVA, one way) was used to compare the tree height measured with the different methods. Comparative results between the remote sensing methods and field measurements showed that LiDAR measurements had a stronger correlation with the field measurements and higher accuracy for pine (R 2 = 0.86, bias = 0.70, RMSE = 1.44) and birch (R 2 = 0.81, bias = 0.86, RMSE = 1.56) than DAP, which had correlation values of (R 2 = 0.71, bias = 0.82, RMSE = 2.13) for pine and (R 2 = 0.69, bias = 1.19, RMSE = 2.08) for birch. The correlation of the two remote sensing methods with the field measurements was very similar for spruce: LiDAR (R 2 = 0.83, bias = 0.30, RMSE = 1.17) and DAP (R 2 = 0.83, bias = 0.44, RMSE = 1.26). Moreover, the correlation was highly significant, with minimum error and mean difference (R 2 = 0.79–0.98, MD = 0.12–0.33, RMSD = 0.45–1.67) between LiDAR and DAP for all species. However, the paired t-test suggested that there is a significant difference ( p < 0.05) in height observation between the field measurements and remote sensing for pine and birch. The test showed that LiDAR and DAP output are not significantly different for pine and spruce. Presumably, the time difference in field campaign between the methods was the reason for these significant results. Additionally, the ANOVA test indicated that the overall means of estimated height from LiDAR and DAP were not significantly different from field measurements in all species. We concluded that utilization of LiDAR and DAP for estimating individual tree height in young forests is possible with acceptable error and comparable accuracy to field measurement. Hence, forest inventory in young forests can be carried out using LiDAR or DAP for height estimation at the individual tree level as an alternative to traditional field measurement approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Arun Gyawali & Mika Aalto & Jussi Peuhkurinen & Maria Villikka & Tapio Ranta, 2022. "Comparison of Individual Tree Height Estimated from LiDAR and Digital Aerial Photogrammetry in Young Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3720-:d:776565
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3720/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3720/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Petty, Aaron & Kärhä, Kalle, 2011. "Effects of subsidies on the profitability of energy wood production of wood chips from early thinnings in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(7), pages 575-581, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kallio, A.M.I. & Salminen, O. & Sievänen, R., 2016. "Forests in the Finnish low carbon scenarios," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 45-62.
    2. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Pongrácz, Eva & Fabritius, Timo, 2013. "The potential of using biomass-based reducing agents in the blast furnace: A review of thermochemical conversion technologies and assessments related to sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 511-528.
    3. Spinelli, Raffaele & Magagnotti, Natascia & Jessup, Eric & Soucy, Michel, 2017. "Perspectives and challenges of logging enterprises in the Italian Alps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 44-51.
    4. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Pongrácz, Eva & Fabritius, Timo, 2014. "Bioreducer use in Finnish blast furnace ironmaking – Analysis of CO2 emission reduction potential and mitigation cost," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 82-93.
    5. Teijo Palander & Kalle Kärhä, 2016. "Adaptive Procurement Guidelines for Automatic Selection of Renewable Forest Energy Sources within a Sustainable Energy Production System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-10, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3720-:d:776565. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.