Multiscale Very High Resolution Topographic Models in Alpine Ecology: Pros and Cons of Airborne LiDAR and Drone-Based Stereo-Photogrammetry Technologies

The vulnerability of alpine environments to climate change presses an urgent need to accurately model and understand these ecosystems. Popularity in the use of digital elevation models (DEMs) to derive proxy environmental variables has increased over the past decade, particularly as DEMs are relatively cheaply acquired at very high resolutions (VHR; <1 m spatial resolution). Here, we implement a multiscale framework and compare DEM-derived variables produced by Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) and stereo-photogrammetry (PHOTO) methods, with the aim of assessing their relevance and utility in species distribution modelling (SDM). Using a case study on the arctic-alpine plant, Arabis alpina, in two valleys in the western Swiss Alps, we show that both LiDAR and PHOTO technologies can be relevant for producing DEM-derived variables for use in SDMs. We demonstrate that PHOTO DEMs, up to a spatial resolution of at least 1 m, rivalled the accuracy of LiDAR DEMs, largely owing to the customizability of PHOTO DEMs to the study sites compared to commercially available LiDAR DEMs. We obtained DEMs at spatial resolutions of 6.25 cm–8 m for PHOTO and 50 cm–32 m for LiDAR, where we determined that the optimal spatial resolutions of DEM-derived variables in SDM were between 1 and 32 m, depending on the variable and site characteristics. We found that the reduced extent of PHOTO DEMs altered the calculations of all derived variables, which had particular consequences on their relevance at the site with heterogenous terrain. However, for the homogenous site, SDMs based on PHOTO-derived variables generally had higher predictive powers than those derived from LiDAR at matching resolutions. From our results, we recommend carefully considering the required DEM extent to produce relevant derived variables. We also advocate implementing a multiscale framework to appropriately assess the ecological relevance of derived variables, where we caution against the use of VHR-DEMs finer than 50 cm in such studies.

[1]  R. Devillers,et al.  Comparing Selections of Environmental Variables for Ecological Studies: A Focus on Terrain Attributes , 2016, PloS one.

[2]  Miroslav Dudík,et al.  Modeling of species distributions with Maxent: new extensions and a comprehensive evaluation , 2008 .

[3]  K. Cook.  An evaluation of the effectiveness of low-cost UAVs and structure from motion for geomorphic change detection , 2017 .

[4]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists , 2011 .

[5]  J. Monteith,et al.  Boundary Layer Climates. , 1979 .

[6]  Michael Höhle,et al.  Accuracy assessment of digital elevation models by means of robust statistical methods , 2009 .

[7]  Reamonn Fealy,et al.  Are fine resolution digital elevation models always the best choice in digital soil mapping , 2013 .

[8]  P. Orozco‐terWengel,et al.  Simple rules for an efficient use of Geographic Information Systems in molecular ecology , 2017, bioRxiv.

[9]  F. Gugerli,et al.  Population genomic footprints of selection and associations with climate in natural populations of Arabidopsis halleri from the Alps , 2013, Molecular ecology.

[10]  H. H. Birks,et al.  Stay or go – how topographic complexity influences alpine plant population and community responses to climate change , 2017 .

[11]  D. Ackerly,et al.  Microclimate and demography interact to shape stable population dynamics across the range of an alpine plant. , 2018, The New phytologist.

[12]  Bharat Lohani,et al.  Airborne LiDAR Technology: A Review of Data Collection and Processing Systems , 2017 .

[13]  N. Zimmermann,et al.  Predictive mapping of alpine grasslands in Switzerland: Species versus community approach , 1999 .

[14]  M. Uysal,et al.  An Experimental Analysis of Digital Elevation Models Generated with Lidar Data and UAV Photogrammetry , 2018, Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing.

[15]  K. Anderson,et al.  The problem of scale in predicting biological responses to climate , 2020, Global change biology.

[16]  S. Joost,et al.  Nested Species Distribution Models of Chlamydiales in Ixodes ricinus (Tick) Hosts in Switzerland , 2020, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[17]  Vítězslav Moudrý,et al.  Comparison of leaf-off and leaf-on combined UAV imagery and airborne LiDAR for assessment of a post-mining site terrain and vegetation structure: Prospects for monitoring hazards and restoration success , 2019, Applied Geography.

[18]  Xiaoye Liu,et al.  Airborne LiDAR for DEM generation: some critical issues , 2008 .

[19]  T. Sankey,et al.  The effects of topographic surveying technique and data resolution on the detection and interpretation of geomorphic change , 2019, Geomorphology.

[20]  Joachim Höhle,et al.  The EuroSDR Test "Checking and Improving of Digital Terrain Models" , 2006 .

[21]  Christian Bernhofer,et al.  GIS‐based regionalisation of radiation, temperature and coupling measures in complex terrain for low mountain ranges , 2005 .

[22]  Robert P. Anderson,et al.  Opening the black box: an open-source release of Maxent , 2017 .

[23]  Craig J. Brown,et al.  Influence of artefacts in marine digital terrain models on habitat maps and species distribution models: a multiscale assessment , 2017 .

[24]  Michaël Kalbermatten,et al.  Multiscale analysis of high resolution digital elevation models using the wavelet transform , 2010 .

[25]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  What we use is not what we know: environmental predictors in plant distribution models , 2016 .

[26]  G. Walther,et al.  Trends in the upward shift of alpine plants , 2005 .

[27]  M. Fortin,et al.  Considering spatial and temporal scale in landscape‐genetic studies of gene flow , 2010, Molecular ecology.

[28]  J. M. Sappington,et al.  Quantifying Landscape Ruggedness for Animal Habitat Analysis: A Case Study Using Bighorn Sheep in the Mojave Desert , 2007 .

[29]  Bo Wu,et al.  Review of geometric fusion of remote sensing imagery and laser scanning data , 2015 .

[30]  G. Grabherr,et al.  Effects of climate change on the alpine and nival vegetation of the Alps , 2014 .

[31]  Hanna Tuomisto,et al.  DISSECTING THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF ECOLOGICAL DATA AT MULTIPLE SCALES , 2004 .

[32]  J. Elith,et al.  Sensitivity of predictive species distribution models to change in grain size , 2007 .

[33]  Stéphane Joost,et al.  Very high resolution digital elevation models : Do they improve models of plant species distribution? , 2006 .

[34]  Christian Ginzler,et al.  Accuracy assessment of airborne photogrammetrically derived high-resolution digital elevation models in a high mountain environment , 2014 .

[35]  Sandra M. Guzmán,et al.  Selection of optimal scales for soil depth prediction on headwater hillslopes: A modeling approach , 2018 .

[36]  Kevin Leempoel,et al.  Very high‐resolution digital elevation models: are multi‐scale derived variables ecologically relevant? , 2015 .

[37]  Jürgen Böhner,et al.  Land-Surface Parameters Specific to Topo-Climatology , 2009 .

[38]  Airborne LiDAR for DEM generation: some critical issues , 2008 .

[39]  J. Böhner,et al.  Spatial Prediction of Soil Attributes Using Terrain Analysis and Climate Regionalisation , 2006 .

[40]  Emmanuel P. Baltsavias,et al.  Airborne laser scanning: basic relations and formulas , 1999 .

[41]  Ottar Michelsen,et al.  Continent-wide response of mountain vegetation to climate change , 2012 .

[42]  Dimitri Van De Ville,et al.  Multiscale analysis of geomorphological and geological features in high resolution digital elevation models using the wavelet transform , 2012 .

[43]  C. Thorne,et al.  Quantitative analysis of land surface topography , 1987 .

[44]  D. Inouye.  Effects of climate change on alpine plants and their pollinators , 2020, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[45]  Aurélie Coulon,et al.  Identifying future research needs in landscape genetics: where to from here? , 2009, Landscape Ecology.

[46]  M. Hutchinson,et al.  Digital terrain analysis. , 2008 .

[47]  C. Körner,et al.  Topographically controlled thermal‐habitat differentiation buffers alpine plant diversity against climate warming , 2011 .

[48]  B. J,et al.  Soil regionalisation by means of terrain analysis and process parameterisation , 2002 .

[49]  S. Joost,et al.  Nested species distribution models of Chlamydiales in tick host Ixodes ricinus in Switzerland , 2020, bioRxiv.

[50]  Ross Purves,et al.  Terrestrial laser scanning improves digital elevation models and topsoil pH modelling in regions with complex topography and dense vegetation , 2017, Environ. Model. Softw..

[51]  M. Guglielmin,et al.  Unexpected impacts of climate change on alpine vegetation , 2007 .

[52]  David I. Warton,et al.  Topoclimate versus macroclimate: how does climate mapping methodology affect species distribution models and climate change projections? , 2014 .

[53]  Emmanuel P. Baltsavias,et al.  A comparison between photogrammetry and laser scanning , 1999 .

[54]  Sung Yong Shin,et al.  Scattered Data Interpolation with Multilevel B-Splines , 1997, IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph..

[55]  Robert P. Anderson,et al.  Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions , 2006 .

[56]  A. Guisan,et al.  Assessing alpine plant vulnerability to climate change: a modeling perspective , 2000 .

[57]  C. Randin,et al.  Very high resolution environmental predictors in species distribution models , 2014 .

[58]  I. Woodhouse,et al.  Structure from Motion (SfM) Photogrammetry with Drone Data: A Low Cost Method for Monitoring Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Forests in Developing Countries , 2017 .

[59]  S. Joost,et al.  Regional investigation of spatial-temporal variability of soil magnesium - a case study from Switzerland , 2020 .

[60]  Bingbo Gao,et al.  State-of-the-Art: DTM Generation Using Airborne LIDAR Data , 2017, Sensors.

[61]  Craig J. Brown,et al.  Towards a framework for terrain attribute selection in environmental studies , 2017, Environ. Model. Softw..