Abstract

Monitoring wildland fire burn severity is important for assessing ecological outcomes of fire and their spatial patterning as well as guiding efforts to mitigate or restore areas where ecological outcomes are negative. Burn severity mapping products are typically created using satellite reflectance data but must be calibrated to field data to derive meaning. The composite burn index (CBI) is the most widely used field-based method used to calibrate satellite-based burn severity data but important limitations of this approach have yet to be resolved. The objective of this study was focused on predicting CBI from point cloud and visible-spectrum camera (RGB) metrics derived from single-scan terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) datasets to determine the viability of TLS data as an alternative approach to estimating burn severity in the field. In our approach, we considered the predictive potential of post-scan-only metrics, differenced pre- and post-scan metrics, RGB metrics, and all three together to predict CBI and evaluated these with candidate algorithms (i.e., linear model, random forest (RF), and support vector machines (SVM) and two evaluation criteria (R-squared and root mean square error (RMSE)). In congruence with the strata-based observations used to calculate CBI, we evaluated the potential approaches at the strata level and at the plot level using 70 TLS and 10 RGB independent variables that we generated from the field data. Machine learning algorithms successfully predicted total plot CBI and strata-specific CBI; however, the accuracy of predictions varied among strata by algorithm. RGB variables improved predictions when used in conjunction with TLS variables, but alone proved a poor predictor of burn severity below the canopy. Although our study was to predict CBI, our results highlight that TLS-based methods for quantifying burn severity can be an improvement over CBI in many ways because TLS is repeatable, quantitative, faster, requires less field-expertise, and is more flexible to phenological variation and biomass change in the understory where prescribed fire effects are most pronounced. We also point out that TLS data can also be leveraged to inform other monitoring needs beyond those specific to wildland fire, representing additional efficiency in using this approach.

Highlights

  • Average diameter at breast height (DBH) in plots ranged from 8.1 to 19.1 cm and average stem height ranged from 4.5 m to 11.2 m

  • Our study provides a replicable workflow and numerous variables relating to forest structure and true color RGB values that can be used as alternative criteria for refencing burn severity consistently in any landscape for both prescribed fire and wildfire

  • In contrast to the typical 23 indirectly observed variables that are integrated into composite burn index (CBI) calculations, the 70 terrestrial laser scanning (TLS)-based variables and 10 RGBbased variables presented in this study demonstrate how our approach can be used to characterize forest structure and spectral conditions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Wildland fires have varying effects on ecosystems that result from a complicated interplay between the pre-fire characteristics of the ecosystem such as species composition, creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). Wildland fire managers aim to monitor fire effects both spatially and temporally to quantify the effectiveness of fuel reduction fire treatments, identify wildfire consequences, guide responsive post-fire management, justify fuels management needs, and better understand the ecological roles, patterns, and processes of wildland fire. There is a growing need to increase the pace and scale of fire effects monitoring in the management community as prescribed fire programs and wildfire response expand to meet the growing challenges of fire suppression and ecosystem management. The term “burn severity” is often used to describe some measure of a fire’s effect on an ecosystem, but there are varying arguments about its precise meaning [3,4,5]. Bond and Keeley [6] conceptualized “fire severity” as the loss of or change in organic matter aboveground and belowground while Simard [3] defined burn severity as the magnitude of significant negative fire impacts on wildland systems

Objectives
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