2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2006.04.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimation of LAI and fractional cover from small footprint airborne laser scanning data based on gap fraction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
292
1
4

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 397 publications
(318 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
6
292
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Canopy cover was estimated as the ratio of the canopy energy to the total energy [14,29]. Typically, a correction factor of 2 is applied to the intensity of the ground returns to account for the differences in reflectance between canopy and ground at the wavelength of the LiDAR system [15,30]. However soil type or the presence of duff and litter affect this correction factor significantly, thus making it site-dependent.…”
Section: Lidar Data and Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Canopy cover was estimated as the ratio of the canopy energy to the total energy [14,29]. Typically, a correction factor of 2 is applied to the intensity of the ground returns to account for the differences in reflectance between canopy and ground at the wavelength of the LiDAR system [15,30]. However soil type or the presence of duff and litter affect this correction factor significantly, thus making it site-dependent.…”
Section: Lidar Data and Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Likewise, although CC was not measured in the field, numerous previous studies have demonstrated that CC can be accurately estimated from LiDAR data. For example, Morsdorf et al [15] reported an RMSE of 0.18 using only first returns; Hopkinson and Chasmer [14] also reported a mean error less than 0.2 in CC estimation from LiDAR data across multiple ecozones. Using these values as reference for the LiDAR-based CC estimates and an uncertainty of 18% was assumed.…”
Section: Model Performance and Error Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Korpela (2008) found that lidar intensity values discriminated well between lichens and other ground vegetation. Precise lidar-based estimation of leaf area index (LAI) from small-footprint data (Morsdorf et al, 2006) contributed to the detection of defoliation of Scots pine in Norway due to a severe insect attack (Solberg et al, 2006).…”
Section: Lidar Metrics As Predictors Of Forest Attributesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is worth noting that the quality of the DEM strongly depends on the point density, especially in closed-canopy forests (Reutebuch et al 2003). The flexibility of airborne LiDAR, coupled with a high level of positional accuracy and point density, makes airborne LiDAR systems an attractive data acquisition tool for estimating a wide range of tree and forest parameters (Laes et al 2011) such as tree height (Andersen et al 2006;Detto et al 2013), stem volume (Heurich and Thoma 2008), tree biomass (Li et al 2008), and leaf area index (Morsdorf et al 2006). The use of airborne LiDAR for estimating forest inventory parameters and structural characteristics is reviewed by van Leeuwen and Nieuwenhuis (2010), and a meta-analysis of 70 articles has been conducted by Zolkos et al (2013).…”
Section: Light Detection and Ranging Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%