气候变化领域集成服务门户(CCPortal): Evaluation of pushbroom DAP relative to frame camera DAP and lidar for forest modeling

CCPortal

DOI	10.1016/j.rse.2019.111535
	Evaluation of pushbroom DAP relative to frame camera DAP and lidar for forest modeling
	Strunk J.L.; Gould P.J.; Packalen P.; Gatziolis D.; Greblowska D.; Maki C.; McGaughey R.J.
发表日期	2020
ISSN	00344257
卷号	237
英文摘要	There is growing interest in using Digital Aerial Photogrammetry (DAP) for forestry applications. However, the performance of pushbroom DAP relative to frame-based DAP and airborne lidar is not well documented. Interest in DAP stems largely from its low cost relative to lidar. Studies have demonstrated that frame-based DAP generally performs slightly poorer than lidar, but still provides good value due to its reduced cost. In the USA pushbroom imagery can be dramatically less expensive than frame-camera imagery in part because of a nationwide collection program. There is an immediate need then to understand how well pushbroom DAP works as an auxiliary data source in the prediction of key forest attributes including basal area, volume, height, and the number of trees per ha. This study compares point clouds generated from 40 cm pushbroom DAP with point clouds from lidar and 7.5 cm, 15 cm, and 30 cm frame-based DAP. Differences in point clouds from these data sources are readily apparent in visual inspections; e.g. DAP tends to measure canopy gaps poorly, omit individual trees in openings, is typically unable to represent the ground beneath canopy, and is susceptible to commission errors manifested as points above the canopy surface. Frame-based DAP provides greater canopy detail than pushbroom DAP, which becomes more apparent with higher image resolution. Our results indicated that DAP height metrics generally have a strong linear relationship with lidar metrics, with R2 values ranging from 83 – 90% for cover, and 47–80% for height quantiles. Similarly, lidar auxiliary variables explain the greatest variation in forest attributes, e.g., volume (84%), followed closely by 30 cm frame-based DAP (81%), with the poorest results from pushbroom DAP (75%). While DAP resolution had a visible effect on canopy definition, it did not appreciably affect point cloud metrics or model performances. Although pushbroom DAP explained the least variation in forest attributes, it still had sufficient explanatory power to provide good value when frame-based DAP and lidar are not available. © 2019
英文关键词	DAP; Forest inventory; Forest modeling; Forestry; Frame-camera; Lidar; NAIP; Photogrammetry; Point cloud; Pushbroom; Structure from motion
语种	英语
scopus关键词	Antennas; Cameras; Forestry; Image resolution; Photogrammetry; Timber; Forest inventory; Forest modeling; NAIP; Point cloud; Pushbroom; Structure from motion; Optical radar; airborne sensing; cloud cover; digital photogrammetry; forest inventory; forestry production; image resolution; lidar; prediction; satellite imagery; United States
来源期刊	Remote Sensing of Environment
文献类型	期刊论文
条目标识符	http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/179541
作者单位	USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3625 93rd Ave SW, Olympia, WA 98512, United States; Washington State Department of Natural Resources, PO Box 47000, 1111 Washington Street, SE, Olympia, WA 98504-7000, United States; School of Forest Sciences, Faculty of Science and Forestry, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, Joensuu, 80101, Finland; USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, 620 Southwest Main, Suite 502, Portland, OR 97205, United States; GeoTerra Inc., 60 McKinley St, Eugene, OR 97402, United States; Washington State Department of Natural Resources, PO Box 47000, 1111 Washington Street SE, Olympia, WA 98504-7000, United States; USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, University of Washington, PO Box 352100, Seattle, WA 98195-2100, United States
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Strunk J.L.,Gould P.J.,Packalen P.,et al. Evaluation of pushbroom DAP relative to frame camera DAP and lidar for forest modeling[J],2020,237.
APA	Strunk J.L..,Gould P.J..,Packalen P..,Gatziolis D..,Greblowska D..,...&McGaughey R.J..(2020).Evaluation of pushbroom DAP relative to frame camera DAP and lidar for forest modeling.Remote Sensing of Environment,237.
MLA	Strunk J.L.,et al."Evaluation of pushbroom DAP relative to frame camera DAP and lidar for forest modeling".Remote Sensing of Environment 237(2020).