评估恢复期间热带森林结构、冠层闭合和地上碳的恢复：比较传统与基于仪器的指标

IF 2.9 Q1 FORESTRY

Trees, Forests and People Pub Date : 2025-06-30 DOI:10.1016/j.tfp.2025.100928

Waiprach Suwannarat , Stephen Elliott , Worayut Takaew , Pornpawee Laohasom , Watit Khokthong

{"title":"评估恢复期间热带森林结构、冠层闭合和地上碳的恢复：比较传统与基于仪器的指标","authors":"Waiprach Suwannarat , Stephen Elliott , Worayut Takaew , Pornpawee Laohasom , Watit Khokthong","doi":"10.1016/j.tfp.2025.100928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Carbon accumulation and structural development are key indicators of the progress of forest-ecosystem restoration. However current techniques of quantifying them are time-consuming, labor-intensive and costly. Therefore, we tested four instrument-based metrics (vegetation area index (VAI) from terrestrial LiDAR (light detection and ranging), leaf area index (LAI) from a plant-canopy analyser, and canopy cover, from both hemispherical photography (CC_HP) and a densiometer (CC_D)), as alternatives to conventional metrics (above-ground carbon (AGC), tree stocking density (TSD) and basal area (BA)), derived from manual measurements of trees. The study sites were: a control (pre-restoration conditions), 1½- and 11½-year-old forest, both undergoing restoration by the framework species method (FSM), and primary forest of indeterminate age (restoration target). VAI, LAI and CC_D, clearly distinguished among the control site and 1½- and 11½-year-old-restoration (<em>P</em> < 0.05). CC_HP failed to distinguish the control plot from young restoration. All four metrics correlated well (<em>r</em> <em>=</em> 0.58–0.80) with conventional metrics (above-ground carbon (AGC), tree stocking density (TSD) and basal area (BA)), when data were combined across all plots, although plot-level correlations weakened, with increasing structural development. Furthermore, the instrument-based metrics failed to reflect a doubling in AGC between 11½-year-old restoration and the reference forest, by under-estimating increases in structural development beyond canopy closure. CC_D is recommended for monitoring structural development, during early forest restoration, due to its cost-effectiveness, ease of use and minimal disturbance of the forest understory. After canopy closure, AGC remains the most useful metric to gauge how closely restoration achieves reference-forest structure. After 11½ years of implementing the FSM, AGC had reached 49 % (65.9 tC/ha, ±SD 30.44) of the reference forest level (137.4 tC/ha, ±SD 83.19).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36104,"journal":{"name":"Trees, Forests and People","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100928"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the recovery of tropical forest structure, canopy closure and above-ground carbon during restoration: Comparing conventional with instrument-based metrics\",\"authors\":\"Waiprach Suwannarat , Stephen Elliott , Worayut Takaew , Pornpawee Laohasom , Watit Khokthong\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tfp.2025.100928\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Carbon accumulation and structural development are key indicators of the progress of forest-ecosystem restoration. However current techniques of quantifying them are time-consuming, labor-intensive and costly. Therefore, we tested four instrument-based metrics (vegetation area index (VAI) from terrestrial LiDAR (light detection and ranging), leaf area index (LAI) from a plant-canopy analyser, and canopy cover, from both hemispherical photography (CC_HP) and a densiometer (CC_D)), as alternatives to conventional metrics (above-ground carbon (AGC), tree stocking density (TSD) and basal area (BA)), derived from manual measurements of trees. The study sites were: a control (pre-restoration conditions), 1½- and 11½-year-old forest, both undergoing restoration by the framework species method (FSM), and primary forest of indeterminate age (restoration target). VAI, LAI and CC_D, clearly distinguished among the control site and 1½- and 11½-year-old-restoration (<em>P</em> < 0.05). CC_HP failed to distinguish the control plot from young restoration. All four metrics correlated well (<em>r</em> <em>=</em> 0.58–0.80) with conventional metrics (above-ground carbon (AGC), tree stocking density (TSD) and basal area (BA)), when data were combined across all plots, although plot-level correlations weakened, with increasing structural development. Furthermore, the instrument-based metrics failed to reflect a doubling in AGC between 11½-year-old restoration and the reference forest, by under-estimating increases in structural development beyond canopy closure. CC_D is recommended for monitoring structural development, during early forest restoration, due to its cost-effectiveness, ease of use and minimal disturbance of the forest understory. After canopy closure, AGC remains the most useful metric to gauge how closely restoration achieves reference-forest structure. After 11½ years of implementing the FSM, AGC had reached 49 % (65.9 tC/ha, ±SD 30.44) of the reference forest level (137.4 tC/ha, ±SD 83.19).</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36104,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trees, Forests and People\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100928\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trees, Forests and People\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666719325001542\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FORESTRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trees, Forests and People","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666719325001542","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

碳积累和结构发育是森林生态系统恢复进展的关键指标。然而，目前的量化技术既费时又费力，而且成本高昂。因此，我们测试了四种基于仪器的指标（来自地面激光雷达（光探测和测距）的植被面积指数（VAI），来自植物-冠层分析仪的叶面积指数（LAI），以及来自半球面摄影（CC_HP）和密度计（CC_D）的冠层覆盖），作为传统指标（地上碳（AGC），树木载畜密度（TSD）和基底面积（BA））的替代方案，这些指标来自人工测量树木。研究地点包括：对照（恢复前条件）、1年半和11年半的森林，均采用框架种方法（FSM）进行恢复，以及年龄不确定的原始森林（恢复目标）。VAI， LAI和CC_D，在对照位点和1½年和11½年的恢复中有明显区别(P <；0.05)。CC_HP不能区分对照样地和幼龄恢复样地。当将所有样地的数据组合在一起时，所有4个指标与常规指标（地上碳（AGC）、树木蓄积量（TSD）和基底面积（BA））均具有良好的相关性（r = 0.58-0.80），但随着结构发展的增加，样地水平的相关性减弱。此外，基于仪器的指标由于低估了冠层关闭后结构发展的增加，未能反映11½年恢复林与参考林之间的AGC翻倍。建议在早期森林恢复期间监测结构发展，因为CC_D具有成本效益、易于使用和对森林下层的干扰最小。冠层关闭后，AGC仍然是衡量恢复与参考森林结构接近程度的最有用的度量。FSM实施11年半后，AGC达到参考森林水平（137.4 tC/ha，±SD 83.19）的49% （65.9 tC/ha，±SD 30.44）。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Assessing the recovery of tropical forest structure, canopy closure and above-ground carbon during restoration: Comparing conventional with instrument-based metrics

Carbon accumulation and structural development are key indicators of the progress of forest-ecosystem restoration. However current techniques of quantifying them are time-consuming, labor-intensive and costly. Therefore, we tested four instrument-based metrics (vegetation area index (VAI) from terrestrial LiDAR (light detection and ranging), leaf area index (LAI) from a plant-canopy analyser, and canopy cover, from both hemispherical photography (CC_HP) and a densiometer (CC_D)), as alternatives to conventional metrics (above-ground carbon (AGC), tree stocking density (TSD) and basal area (BA)), derived from manual measurements of trees. The study sites were: a control (pre-restoration conditions), 1½- and 11½-year-old forest, both undergoing restoration by the framework species method (FSM), and primary forest of indeterminate age (restoration target). VAI, LAI and CC_D, clearly distinguished among the control site and 1½- and 11½-year-old-restoration (P < 0.05). CC_HP failed to distinguish the control plot from young restoration. All four metrics correlated well (r = 0.58–0.80) with conventional metrics (above-ground carbon (AGC), tree stocking density (TSD) and basal area (BA)), when data were combined across all plots, although plot-level correlations weakened, with increasing structural development. Furthermore, the instrument-based metrics failed to reflect a doubling in AGC between 11½-year-old restoration and the reference forest, by under-estimating increases in structural development beyond canopy closure. CC_D is recommended for monitoring structural development, during early forest restoration, due to its cost-effectiveness, ease of use and minimal disturbance of the forest understory. After canopy closure, AGC remains the most useful metric to gauge how closely restoration achieves reference-forest structure. After 11½ years of implementing the FSM, AGC had reached 49 % (65.9 tC/ha, ±SD 30.44) of the reference forest level (137.4 tC/ha, ±SD 83.19).

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊