Abstract

Accurate estimation of forest aboveground biomass (AGB) is important for carbon accounting. Forest AGB estimation has been conducted with a variety of data sources and prediction methods, but many uncertainties still exist. In this study, six prediction methods, including Gaussian processes, stepwise linear regression, nonlinear regression using a logistic model, partial least squares regression, random forest, and support vector machines were used to estimate forest AGB in Jiangxi Province, China, by combining Geoscience Laser Altimeter System (GLAS) data, Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) data, and field measurements. We compared the effect of three factors (prediction methods, sample sizes of field measurements, and cross-validation settings) on the predictive quality of the methods. The results showed that the prediction methods had the most considerable effect on the prediction quality. In most cases, random forest produced more accurate estimates than the other methods. The sample sizes had an obvious effect on accuracy, especially for the random forest model. The accuracy increased with increasing sample sizes. The random forest algorithm with a large number of field measurements, was the most precise (coefficient of determination (R2) = 0.73, root mean square error (RMSE) = 23.58 Mg/ha). Increasing the number of folds within the cross-validation settings improved the R2 values. However, no apparent change occurred in RMSE for different numbers of folds. Finally, the wall-to-wall forest AGB map over the study area was generated using the random forest model.

Highlights

  • Forest ecosystems play a pivotal role in the global carbon cycle, and the contribution of the forest to carbon cycle is often quantified by forest aboveground biomass (AGB) [1]

  • The number of folds in the k-fold cross-validation settings was less important than the prediction method and sample size, as indicated by the smaller sum of squares (3.58)

  • Analysis of variance (ANOVA) results for root mean square error (RMSE) showed the same pattern, with the prediction model and sample size as well as their interaction having the larger sum of squares values (5013184, 22048, and 53584, respectively)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Forest ecosystems play a pivotal role in the global carbon cycle, and the contribution of the forest to carbon cycle is often quantified by forest aboveground biomass (AGB) [1]. AGB has been identified as a biodiversity variable suitable for estimating ecosystem functions [2]. There is particular interest in mapping forest AGB so that spatial variations in carbon stock and ecosystem functions can be monitored across a range of scales. Forest field measurements are an essential prerequisite for biomass estimation. Most researchers assume that field measured data, which are called reference data, are the most accurate. The size of the reference data set could be a crucial factor influencing the precision of forest AGB prediction. The collection of large amounts of reference data is time-consuming and laborious, so understanding how field sample size impacts the reliability of biomass estimation models would be helpful. Ecologists aiming to generate more accurate estimations of forest AGB would benefit from knowing the suitable field sample size [4]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call