| Summary: | Knowledge of forest structure is vital for sustainable forest management decisions. Terrestrial laser scanning cannot describe the canopy trees in a large area, and it is unclear whether unmanned aerial vehicle-light detection and ranging (UAV-LiDAR) data have the ability to capture the forest canopy structural parameters in tropical forests. In this study, we estimated five forest canopy structures (stand density (N), basic area (G), above-ground biomass (AGB), Lorey’s mean height (HL), and under-crown height (hT)) with four modeling algorithms (linear regression (LR), bagged tree (BT), support vector regression (SVR), and random forest (RF)) based on UAV-LiDAR data and 60 sample plot data from tropical forests in Hainan and determined the optimal algorithms for the five canopy structures by comparing the performance of the four algorithms. First, we defined the canopy tree as a tree with a height ≥70% HL. Then, UAV-LiDAR metrics were calculated, and the LiDAR metrics were screened by recursive feature elimination (RFE). Finally, a prediction model of the five forest canopy structural parameters was established by the four algorithms, and the results were compared. The metrics’ screening results show that the most important LiDAR indexes for estimating HL, AGB, and hT are the leaf area index and some height metrics, while the most important indexes for estimating N and G are the kurtosis of heights and the coefficient of variation of height. The relative root mean squared error (rRMSE) of five structure parameters showed the following: when modeling HL, the rRMSEs (10.60%–12.05%) obtained by the four algorithms showed little difference; when N was modeled, BT, RF, and SVR had lower rRMSEs (26.76%–27.44%); when G was modeled, the rRMSEs of RF and SVR (15.37%–15.87%) were lower; when hT was modeled, BT, RF, and SVR had lower rRMSEs (10.24%–11.07%); when AGB was modeled, RF had the lowest rRMSE (26.75%). Our results will help facilitate choosing LiDAR indexes and modeling algorithms for tropical forest resource inventories.
|
|---|
