Skip Navigation



Forestry Advance Access published online on February 22, 2006
Forestry, doi:10.1093/forestry/cpl007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
79/2/217    most recent
cpl007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maltamo, M.
Right arrow Articles by Hyyppä, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Institute of Chartered Foresters, 2006. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Received April 24, 2005

Article

Estimation of stem volume using laser scanning-based canopy height metrics

Matti Maltamo 1 *, Kalle Eerikäinen 2, Petteri Packalén 1, and Juha Hyyppä 3

1 University of Joensuu, Faculty of Forestry, PO Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland
2 Finnish Forest Research Institute, Joensuu Research Unit, PO Box 68, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland
3 Finnish Geodetic Institute, Geodeetinrinne 2, PO Box 15, FI-02431 Masala, Finland

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Matti Maltamo, E-mail: matti.maltamo{at}forest.joensuu.fi


  Abstract

The aim of this study was to test different stem volume predictors that are capable of utilizing laser scanning-based canopy height metrics as independent variables. The three laser scanning-based methods compared were (1) a direct prediction model for the stem volume at plot level, (2) a volume prediction system based on the modelled percentiles of the basal area diameter distribution, and (3) a parameter prediction method used to determinate Weibull-based basal area diameter distributions for the plot-level stem volume prediction. The predicted volumes were also compared with field-measured volumes obtained with the Finnish conventional inventory by compartments. The best results were obtained with the first method, i.e. the model that predicts plot-level stem volumes directly, which is logical. Furthermore, the simulated reduction of point density of laser data had no effect on the accuracy of stem volume predictions. The percentile-based modelling of diameter distributions was applied, in particular, to the determination of non-homogenous stand structure; using this method, it is even possible to fit multimodal distributions. In terms of the accuracy of the predicted plot-level stem volumes, the volume prediction method based on modelled percentiles of basal area diameter distributions was the second best, whereas the volume prediction method based on the parameter prediction of the Weibull-based basal area diameter distributions resulted in slightly worse results. However, the accuracies of the three laser-based volume prediction methods tested were superior to the published results of spectral value-based remote sensing studies implemented using data collected from Finland. Furthermore, the accuracy of plot-level stem volume estimates calculated from field assessments was considerably weaker than the accuracy of the three volume prediction methods that utilized measures obtained with laser scanning.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.