四种非破坏性方法估算亚热带草原地上生物量的有效性

IF 2.4 3区环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY

Rangeland Ecology & Management Pub Date : 2025-09-17 DOI:10.1016/j.rama.2025.08.008

Akiem M. Gough, Kathryn G. Smith, Grégory Sonnier, Karen E. Rice, Emily Anderson, Fern Barker, Tyler Bernard, Emmy Stewart, Jacqueline Valiente, Elizabeth H. Boughton

{"title":"四种非破坏性方法估算亚热带草原地上生物量的有效性","authors":"Akiem M. Gough, Kathryn G. Smith, Grégory Sonnier, Karen E. Rice, Emily Anderson, Fern Barker, Tyler Bernard, Emmy Stewart, Jacqueline Valiente, Elizabeth H. Boughton","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2025.08.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Reliably measuring aboveground vegetative biomass is essential for managing grazing lands and protecting the ecosystem services these lands provide. Destructive methods of measuring aboveground biomass (clipping and weighing biomass) are time-consuming and labor-intensive. We evaluated the efficacy of four non-destructive methods for estimating aboveground biomass: visual obstruction (VO<span><span><sup>1</sup></span></span>) measured with a Robel pole, vegetation height with a meter stick, a 1.6 kg weighted plate, and a 3.7 kg weighted plate.</div><div>This study was conducted at Archbold Biological Station’s Buck Island Ranch, a working cattle ranch in south-central Florida. Ninety plots were measured within ten 16-ha pastures for each month of the five-month study: eight cultivated improved pastures (IMP<span><span><sup>2</sup></span></span>) and two semi-native pastures (SNP<span><span><sup>3</sup></span></span>). We hypothesized that (1) VO measured with a Robel pole would provide the most reliable measurements while the meter stick would provide the least reliable measurements and (2) non-destructive methods would have a higher correlation to clipped biomass in more homogenous IMP. Linear regressions were used to determine if correlations existed between observed biomass weights and vegetation height from each of the non-destructive sampling methods. All methods showed a positive relationship with biomass, but in both IMP and SNP, the 3.7 kg weighted plate had the strongest correlation with biomass (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.72, 0.62, respectively) and the meter stick had the least (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.54, 0.23, respectively).</div><div>However, different methods were found to be more effective at estimating biomass when dominant species were modeled individually. This study demonstrated that there are reliable, less time-consuming, and labor-intensive alternatives to destructive methods of biomass estimation. Less intensive measurements may allow land managers to make more efficient grazing decisions or simplify calibrating remote sensing products that will allow biomass estimates to be taken at scales relevant to management.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"103 ","pages":"Pages 163-170"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Four Non-destructive Methods for Estimating Aboveground Biomass in Subtropical Grasslands\",\"authors\":\"Akiem M. Gough, Kathryn G. Smith, Grégory Sonnier, Karen E. Rice, Emily Anderson, Fern Barker, Tyler Bernard, Emmy Stewart, Jacqueline Valiente, Elizabeth H. Boughton\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rama.2025.08.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Reliably measuring aboveground vegetative biomass is essential for managing grazing lands and protecting the ecosystem services these lands provide. Destructive methods of measuring aboveground biomass (clipping and weighing biomass) are time-consuming and labor-intensive. We evaluated the efficacy of four non-destructive methods for estimating aboveground biomass: visual obstruction (VO<span><span><sup>1</sup></span></span>) measured with a Robel pole, vegetation height with a meter stick, a 1.6 kg weighted plate, and a 3.7 kg weighted plate.</div><div>This study was conducted at Archbold Biological Station’s Buck Island Ranch, a working cattle ranch in south-central Florida. Ninety plots were measured within ten 16-ha pastures for each month of the five-month study: eight cultivated improved pastures (IMP<span><span><sup>2</sup></span></span>) and two semi-native pastures (SNP<span><span><sup>3</sup></span></span>). We hypothesized that (1) VO measured with a Robel pole would provide the most reliable measurements while the meter stick would provide the least reliable measurements and (2) non-destructive methods would have a higher correlation to clipped biomass in more homogenous IMP. Linear regressions were used to determine if correlations existed between observed biomass weights and vegetation height from each of the non-destructive sampling methods. All methods showed a positive relationship with biomass, but in both IMP and SNP, the 3.7 kg weighted plate had the strongest correlation with biomass (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.72, 0.62, respectively) and the meter stick had the least (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.54, 0.23, respectively).</div><div>However, different methods were found to be more effective at estimating biomass when dominant species were modeled individually. This study demonstrated that there are reliable, less time-consuming, and labor-intensive alternatives to destructive methods of biomass estimation. Less intensive measurements may allow land managers to make more efficient grazing decisions or simplify calibrating remote sensing products that will allow biomass estimates to be taken at scales relevant to management.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"volume\":\"103 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 163-170\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742425001137\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742425001137","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

可靠地测量地上植物生物量对于放牧地的管理和保护这些土地提供的生态系统服务至关重要。测量地上生物量的破坏性方法（剪切和称重生物量）既耗时又费力。我们评估了四种估算地上生物量的非破坏性方法的有效性：用罗贝尔杆测量视觉阻塞（VO1），用米尺测量植被高度，用1.6 kg称重板和3.7 kg称重板。这项研究是在阿奇博尔德生物站的巴克岛牧场进行的，这是佛罗里达州中南部的一个工作牧场。在为期5个月的研究中，每个月在10个16公顷的牧场内测量90个样地，其中8个改良牧场（IMP2）和2个半原生牧场（SNP3）。我们假设(1)用罗贝尔杆测量的VO是最可靠的测量值，而米尺测量的VO是最不可靠的测量值；(2)在更均匀的IMP中，非破坏性采样方法与剪切生物量的相关性更高。我们使用线性回归来确定每种非破坏性采样方法观察到的生物量重量与植被高度之间是否存在相关性。所有方法均与生物量呈正相关，但在IMP和SNP中，3.7 kg加权板与生物量的相关性最强（R2分别为 = 0.72、0.62），米尺与生物量的相关性最小（R2分别为 = 0.54、0.23）。然而，当优势种单独建模时，发现不同的方法在估算生物量方面更有效。这项研究表明，有可靠的，更少的时间和劳动密集型替代破坏性的生物量估算方法。不那么密集的测量可能使土地管理者能够作出更有效的放牧决定，或简化遥感产品的校准，从而能够在与管理有关的尺度上进行生物量估算。

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

Efficacy of Four Non-destructive Methods for Estimating Aboveground Biomass in Subtropical Grasslands

Reliably measuring aboveground vegetative biomass is essential for managing grazing lands and protecting the ecosystem services these lands provide. Destructive methods of measuring aboveground biomass (clipping and weighing biomass) are time-consuming and labor-intensive. We evaluated the efficacy of four non-destructive methods for estimating aboveground biomass: visual obstruction (VO¹) measured with a Robel pole, vegetation height with a meter stick, a 1.6 kg weighted plate, and a 3.7 kg weighted plate.

This study was conducted at Archbold Biological Station’s Buck Island Ranch, a working cattle ranch in south-central Florida. Ninety plots were measured within ten 16-ha pastures for each month of the five-month study: eight cultivated improved pastures (IMP²) and two semi-native pastures (SNP³). We hypothesized that (1) VO measured with a Robel pole would provide the most reliable measurements while the meter stick would provide the least reliable measurements and (2) non-destructive methods would have a higher correlation to clipped biomass in more homogenous IMP. Linear regressions were used to determine if correlations existed between observed biomass weights and vegetation height from each of the non-destructive sampling methods. All methods showed a positive relationship with biomass, but in both IMP and SNP, the 3.7 kg weighted plate had the strongest correlation with biomass (R² = 0.72, 0.62, respectively) and the meter stick had the least (R² = 0.54, 0.23, respectively).

However, different methods were found to be more effective at estimating biomass when dominant species were modeled individually. This study demonstrated that there are reliable, less time-consuming, and labor-intensive alternatives to destructive methods of biomass estimation. Less intensive measurements may allow land managers to make more efficient grazing decisions or simplify calibrating remote sensing products that will allow biomass estimates to be taken at scales relevant to management.

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

Rangeland Ecology & Management 农林科学-环境科学

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

13.00%

发文量

审稿时长

12-24 weeks

期刊介绍： Rangeland Ecology & Management publishes all topics-including ecology, management, socioeconomic and policy-pertaining to global rangelands. The journal''s mission is to inform academics, ecosystem managers and policy makers of science-based information to promote sound rangeland stewardship. Author submissions are published in five manuscript categories: original research papers, high-profile forum topics, concept syntheses, as well as research and technical notes. Rangelands represent approximately 50% of the Earth''s land area and provision multiple ecosystem services for large human populations. This expansive and diverse land area functions as coupled human-ecological systems. Knowledge of both social and biophysical system components and their interactions represent the foundation for informed rangeland stewardship. Rangeland Ecology & Management uniquely integrates information from multiple system components to address current and pending challenges confronting global rangelands.