Yao Wang , Hongliang Fang , Yu Li , Sijia Li , Hao Tang
{"title":"基于GEDI的全球森林立地垂直植物面积指数剖面产品的验证","authors":"Yao Wang , Hongliang Fang , Yu Li , Sijia Li , Hao Tang","doi":"10.1016/j.agrformet.2025.110612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Knowledge of the vertical plant area index (PAI) profile is critical for understanding the forest structural and functional characteristics. Vertical PAI profile has been retrieved by the Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) spaceborne LiDAR. However, large-scale validation of the GEDI PAI profile products is limited, and their performance has yet to be clearly established. This study aims to systematically assess the performance of GEDI PAI profile product and investigate the impact factors on PAI profile estimates. The digital hemispherical photography (DHP) of vertical measurement and airborne laser scanning (ALS) data were collected to derive the reference PAI profiles. The results indicate that adjusting footprint geolocation before GEDI validation is essential for enhancing product assessment. The GEDI PAI profile moderately agrees with the DHP and ALS (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.84 and 0.58, respectively) but underestimates the reference (bias = −0.14 and −0.28, respectively). The needleleaf forest exhibits the highest agreement with ALS (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.60 and bias = −0.16), while shrubland shows the lowest agreement (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.38 and bias = 0.21). The agreement between GEDI and ALS increases with the canopy height but decreases with the canopy cover. Low vegetation height and steep slopes affect the GEDI PAI accuracy owing to the difficulty in decomposing the mixed ground and canopy returns. Additionally, the limited penetration of GEDI in dense vegetation with high canopy cover contributes to the underestimation. The performance of GEDI PAI profile can be improved by applying a specific canopy and ground reflectance ratio (<span><math><msub><mi>ρ</mi><mi>v</mi></msub></math></span>/<span><math><msub><mi>ρ</mi><mi>g</mi></msub></math></span>) value derived from the linear regression of return energy. The discrepancies between GEDI and ALS PAI profiles were partially attributed to the sub-optimal waveform processing algorithm settings and differences in LiDAR specifications. Further improvement to the GEDI PAI product may be achieved by implementing a customized waveform processing algorithm and using realistic <span><math><msub><mi>ρ</mi><mi>v</mi></msub></math></span>/<span><math><msub><mi>ρ</mi><mi>g</mi></msub></math></span> values.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50839,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology","volume":"371 ","pages":"Article 110612"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the vertical plant area index profile product derived from GEDI over global forest sites\",\"authors\":\"Yao Wang , Hongliang Fang , Yu Li , Sijia Li , Hao Tang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.agrformet.2025.110612\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Knowledge of the vertical plant area index (PAI) profile is critical for understanding the forest structural and functional characteristics. Vertical PAI profile has been retrieved by the Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) spaceborne LiDAR. However, large-scale validation of the GEDI PAI profile products is limited, and their performance has yet to be clearly established. This study aims to systematically assess the performance of GEDI PAI profile product and investigate the impact factors on PAI profile estimates. The digital hemispherical photography (DHP) of vertical measurement and airborne laser scanning (ALS) data were collected to derive the reference PAI profiles. The results indicate that adjusting footprint geolocation before GEDI validation is essential for enhancing product assessment. The GEDI PAI profile moderately agrees with the DHP and ALS (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.84 and 0.58, respectively) but underestimates the reference (bias = −0.14 and −0.28, respectively). The needleleaf forest exhibits the highest agreement with ALS (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.60 and bias = −0.16), while shrubland shows the lowest agreement (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.38 and bias = 0.21). The agreement between GEDI and ALS increases with the canopy height but decreases with the canopy cover. Low vegetation height and steep slopes affect the GEDI PAI accuracy owing to the difficulty in decomposing the mixed ground and canopy returns. Additionally, the limited penetration of GEDI in dense vegetation with high canopy cover contributes to the underestimation. The performance of GEDI PAI profile can be improved by applying a specific canopy and ground reflectance ratio (<span><math><msub><mi>ρ</mi><mi>v</mi></msub></math></span>/<span><math><msub><mi>ρ</mi><mi>g</mi></msub></math></span>) value derived from the linear regression of return energy. The discrepancies between GEDI and ALS PAI profiles were partially attributed to the sub-optimal waveform processing algorithm settings and differences in LiDAR specifications. Further improvement to the GEDI PAI product may be achieved by implementing a customized waveform processing algorithm and using realistic <span><math><msub><mi>ρ</mi><mi>v</mi></msub></math></span>/<span><math><msub><mi>ρ</mi><mi>g</mi></msub></math></span> values.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology\",\"volume\":\"371 \",\"pages\":\"Article 110612\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168192325002321\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168192325002321","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Validation of the vertical plant area index profile product derived from GEDI over global forest sites
Knowledge of the vertical plant area index (PAI) profile is critical for understanding the forest structural and functional characteristics. Vertical PAI profile has been retrieved by the Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) spaceborne LiDAR. However, large-scale validation of the GEDI PAI profile products is limited, and their performance has yet to be clearly established. This study aims to systematically assess the performance of GEDI PAI profile product and investigate the impact factors on PAI profile estimates. The digital hemispherical photography (DHP) of vertical measurement and airborne laser scanning (ALS) data were collected to derive the reference PAI profiles. The results indicate that adjusting footprint geolocation before GEDI validation is essential for enhancing product assessment. The GEDI PAI profile moderately agrees with the DHP and ALS (R2 = 0.84 and 0.58, respectively) but underestimates the reference (bias = −0.14 and −0.28, respectively). The needleleaf forest exhibits the highest agreement with ALS (R2 = 0.60 and bias = −0.16), while shrubland shows the lowest agreement (R2 = 0.38 and bias = 0.21). The agreement between GEDI and ALS increases with the canopy height but decreases with the canopy cover. Low vegetation height and steep slopes affect the GEDI PAI accuracy owing to the difficulty in decomposing the mixed ground and canopy returns. Additionally, the limited penetration of GEDI in dense vegetation with high canopy cover contributes to the underestimation. The performance of GEDI PAI profile can be improved by applying a specific canopy and ground reflectance ratio (/) value derived from the linear regression of return energy. The discrepancies between GEDI and ALS PAI profiles were partially attributed to the sub-optimal waveform processing algorithm settings and differences in LiDAR specifications. Further improvement to the GEDI PAI product may be achieved by implementing a customized waveform processing algorithm and using realistic / values.
期刊介绍:
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology is an international journal for the publication of original articles and reviews on the inter-relationship between meteorology, agriculture, forestry, and natural ecosystems. Emphasis is on basic and applied scientific research relevant to practical problems in the field of plant and soil sciences, ecology and biogeochemistry as affected by weather as well as climate variability and change. Theoretical models should be tested against experimental data. Articles must appeal to an international audience. Special issues devoted to single topics are also published.
Typical topics include canopy micrometeorology (e.g. canopy radiation transfer, turbulence near the ground, evapotranspiration, energy balance, fluxes of trace gases), micrometeorological instrumentation (e.g., sensors for trace gases, flux measurement instruments, radiation measurement techniques), aerobiology (e.g. the dispersion of pollen, spores, insects and pesticides), biometeorology (e.g. the effect of weather and climate on plant distribution, crop yield, water-use efficiency, and plant phenology), forest-fire/weather interactions, and feedbacks from vegetation to weather and the climate system.