Tree species classification using airborne LiDAR - effects of stand and tree parameters, downsizing of training set, intensity normalization, and sensor type

Tree species identification constitutes a bottleneck in remote sensing-based forest inventory. In passive images the differentiating features overlap and bidirectional reflectance hampers analysis. Airborne LiDAR provides radiometric and geometric information. We examined the single-trees-level response of two LiDAR sensors in over 13 000 forest trees in southern Finland. We focused on the commercially important species. Our aims were to 1) explore the relevant LiDAR features and study their dependencies on stand and tree variables, 2) examine two sensors and their fusion, 3) quantify the gain from intensity normalizations, 4) examine the importance of the size of the training set, and 5) determine the effects of stand age and site fertility. A set of 570 semiurban broad-leaved trees and exotic conifers was analyzed to 6) examine the LiDAR signal in the economically less important species. An accuracy of 88−90% was achieved in the classification of Scots pine, Norway spruce, and birch, using intensity variables. Spruce and birch showed the highest levels of confusion. Downsizing the training set from 30% to 2.5% of all trees had only a marginal effect on the performance of classifiers. The intensity features were dependent on the absolute and relative sizes of trees, especially for birch. The results suggest that leaf size, orientation, and foliage density affect the intensity, which is thus not affected by reflectance only. Some of the ecologically important species in Finland may be separable, since they gave rise to high intensity values. Comparison of the sensors implies that performance of the intensity data for species classification varies between sensors for reasons that remained uncertain. Both range and gain receiver normalization improved species classification. Weighting of the intensity values improved the fusion of two LiDAR datasets.

[1]  Helena M. Henttonen,et al.  Valtakunnan metsien 8. inventoinnin menetelmä ja tulokset metsäkeskuksittain Pohjois-Suomessa 1992–94 sekä tulokset Etelä-Suomessa 1986–92 ja koko maassa 1986–94 , 1970 .

[2]  Albert R. Stage,et al.  Most Similar Neighbor: An Improved Sampling Inference Procedure for Natural Resource Planning , 1995, Forest Science.

[3]  Tomas Brandtberg Automatic individual tree based analysis of high spatial resolution aerial images on naturally regenerated boreal forests , 1999 .

[4]  Christopher P. Quine,et al.  An investigation of the potential of digital photogrammetry to provide measurements of forest characteristics and abiotic damage , 2000 .

[5]  A. Haara,et al.  Tree Species Classification using Semi-automatic Delineation of Trees on Aerial Images , 2002 .

[6]  Peng Gong,et al.  3D Model-Based Tree Measurement from High-Resolution Aerial Imagery , 2002 .

[7]  Brian D. Ripley,et al.  Modern Applied Statistics with S Fourth edition , 2002 .

[8]  E. Næsset Predicting forest stand characteristics with airborne scanning laser using a practical two-stage procedure and field data , 2002 .

[9]  Åsa Persson,et al.  Detecting and measuring individual trees using an airborne laser scanner , 2002 .

[10]  Tomas Brandtberg Detection and analysis of individual leaf-off tree crowns in small footprint, high sampling density lidar data from the eastern deciduous forest in North America , 2003 .

[11]  Christina Gloeckner,et al.  Modern Applied Statistics With S , 2003 .

[12]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[13]  Chao Chen,et al.  Using Random Forest to Learn Imbalanced Data , 2004 .

[14]  Åsa Persson,et al.  Identifying species of individual trees using airborne laser scanner , 2004 .

[15]  J. Holmgren,et al.  TREE SPECIES CLASSIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL TREES IN SWEDEN BY COMBINING HIGH RESOLUTION LASER DATA WITH HIGH RESOLUTION NEAR-INFRARED DIGITAL IMAGES , 2004 .

[16]  I. Korpela Individual tree measurements by means of digital aerial photogrammetry , 2004, Silva Fennica Monographs.

[17]  David A. Holland,et al.  High Resolution Earth Imaging for Geospatial Information , 2005 .

[18]  Uwe Stilla,et al.  ANALYSIS OF FULL WAVEFORM LIDAR DATA FOR TREE SPECIES CLASSIFICATION , 2006 .

[19]  W. Wagner,et al.  Gaussian decomposition and calibration of a novel small-footprint full-waveform digitising airborne laser scanner , 2006 .

[20]  Juha Hyyppä,et al.  Calibration of the optech ALTM-3100 laser scanner intensity data using brightness targets , 2006 .

[21]  Markus Holopainen,et al.  Effect of data acquisition accuracy on timing of stand harvests and expected net present value. , 2006 .

[22]  Tomas Brandtberg Classifying individual tree species under leaf-off and leaf-on conditions using airborne lidar , 2007 .

[23]  E. Næsset,et al.  UTILIZING AIRBORNE LASER INTENSITY FOR TREE SPECIES CLASSIFICATION , 2007 .

[24]  Juha Hyyppä,et al.  RADIOMETRIC CALIBRATION OF ALS INTENSITY , 2007 .

[25]  Benjamin Koetz,et al.  Ray tracing for modeling of small footprint airborne laser scanning returns , 2007 .

[26]  C. Hopkinson The influence of flying altitude, beam divergence, and pulse repetition frequency on laser pulse return intensity and canopy frequency distribution , 2007 .

[27]  Andy Liaw,et al.  Classification and Regression by randomForest , 2007 .

[28]  M. Maltamo,et al.  The k-MSN method for the prediction of species-specific stand attributes using airborne laser scanning and aerial photographs , 2007 .

[29]  Ilkka Korpela,et al.  Mapping forest plots: an efficient method combining photogrammetry and field triangulation , 2007 .

[30]  Åsa Persson,et al.  Species identification of individual trees by combining high resolution LiDAR data with multi‐spectral images , 2008 .

[31]  J. Reitberger,et al.  Analysis of full waveform LIDAR data for the classification of deciduous and coniferous trees , 2008 .

[32]  I. Korpela,et al.  Appraisal of seedling stand vegetation with airborne imagery and discrete-return LiDAR : an exploratory analysis , 2008 .

[33]  M. Nilsson,et al.  Combining national forest inventory field plots and remote sensing data for forest databases , 2008 .

[34]  B. Koch,et al.  Full automatic detection of tree species based on delineated single tree crowns - a data fusion approach for airborne laser scanning data and aerial photographs. , 2008 .

[35]  Matti Maltamo,et al.  Detection of Aspens Using High Resolution Aerial Laser Scanning Data and Digital Aerial Images , 2008, Sensors.

[36]  Ilkka Korpela,et al.  Mapping of understory lichens with airborne discrete-return LiDAR data , 2008 .

[37]  W. Wagner,et al.  Area-based parameterization of forest structure using full-waveform airborne laser scanning data. , 2008 .

[38]  P. Gessler,et al.  Characterizing forest succession with lidar data: An evaluation for the Inland Northwest, USA , 2009 .

[39]  E. Næsset,et al.  Classifying species of individual trees by intensity and structure features derived from airborne laser scanner data , 2009 .

[40]  E. Næsset Effects of different sensors, flying altitudes, and pulse repetition frequencies on forest canopy metrics and biophysical stand properties derived from small-footprint airborne laser data , 2009 .

[41]  Markus Holopainen,et al.  Airborne small-footprint discrete-return LiDAR data in the assessment of boreal mire surface patterns, vegetation, and habitats , 2009 .

[42]  H. Andersen,et al.  Tree species differentiation using intensity data derived from leaf-on and leaf-off airborne laser scanner data , 2009 .

[43]  Petteri Packalen,et al.  Identification of Scandinavian Commercial Species of Individual Trees from Airborne Laser Scanning Data Using Alpha Shape Metrics , 2009 .

[44]  Terje Gobakken,et al.  Different plot selection strategies for field training data in ALS-assisted forest , 2010 .