Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7780/kjrs.2021.37.2.6

Analysis of Optimal Pathways for Terrestrial LiDAR Scanning for the Establishment of Digital Inventory of Forest Resources  

Ko, Chi-Ung (Division of Forest Industry, National Institute of Forest Science)
Yim, Jong-Su (Division of Forest Industry, National Institute of Forest Science)
Kim, Dong-Geun (Department of Ecology and Environment System, Graduate School, Kyungpook University)
Kang, Jin-Taek (Division of Forest Industry, National Institute of Forest Science)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Remote Sensing / v.37, no.2, 2021 , pp. 245-256 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study was conducted to identify the applicability of a LiDAR sensor to forest resources inventories by comparing data on a tree's position, height, and DBH obtained by the sensor with those by existing forest inventory methods, for the tree species of Criptomeria japonica in Jeolmul forest in Jeju, South Korea. To this end, a backpack personal LiDAR (Greenvalley International, Model D50) was employed. To facilitate the process of the data collection, patterns of collecting the data by the sensor were divided into seven ones, considering the density of sample plots and the work efficiency. Then, the accuracy of estimating the variables of each tree was assessed. The amount of time spent on acquiring and processing the data by each method was compared to evaluate the efficiency. The findings showed that the rate of detecting standing trees by the LiDAR was 100%. Also, the high statistical accuracy was observed in both Pattern 5 (DBH: RMSE 1.07 cm, Bias -0.79 cm, Height: RMSE 0.95 m, Bias -3.2 m), and Pattern 7 (DBH: RMSE 1.18 cm, Bias -0.82 cm, Height: RMSE 1.13 m, Bias -2.62 m), compared to the results drawn in the typical inventory manner. Concerning the time issue, 115 to 135 minutes per 1ha were taken to process the data by utilizing the LiDAR, while 375 to 1,115 spent in the existing way, proving the higher efficiency of the device. It can thus be concluded that using a backpack personal LiDAR helps increase efficiency in conducting a forest resources inventory in an planted coniferous forest with understory vegetation, implying a need for further research in a variety of forests.
Keywords
LiDAR; Backpack laser scanning; Terrestrial laser scanning; Forest inventory; point cloud;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Saarela, S., J. Breidenbach, P. Raumonen, A. Grafstrom, G. Stahl, M.J. Ducey, and R. Astrup, 2017. Kriging prediction of stand-level forest information using mobile laser scanning data adjusted for nondetection, Canada Jouenal For Research, 47(9): 1257-1265.   DOI
2 Seidel, D., S. Fleck, and C. Leuschner, 2012. Analyzing forest canopies with ground-based laser scanning: A comparison with hemispherical photography, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 154: 1-8.   DOI
3 Tao, S., F. Wu, Q. Guo, Y. Wang, W. Li, B. Xue, X. Hu, P. Li, D. Tian, C. Li, H. Yao, Y. Li, G. Xu, and J. Fang, 2015. Segmenting tree crowns from terrestrial and mobile LiDAR data by exploring ecological theories, ISPRS Journal Photogramm Remote Sens, 110: 66-76.   DOI
4 Wang, Y., M. Lehtomaki, X. Liang, J. Pyorala, A. Kukko, A. Jaakkola, J. Liu, Z. Feng, R. Chen, and J. Hyyppa, 2019. Is field-measured tree height as reliable as believed-A comparison study of tree height estimates from field measurement, airborne laser scanning and terrestrial laser scanning in a boreal forest, ISPRS Journal Photogramm Remote Sensing, 147: 132-145.   DOI
5 Chen, S., H. Liu, Z. Feng, C. Shen, and P. Chen, 2019. Applicability of personal laser scanning in forestry inventory, Plos One, 14(2): 1-22.   DOI
6 Del Perugia, B., F. Giannetti, G. Chirici, and D. Travaglini, 2019. Influence of scan density on the estimation of single-tree attributes by hand-held mobile laser scanning, Forests, 10(3): 277.   DOI
7 Hyyppa, E., X. Yu, H. Kaartinen, T. Hakala, A. Kukko, M. Vastaranta, and J. Hyyppa, 2020b. Comparison of backpack, handheld, under-canopy UAV, and above-canopy UAV laser scanning for field reference data collection in boreal forests, Remote Sense, 12(20): 3327.   DOI
8 Fleck, S., I. Molder, M. Jacob, T. Gebauer, H.F. Jungkunst, and C. Leuschner, 2011. Comparison of conventional eight-point crown projections with LIDAR-based virtual crown projections in a temperate old-growth forest, Ann For Sci, 68(7): 1173-1185.   DOI
9 Giannetti, F., G. Chirici, T. Gobakken, E. Naesset, D. Travaglini, and S. Puliti, 2018. A new approach with DTM-independent metrics for forest growing stock prediction using UAV photogrammetric data, Remote Sens Environ, 213: 195-205.   DOI
10 Huang, H., Z. Li, P. Gong, X. Cheng, N. Clinton, C. Cao, W. Ni, and L. Wang, 2011. Automated methods for measuring DBH and tree heights with a commercial scanning lidar, Photogramm, Eng. Remote Sens, 77(3): 219-227.   DOI
11 Liang, X. and J. Hyyppa, 2013. Automatic stem mapping by merging several terrestrial laser scans at the feature and decision levels, Sensors, 13(2): 1614-1634.   DOI
12 Hyyppa, E., A. Kukko, R. Kaijaluoto, J.C. White, M.A. Wulder, J. Pyorala, X. Liang, X. Yu, Y. Wang, H. Kaartinen, J.-P. Virtanen, and J. Hyyppa, 2020a. Accurate derivation of stem curve and volume using backpack mobile laser scanning ISPRS J Photogramm, Remote Sens, 161: 246-262.   DOI
13 Kitahara, F., N. Mizoue, and S. Yoshida, 2010. Effects of training for inexperienced surveyors on data quality of tree diameter and height measurements, Silva Fennica, 44(4): 657-667.
14 Ko C., S.H. Lee, J.S. Yim, D.G. Kim, and J.T. Kang, 2021. Comparison of Forest Inventory Methods at Plot-Level between a Backpack Personal Laser Scanning (BPLS) and Conventional Equipment in Jeju Island, South Korea, Forests, 12(3): 308.   DOI
15 Oveland, I., M. Hauglin, F. Giannetti, N.S. Kjorsvik, and T. Gobakken, 2018. Comparing three different ground based laser scanning methods for tree stem detection, Remote Sense, 10(4): 538.   DOI
16 Bauwens, S., H. Bartholomeus, K. Calders, and P. Lejeune, 2016. Forest inventory with terrestrial LiDAR: A comparison of static and hand-held mobile laser scanning, Forests, 7(6): 127.   DOI
17 Cabo, C., S.D. Pozo, P. Rodriguez-Gonzalvez, C. Ordonez, and D. Gonzalez-Aguilera, 2018. Comparing terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) and wearable laser scanning (WLS) for individual tree modeling at plot level, Remote Sense, 10(4): 540.   DOI
18 Liang, X., Y. Wang, A. Jaakkola, A. Kukko, H. Kaartinen, J. Hyyppa, E. Honkavaara, and J. Liu, 2015. Forest data collection using terrestrial image-based point clouds from a handheld camera compared to terrestrial and personal laser scanning, IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens, 53(9): 5117-5132.   DOI
19 Liang, X., Y. Wang, J. Pyorala, M. Lehtomaki, X. Yu, H. Kaartinen, A. Kukko, E. Honkavaara, A.E.I. Issaoui, O. Nevalainen, M. Vaaja, J.P. Virtanen, M. Katoh, and S. Deng, 2019. Forest in situ observations using unmanned aerial vehicle as an alternative of terrestrial measurements, Forest Ecosystem, 6(1): 1-16.   DOI
20 Maltamo, M., 2014. Forestry applications of airborne laser scanning, concepts and case studies, Dordrecht, NL.
21 Paivinen, R., M. Nousiainen, and K.T. Korhonen, 1992. Accuracy of Certain Tree Measurements, Puutunnusten mittaamisen luotettavuus, Folia Forestalia, Finnish Forest Research Institute, Helsinki, FIN.
22 Rutzinger, M., A.K. Pratihast, S. Oude Elberink, and G. Vosselman, 2010. Detection and modelling of 3D trees from mobile laser scanning data, Int. Arch, Photogramm, Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci, 38: 520-525.
23 Ryding, J., E. Williams, M. Smith, and M. Eichhorn, 2015. Assessing handheld mobile laser scanners for forest surveys, Remote Sense, 7(1): 1095-1111.   DOI