Estimation of above‐ground biomass of large tropical trees with terrestrial LiDAR

Tropical forest biomass is a crucial component of global carbon emission estimations. However, calibration and validation of such estimates require accurate and effective methods to estimate in situ above‐ground biomass (AGB). Present methods rely on allometric models that are highly uncertain for large tropical trees. Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) tree modelling has demonstrated to be more accurate than these models to infer forest AGB. Nevertheless, applying TLS methods on tropical large trees is still challenging. We propose a method to estimate AGB of large tropical trees by three‐dimensional (3D) tree modelling of TLS point clouds. Twenty‐nine plots were scanned with a TLS in three study sites (Peru, Indonesia and Guyana). We identified the largest tree per plot (mean diameter at breast height of 73.5 cm), extracted its point cloud and calculated its volume by 3D modelling its structure using quantitative structure models (QSM) and converted to AGB using species‐specific wood density. We also estimated AGB using pantropical and local allometric models. To assess the accuracy of our and allometric methods, we harvest the trees and took destructive measurements. AGB estimates by the TLS–QSM method showed the best agreement in comparison to destructive harvest measurements (28.37% coefficient of variation of root mean square error [CV‐RMSE] and concordance correlation coefficient [CCC] of 0.95), outperforming the pantropical allometric models tested (35.6%–54.95% CV‐RMSE and CCC of 0.89–0.73). TLS–QSM showed also the lowest bias (overall underestimation of 3.7%) and stability across tree size range, contrasting with the allometric models that showed a systematic bias (overall underestimation ranging 15.2%–35.7%) increasing linearly with tree size. The TLS–QSM method also provided accurate tree wood volume estimates (CV RMSE of 23.7%) with no systematic bias regardless the tree structural characteristics. Our TLS–QSM method accounts for individual tree biophysical structure more effectively than allometric models, providing more accurate and less biased AGB estimates for large tropical trees, independently of their morphology. This non‐destructive method can be further used for testing and calibrating new allometric models, reducing the current under‐representation of large trees in and enhancing present and past estimates of forest biomass and carbon emissions from tropical forests.

[1]  M. Herold,et al.  Data acquisition considerations for Terrestrial Laser Scanning of forest plots , 2017 .

[2]  Sébastien Bauwens,et al.  Forest Inventory with Terrestrial LiDAR: A Comparison of Static and Hand-Held Mobile Laser Scanning , 2016 .

[3]  P. Couteron,et al.  Closing a gap in tropical forest biomass estimation: accounting for crown mass variation in pantropical allometries , 2015 .

[4]  F. M. Danson,et al.  Terrestrial Laser Scanning for Plot-Scale Forest Measurement , 2015, Current Forestry Reports.

[5]  H. Spiecker,et al.  Non Destructive Method for Biomass Prediction Combining TLS Derived Tree Volume and Wood Density , 2015 .

[6]  P. Raumonen,et al.  Massive-Scale Tree Modelling from Tls Data , 2015 .

[7]  M. Herold,et al.  Nondestructive estimates of above‐ground biomass using terrestrial laser scanning , 2015 .

[8]  Reducing uncertainties in above-ground biomass estimates using terrestrial laser scanning , 2015 .

[9]  M. Herold,et al.  Terrestrial LiDAR and 3D tree Quantitative Structure Model for quantification of aboveground biomass loss from selective logging in a tropical rainforest of Peru , 2015 .

[10]  Cristopher Brack,et al.  Tree biomass equations for tropical peat swamp forest ecosystems in Indonesia , 2014 .

[11]  B. Nelson,et al.  Improved allometric models to estimate the aboveground biomass of tropical trees , 2014, Global change biology.

[12]  O. Phillips,et al.  The importance of crown dimensions to improve tropical tree biomass estimates. , 2014, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[13]  J. Terborgh,et al.  Markedly divergent estimates of Amazon forest carbon density from ground plots and satellites , 2014, Global ecology and biogeography : a journal of macroecology.

[14]  Christian Jauvin,et al.  PypeTree: A Tool for Reconstructing Tree Perennial Tissues from Point Clouds , 2014, Sensors.

[15]  Ronald E. McRoberts,et al.  Effects of Measurement Errors on Individual Tree Stem Volume Estimates for the Austrian National Forest Inventory , 2014 .

[16]  M. Herold,et al.  New applications of 3D measurement and modelling for quantifying forest structure and biomass , 2014 .

[17]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[18]  F. Rovero,et al.  Large trees drive forest aboveground biomass variation in moist lowland forests across the tropics , 2013 .

[19]  S. Goetz,et al.  Uncertainty in the spatial distribution of tropical forest biomass: a comparison of pan-tropical maps , 2013, Carbon Balance and Management.

[20]  Juha Hyyppä,et al.  Retrieval of Forest Aboveground Biomass and Stem Volume with Airborne Scanning LiDAR , 2013, Remote. Sens..

[21]  Lilian Blanc,et al.  Error propagation in biomass estimation in tropical forests , 2013 .

[22]  Philip Lewis,et al.  Fast Automatic Precision Tree Models from Terrestrial Laser Scanner Data , 2013, Remote. Sens..

[23]  Martin Herold,et al.  Estimating above ground biomass from terrestrial laser scanning in Australian Eucalypt open forest , 2013 .

[24]  D. Clark,et al.  Tropical forest biomass estimation and the fallacy of misplaced concreteness , 2012 .

[25]  Harri Kaartinen,et al.  APPROXIMATION OF VOLUME AND BRANCH SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF TREES FROM LASER SCANNER DATA , 2012 .

[26]  Juha Hyyppä,et al.  BIOMASS ESTIMATION OF INDIVIDUAL TREES USING STEM AND CROWN DIAMETER TLS MEASUREMENTS , 2012 .

[27]  C. Woodcock,et al.  Measuring forest structure and biomass in New England forest stands using Echidna ground-based lidar , 2011 .

[28]  James C. Stegen,et al.  Variation in above-ground forest biomass across broad climatic gradients , 2011 .

[29]  S. Goetz,et al.  Advances in remote sensing technology and implications for measuring and monitoring forest carbon stocks and change , 2011 .

[30]  J. Chave,et al.  Towards a Worldwide Wood Economics Spectrum 2 . L E a D I N G D I M E N S I O N S I N W O O D F U N C T I O N , 2022 .

[31]  Sandra A. Brown,et al.  Monitoring and estimating tropical forest carbon stocks: making REDD a reality , 2007 .

[32]  Adi Jaya,et al.  BIOMASA HUTAN RAWA GAMBUT TROPIKA PADA BERBAGAI KONDISI PENUTUPAN LAHAN , 2007 .

[33]  Gábor Brolly,et al.  TREE HEIGHT ESTIMATION METHODS FOR TERRESTRIAL LASER SCANNING IN A FOREST RESERVE , 2007 .

[34]  N. H. Ravindranath,et al.  2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories , 2006 .

[35]  J. Chambers,et al.  Tree allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests , 2005, Oecologia.

[36]  Philip M. Fearnside,et al.  Wood density in dense forest in central Amazonia, Brazil , 2005 .

[37]  M. Segura,et al.  Allometric Models for Tree Volume and Total Aboveground Biomass in a Tropical Humid Forest in Costa Rica 1 , 2005 .

[38]  Richard Condit,et al.  Error propagation and scaling for tropical forest biomass estimates. , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.