Abstract

Forest growing stock volume (GSV) is an essential aspect of ecological carbon stock monitoring. The successive launches of spaceborne microwave satellites have provided a broader way to use microwave remote sensing to monitor forest accumulation. Currently, the inversion parameterization models of active microwave remote sensing stock volume mainly include the interferometric water cloud (IWCM), BIOMASAR, and Siberia. Among them, the IWCM introduces backscattering and coherence, the BIOMASAR model only introduces backscattering, and the Siberia model only introduces coherence. Although these three models combine the backscatter coefficient and coherence of SAR to estimate volume accumulation, the performance of the models has not been evaluated at the same time in the same area. Therefore, this article starts from the perspective of the three combinations of coherence and backscattering, relies on three models that do not require measured data, and evaluates the accuracy of the models’ overall inversion of GSV. In addition, we combine precipitation meteorological information, vegetation types, and seasonal variation to separately explore model performance. The comparison results show that the IWCM model is relatively stable in the process of stock volume inversion and is more sensitive to the vegetation types of coniferous and deciduous forests. The influence of seasons and precipitation on the model is weak, and the accuracy of the multi-time-series model is slightly improved. The Siberia model has a good storage volume inversion effect in this study area, but the multiple time series did not improve the model accuracy. The BIOMASAR model is simple, and its performance was slightly inferior in this study area. Precipitation can negatively affect BIOMASAR. The model results for multiple time series outperform those for single time. In summary, the stability of IWCM is more suitable for research with unknown information. The BIOMASAR model is simple, does not require coherence calculations, and is ideal for the estimation of large-scale national or world-level storage distributions. The Siberian model performs better in small regions and smaller spatiotemporal baselines.

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