2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2018.01.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automatic dendrometry: Tree detection, tree height and diameter estimation using terrestrial laser scanning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
57
2
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
1
57
2
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition to the influence of bark roughness, the main reasons for the smaller DBH estimation were the shape of the trunk and the low density and uneven distribution of point cloud data [40,56]. The precision of the tree height estimation (RMSE = 1.3 m) in our study was lower than that reported by Cabo et al [58]. That was likely due to the higher trunk density in our plots, which caused occlusion of tree tops, leading to the modelling error of the tree height-DBH model.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition to the influence of bark roughness, the main reasons for the smaller DBH estimation were the shape of the trunk and the low density and uneven distribution of point cloud data [40,56]. The precision of the tree height estimation (RMSE = 1.3 m) in our study was lower than that reported by Cabo et al [58]. That was likely due to the higher trunk density in our plots, which caused occlusion of tree tops, leading to the modelling error of the tree height-DBH model.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 86%
“…The comparison of DBH from TLS data and field measurements shows a high consistency. The precision of the DBH estimation in our study (RMSE = 1.2 cm) was higher than that reported by Calders et al [2] and Cabo et al [58]. The slope of the fitting line between the estimated DBH and the measured data was 0.97, which indicated that the DBH of trees was slightly underestimated on the whole.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 71%
“…After stem extraction, the DBH can be estimated from the stem points at breast height. There have been many DBH methods proposed, such as linear least square (Landau algorithm) circle fitting [3,10], nonlinear least squares (Gauss Newton) circle fitting [7], crescent moon method proposed by Kiraly and Brolly [47], RANSAC circle detection [39], Hough transform, and random Hough transform [26,31,40]. However, most of them are based on the assumption that the stem section is circular.…”
Section: Robust Least Squares Elliptic Fitting For Dbh Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main task is to estimate the optimal DBH parameters from the point cloud of the trunk at the corresponding height. Many articles have proposed many DBH estimation methods, such as linearized or nonlinear least square circle fitting [3,7,24], Hough-transform [26], cylinder fitting [15,38], random sample consensus (RANSAC) algorithm [8,39], and random Hough transform [31,40]. Most of these methods model the stem profiles as a circle and fit the diameter parameter from the stem points at the breast height.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) has proven to non-destructively provide three-dimensional (3D) information on tree stems (Liang et al 2014, Kankare et al 2013, Raumonen et al 2013, Saarinen et al 2017 that has not been possible with calipers or measurement tape. Individual trees can be detected from a TLS-based point cloud through identification of circular shapes (Aschoff et al 2004, Maas et al 2008 or clusters of points (Cabo et al 2018, Zhang et al 2019. Points from individual trees can then be utilized in reconstructing the entire architectural structure of a tree (Raumonen et al 2013, Hackenberg et al 2014 or only the stem (Liang et al 2011, Heinzel & Huber 2017.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%