Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVieira Leite, Rodrigo
dc.contributor.authorHummel do Amaral, Cibele
dc.contributor.authorDe Paula Pires, Raul
dc.contributor.authorSilva, Carlos Alberto
dc.contributor.authorBoechat Soares, Carlos Pedro
dc.contributor.authorPaulo Macedo, Renata
dc.contributor.authorAraújo Lopes Da Silva, Antonilmar
dc.contributor.authorNorth Broadbent, Eben
dc.contributor.authorMohan, Midhun
dc.contributor.authorGarcia Leite, Hélio
dc.description.abstractForest plantations are globally important for the economy and are significant for carbon sequestration. Properly managing plantations requires accurate information about stand timber stocks. In this study, we used the area (ABA) and individual tree (ITD) based approaches for estimating stem volume in fast-growing Eucalyptus spp forest plantations. Herein, we propose a new method to improve individual tree detection (ITD) in dense canopy homogeneous forests and assess the effects of stand age, slope and scan angle on ITD accuracy. Field and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data were collected in Eucalyptus urophylla x Eucalyptus grandis even-aged forest stands located in the mountainous region of the Rio Doce Valley, southeastern Brazil. We tested five methods to estimate volume from LiDAR-derived metrics using ABA: Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and linear and Gompertz models. LiDAR-derived canopy metrics were selected using the Recursive Feature Elimination algorithm and Spearman’s correlation, for nonparametric and parametric methods, respectively. For the ITD, we tested three ITD methods: two local maxima filters and the watershed method. All methods were tested adding our proposed procedure of Tree Buffer Exclusion (TBE), resulting in 35 possibilities for treetop detection. Stem volume for this approach was estimated using the Schumacher and Hall model. Estimated volumes in both ABA and ITD approaches were compared to the field observed values using the F-test. Overall, the ABA with ANN was found to be better for stand volume estimation ( ryyˆ = 0.95 and RMSE = 14.4%). Although the ITD results showed similar precision ( ryyˆ = 0.94 and RMSE = 16.4%) to the ABA, the results underestimated stem volume in younger stands and in gently sloping terrain (<25%). Stem volume maps also differed between the approaches; ITD represented the stand variability better. In addition, we discuss the importance of LiDAR metrics as input variables for stem volume estimation methods and the possible issues related to the ABA and ITD performance.ca_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipThe first author was granted with a scholarship from the CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico).ca_ES
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a:
dc.relation.ispartofRemote Sensing, 2020, vol. 12, núm. 9, p. 1513ca_ES
dc.rightscc-by (c) Vieira Leite, Rodrigo et al., 2020ca_ES
dc.subjectTree detectionca_ES
dc.subjectMachine learningca_ES
dc.subjectRemote sensingca_ES
dc.titleEstimating Stem Volume in Eucalyptus Plantations Using Airborne LiDAR: A Comparison of Area- and Individual Tree-Based Approachesca_ES

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

cc-by (c) Vieira Leite, Rodrigo et al., 2020
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as cc-by (c) Vieira Leite, Rodrigo et al., 2020