Total biomass from QSMs overestimated by 9.7% while local allometric equations show an underestimation between 29.9% and 36.6%. (65 sampled Eucalyptus trees, Calders et al. 2015)
Motivation for plot-level reconstruction
Accurate biomass estimates.
Ground truth data for airborne measurements.
Cheap measurements.
Biomass estimation non-destructively.
Forest plot reconstruction
Perform TLS from several locations inside a forest plot.
Register to single point cloud.
Plot-level: tree extraction
Remove ground and under-growth.
Automatically extract trees based on segmentation.
Remove low point density regions and small separate clusters.
Make high point density regions sparser.
Large reduction in point count.
Stem extraction
Algorithm details
Partition the point cloud into small subsets corresponding surface patches in tree and other surfaces.
Use the patches and heuristics to locate the stems.
Patch surface normal approximately horizontal.
Large patch components define the stems.
Tree extraction
Algorithm details
Segment the patches into stems and branches.
Restrict the trees inside the plot.
Test case: Oak plot
South-Eastern England
Species: Quercus robur L.
Five scans, leaf-off
Leica HDS-6100
Reference biomass from allometric equation.
Test case: Eucalyptus plot
Victoria, Australia
Species: Eucalyptus leucoxylon, E. microcarpa and E. tricarpa.
RIEGL VZ-400
Reference biomass from destructive harvesting of 27 trees.
Test cases
Oak plot
Eucalyptus plot
Plot radius
15 m
40 m
Number of scans
5
5
Resolution
0.036°
0.060°
Leaves
off
on
Millions of points
124
71
After filtering
35
33
Results
Results
Oak plot
Eucalyptus plot
Number of trees
15
120 / 27
Modeling time (1 x QSM)
100 min
160 min
Modeling time (5 x QSM)
240 min
540 min
Average error per tree
24.0%
28.5%
Total error per plot
↑ 15.0%
↑ 8.5%
Computations: MacBook Pro 2.8GHz, 16GB, Matlab.
Conclusion
Fast and accurate massive scale tree modelling is possible from TLS data.
Tree extraction and modelling in hours.
Total plot level biomass were overestimated by 8% and 15% in the test cases.
The method seems to be robust.
Two different plots with different species, scanners and resolutions.
Parameters tested for sensitivity.
Multi-hectare forest regions possible.
Questions?
References
Åkerblom2015Åkerblom, M., Raumonen, P., Kaasalainen, M., Casella, E.Analysis of geometric primitives in quantitative structure models of tree stems2015Remote SensingSubmittedAnimationÅkerblom, M.3D Forest Information2014www.youtube.com/watch?v=wANRdliE1zQCalders2015Calders, K., Newnham, G., Burt, A., Murphy, S., Raumonen, P., Herold, M., Culvenor, D., Avitabile, V., Disney, M., Armston, J., Kaasalainen, M.Non-destructive estimates of above-ground biomass using terrestrial laser scanning2015Ecology and Evolution6(2)198-208Raumonen2013Raumonen, P., Kaasalainen, M., Åkerblom, M., Kaasalainen, S., Kaartinen, H., Vastaranta, M., Holopainen, M., Disney, M., Lewis, P.Fast Automatic Precision Tree Models from Terrestrial Laser Scanner Data2013Remote Sensing5(2)491-520