ALS as Tool to Study Preferred Stem Inclination Directions

Abstract

Although gravitropism forces trees to grow vertically, stems have shown to prefer specific orientations. Apart from wind deforming the tree shape, lateral light can result in prevailing inclination directions. In recent years a species dependent interaction between gravitropism and phototropism, resulting in trunks leaning down-slope, has been confirmed, but a terrestrial investigation of such factors is limited to small scale surveys. ALS offers the opportunity to investigate trees remotely. This study shall clarify whether ALS detected tree trunks can be used to identify prevailing trunk inclinations. In particular, the effect of topography, wind, soil properties and scan direction are investigated empirically using linear regression models. 299.000 significantly inclined stems were investigated. Species-specific prevailing trunk orientations could be observed. About 58% of the inclination and 19% of the orientation could be explained by the linear models, while the tree species, tree height, aspect and slope could be identified as significant factors. The models indicate that deciduous trees tend to lean down-slope, while conifers tend to lean leeward. This study has shown that ALS is suitable to investigate the trunk orientation on larger scales. It provides empirical evidence for the effect of phototropism and wind on the trunk orientation.

3D Point Clouds in Forest Remote Sensing

“…Among these, only one paper exclusively uses passive RS data [21], while 29 papers use at least one LiDAR dataset in the analysis [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. Ten papers exclusively use airborne laser scanning (ALS) data [4,6,7,10,11,13,18,23,26,27], nine papers exclusively use terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) data in the analysis [3,9,15,16,20,22,24,25,30], two papers exclusively use mobile laser scanning (MLS) data …”

“…Finally, five papers use combined active and passive remote sensing data sets [2,14,17,19,28]. Regarding the scale of the analysis, 18 of the studies perform individual tree level (ITL) analysis [1][2][3][8][9][10][11][12][14][15][16]19,20,[23][24][25][26]30], eight papers report stand level (SL) analysis [6,7,17,18,21,22,27,29] and four report a combination of ITL and SL [4,5,13,28]. Tree position, diameter at breast height (DBH) and individual tree height (h) are the most common variables of interest, analyzed in nine, six and six papers, respectively, while the most commonly used methods are 3D reconstruction, point filtering and statistical modelling, which are used in eight, five and five papers, respectively (see Table 1).…”

“…The SM include 30 published manuscripts (see Table 1): 28 research papers [1,2,[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30], one letter [16] and one technical note [3]. Among these, only one paper exclusively uses passive RS data [21], while 29 papers use at least one LiDAR dataset in the analysis [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]…”

“…Cont. SM include 30 published manuscripts (see Table1): 28 research papers[1,2,[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30], one letter…”