Search NASA⌕ Search
Home/Archive/NASA NTRS

NASA NTRS · 20220006510

Challenges to Aboveground Biomass Prediction from Waveform Lidar

Jamis M Bruening·Rico Fischer·Friedrich J Bohn·John Armston·Amanda H Armstrong·Nikolai Knapp·Hao Tang·Andreas Huth·Ralph Dubayah
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Accurate accounting of aboveground biomass density (AGBD) is crucial for carbon cycle, biodiversity, and climate change science. The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI), which maps global AGBD from waveform lidar, is the first of a new generation of Earth observation missions designed to improve carbon accounting. This paper explores the possibility that lidar waveforms may not be unique to AGBD—that forest stands with different AGBD may produce highly similar waveforms—and we hypothesize that non-uniqueness may contribute to the large uncertainties in AGBD predictions. Our analysis integrates simulated GEDI waveforms from 428 in situ stem maps with output from an individual-based forest gap model, which we use to generate a database of potential forest stands and simulate GEDI waveforms from those stands. We use this database to predict the AGBD of the 428 in situ stem maps via two different methods: a linear regression from waveform metrics, and a waveform-matching approach that accounts for waveform-AGBD non-uniqueness. We find that some in situ waveforms are more unique to AGBD than others, which notably impacts AGBD prediction uncertainty (7–411 Mg ha−1, average of 167 Mg ha−1). We also find that forest structure complexity may influence the non-uniqueness effect; stands with low structural complexity are more unique to AGBD than more mature stands with multiple cohorts and canopy layers. These findings suggest that the non-uniqueness phenomena may be introduced by the measuring characteristics of waveform lidar in combination with how forest structure manifests at small scales, and we discuss how this complexity may complicate uncertainty estimation in AGBD prediction. This analysis suggests a limit to the accuracy and precision of AGBD predictions from lidar waveforms seen in empirical studies, and underscores the need for further exploration of the relationships between lidar remote sensing measurements, forest structure, and AGBD.

Explore related subjects

GEDIwaveform lidarforest modelingaboveground biomassforest structure

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jamis M Bruening, Rico Fischer, Friedrich J Bohn, John Armston, Amanda H Armstrong, Nikolai Knapp, Hao Tang, Andreas Huth, Ralph Dubayah. 2021-12-14. Challenges to Aboveground Biomass Prediction from Waveform Lidar. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20220006510

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

NASA NTRS2020

Biomass Estimation from Simulated GEDI, ICESat-2 and NISAR Across Environmental Gradients in Sonoma County, California

Estimates of the magnitude and distribution of aboveground carbon in Earth’s forests remain uncertain, yet knowledge of forest carbon content at a global scale is critical for forest management in support of climate mitigation. In light of this knowledge gap, several upcoming spaceborne missions aim to map forest aboveground biomass, and many new biomass products are expected from these datasets. As these new missions host different technologies, each with relative strengths and weaknesses for biomass retrieval, as well as different spatial resolutions, consistently comparing or combining biomass estimates from these new datasets will be challenging. This paper presents a demonstration of an inter-comparison of biomass estimates from simulations of three NASA missions (GEDI, ICESat-2 and NISAR) over Sonoma county in California, USA. We use a high resolution, locally calibrated airborne lidar map as our reference dataset, and emphasize the importance of considering uncertainties in both reference maps and spaceborne estimates when conducting biomass product validation. GEDI and ICESat-2 were simulated from airborne lidar point clouds, while UAVSAR’s L-band backscatter was used as a proxy for NISAR. To estimate biomass for the lidar missions we used GEDI’s footprint-level biomass algorithms, and also adapted these for application to ICESat-2. For UAVSAR, we developed a locally trained biomass model, calibrated against the ALS reference map. Each mission simulation was evaluated in comparison to the local reference map at its native product resolution (25 m, 100m transect, and 1 ha) yielding RMSEs of 57%, 75%, and 89% for GEDI, NISAR, and ICESat-2 respectively. RMSE values increased for GEDI’s power beam during simulated daytime conditions (64%), coverage beam during nighttime conditions (72%), and coverage beam daytime conditions (87%). We also test the application of GEDI’s biomass modeling framework for estimation of biomass from ICESat-2, and fine that ICESat-2 yields reasonable biomass estimates, particularly in relatively short, open canopies. Results suggest that while all three missions will produce datasets useful for biomass mapping, tall, dense canopies such as those found in Sonoma County present the greatest challenges for all three missions, while steep slopes also prove challenging for single-date SAR based biomass retrieval. Our methods provide guidance for the inter-comparison and validation of spaceborne biomass estimates through the use of airborne lidar reference maps, and could be repeated with on-orbit estimates in any area with high quality field plot and ALS data. These methods allow for regional interpretations and filtering of multi-mission biomass estimates toward improved wall-to-wall biomass maps through data fusion.

GEDI↗