Flying high: Sampling savanna vegetation with UAV‐lidar

Abstract

The flexibility of UAV‐lidar remote sensing offers a myriad of new opportunities for savanna ecology, enabling researchers to measure vegetation structure at a variety of temporal and spatial scales. However, this flexibility also increases the number of customizable variables, such as flight altitude, pattern, and sensor parameters, that, when adjusted, can impact data quality as well as the applicability of a dataset to a specific research interest. To better understand the impacts that UAV flight patterns and sensor parameters have on vegetation metrics, we compared 7 lidar point clouds collected with a Riegl VUX − 1LR over a 300 × 300 m area in the Kruger National Park, South Africa. We varied the altitude (60 m above ground, 100 m, 180 m, and 300 m) and sampling pattern (slowing the flight speed, increasing the overlap between flightlines and flying a crosshatch pattern), and compared a variety of vertical vegetation metrics related to height and fractional cover. Comparing vegetation metrics from acquisitions with different flight patterns and sensor parameters, we found that both flight altitude and pattern had significant impacts on derived structure metrics, with variation in altitude causing the largest impacts. Flying higher resulted in lower point cloud heights, leading to a consistent downward trend in percentile height metrics and fractional cover. The magnitude and direction of these trends also varied depending on the vegetation type sampled (trees, shrubs or grasses), showing that the structure and composition of savanna vegetation can interact with the lidar signal and alter derived metrics. While there were statistically significant differences in metrics among acquisitions, the average differences were often on the order of a few centimetres or less, which shows great promise for future comparison studies. We discuss how these results apply in practice, explaining the potential trade‐offs of flying at higher altitudes and with alternate patterns. We highlight how flight and sensor parameters can be geared toward specific ecological applications and vegetation types, and we explore future opportunities for optimizing UAV‐lidar sampling designs in savannas.

Robust characterization of forest structure from airborne laser scanning – a systematic assessment and sample workflow for ecologists

“…First, we ignored interactions between pulse density degradation and other sources of uncertainty (e.g., an operator flying at higher altitudes can compensate lower point densities by increasing laser power) and focussed on sites with subtle changes in topography (except for Robson Creek; Fig S9). Furthermore, some sources of point cloud variation (rotational patterns of scanners, varying footprint sizes or waveform-to-discrete-point conversion) were beyond the scope of our analysis and would need ray tracing simulations or careful experiments with different instrumentations (Boucher et al, 2023; Brede et al, 2022; Næsset, 2009). Footprint size, for example, has been found to introduce moderate, but highly variable biases into height estimates (0.1-0.5 m), including both positive (Næsset, 2009), negative (Morsdorf et al, 2008; Roussel et al, 2017) and site-dependent (Goodwin et al, 2006) differences between larger and smaller footprints.…”

A new method for voxel‐based modelling of three‐dimensional forest scenes with integration of terrestrial and airborne LiDAR data

“…Although many methods have been proposed to create 3D tree models, modelling realistic 3D forest scenes is still challenging due to the high complexity of tree architectures in reality (Hu et al., 2017). Recently, the development of LiDAR technology makes it a powerful tool in forest inventory, and researchers can use different LiDAR systems to collect information of 3D architectures of forests (Boucher et al., 2023; Liang et al., 2016; Zhao et al., 2011). Therefore, LiDAR is increasingly used to extract 3D structural attributes of forests, for example tree position, height, crown radius, diameter at breast height (DBH), leaf area index (LAI), leaf angle distribution and detailed architectures of individual trees, which can then be used to create 3D forest models (Allen et al., 2022; Burt et al., 2019; Hardenbol et al., 2022; Zhao et al., 2015).…”

Automated detection of an insect‐induced keystone vegetation phenotype using airborne LiDAR

“…Ecologists, foresters and conservation practitioners need ‘biodiversity scanners’—timely, cost‐effective landscape observation technology to inventory biodiversity, audit conservation progress and track changes in ecosystem function (Bush et al., 2017; Jetz et al., 2019; Ji et al., 2022). One promising candidate is the use of light detection and ranging (LiDAR) scanners to provide high‐resolution scans of terrain and vegetation structure across vast, difficult‐to‐access landscapes (Boucher et al., 2023; Kellner et al., 2019). LiDAR scanners emit pulses of light into the survey environment and use temporal differences in received light reflection to reconstruct surrounding objects as a collection of point clouds in three‐dimensional space (Gatziolis & Andersen, 2008).…”