Advertisement

Trees

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 59–73 | Cite as

Evaluating optical measurements of leaf area index against litter collection in a mixed broadleaved-Korean pine forest in China

  • Zhili Liu
  • Guangze JinEmail author
  • Jing M. Chen
  • Yujiao Qi
Original Paper

Abstract

Key message

We evaluated the error caused by optical measurements of leaf area index using a direct method in a mixed broadleaf-coniferous forest in China.

Abstract

Indirect optical methods to measure leaf area index (LAI) have been previously developed, but it is difficult to evaluate the accuracy of these methods in a mixed broadleaf-coniferous forest. In this study, the LAI in a mixed broadleaved-Korean pine (Pinus koraiensis) forest in China was estimated directly by litter collection (LAIlit) for the purpose of evaluating optical LAI measurements using digital hemispherical photography (DHP) and LAI-2000. With the DHP method, we corrected a systematic error due to incorrect automatic photographic exposure. With both DHP and LAI-2000 methods, we studied the influences of zenith angle selection schemes (0°–45°, 30°–60°, 45°–60° and 0°–75°) on the effective LAI (L e) measurement. In addition to optical L e, we also investigated other major factors influencing the determination of LAI, including woody-to-total area ratio (α), element clumping index (Ω E) and needle-to-shoot area ratio (γ E). A significant correlation (P < 0.01) was observed between optical (DHP and LAI-2000) and litter collection methods, but DHP L e underestimated LAIlit by 61 % on average based on different zenith angle ranges, and L e at 45°–60° agrees better with LAIlit (R 2 = 0.75, P < 0.01 and RMSE = 4.5), and the accuracy was enhanced by 21 % on average after considering α, Ω E and γ E and was further improved by 36 % after correcting for the error due to exposure. In contrast, LAI-2000 L e underestimated LAIlit by 32 % on average based on different zenith angle ranges, and L e in rings 1–3 is closer to LAIlit (R 2 = 0.80, P < 0.01 and RMSE = 2.1) than those in other rings (e.g., 3–4, 4 and 1–5), and after correcting for α, Ω E and γ E, the difference between LAI-2000 LAI and LAIlit was less than 6 %. Although DHP L e underestimated LAI-2000 L e by an average of 43 % at different zenith angle ranges, significant correlations between them were found (minimum r = 0.787, P < 0.01). We confirm the accuracy of the best estimates of LAI using DHP and LAI-2000 methods are to be over 94 % after considering woody materials and foliage clumping within shoots and the canopy. Meanwhile, the litter collection method is useful for estimating LAI in a mixed broadleaf-coniferous forest, if the specific leaf area for all major species and the average leaf age for evergreen coniferous species are known.

Keywords

Leaf area index Litter collection method Digital hemispherical photography (DHP) LAI-2000 Influence factors Mixed broadleaved-Korean pine forest 

Notes

Author contribution statement

Conceived and designed the experiments: Guangze Jin. Performed the experiments: Zhili Liu, Yujiao Qi. Analyzed the data: Zhili Liu, Yujiao Qi. Wrote the paper: Zhili Liu, Jing M. Chen, Guangze Jin.

Acknowledgments

This work was financially supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (No. 2011BAD37B01), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31270473); the Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University (IRT1054), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2572014AA01).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Barclay HJ, Trofymow JA, Leach RI (2000) Assessing bias from boles in calculating leaf area index in immature Douglas-fir with the Li-Cor canopy analyzer. Agric For Meteorol 100:255–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beckschäfer P, Seidel D, Kleinn C, Xu J (2013) On the exposure of hemispherical photographs in forests. iForest 6:228–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Behera SK, Srivastava P, Pathre UV, Tuli R (2010) An indirect method of estimating leaf area index in Jatropha curcas L. using LAI-2000 Plant Canopy Analyzer. Agric For Meteorol 150(2):307–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bequet R, Campioli M, Kint V, Vansteenkiste D, Muys B, Ceulemans R (2011) Leaf area index development in temperate oak and beech forests is driven by stand characteristics and weather conditions. Trees Struct Funct 25(5):935–946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brantley ST, Young DR (2007) Leaf-area index and light attenuation in rapidly expanding shrub thickets. Ecology 88(2):524–530PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bréda NJJ (2003) Ground-based measurements of leaf area index: a review of methods, instruments and current controversies. J Exp Bot 54(392):2403–2417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chason JW, Baldocchi DD, Huston MA (1991) A comparison of direct and indirect methods for estimating forest canopy leaf area. Agric For Meteorol 57(1–3):107–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen JM (1996) Optically-based methods for measuring seasonal variation of leaf area index in boreal conifer stands. Agric For Meteorol 80:135–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen JM, Black TA (1992) Defining leaf area index for non-flat leaves. Plant Cell Environ 15(4):421–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen JM, Cihlar J (1995) Plant canopy gap-size analysis theory for improving optical measurements of leaf-area index. Appl Optics 34:6211–6222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen JM, Black TA, Adams RS (1991) Evaluation of hemispherical photography for determining plant area index and geometry of a forest stand. Agric For Meteorol 56:129–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen JM, Rich PM, Gower ST, Norman JM, Plummer S (1997) Leaf area index of boreal forests: theory, techniques, and measurements. J Geophys Res 102(D24):29429–29443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chen JM, Govind A, Sonnentag O, Zhang Y, Barr A, Amiro B (2006) Leaf area index measurements at Fluxnet-Canada forest sites. Agric For Meteorol 140(1–4):257–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cutini A, Matteucci G, Mugnozza G (1998) Estimation of leaf area index with the Li-Cor LAI 2000 in deciduous forests. For Ecol Manage 105(1–3):55–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Deblonde G, Penner M, Royer A (1994) Measuring leaf area index with the LI-COR LAI-2000 in pine stands. Ecology 75(5):1507–1511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dufrêne E, Bréda N (1995) Estimation of deciduous forest leaf area index using direct and indirect methods. Oecologia 104(2):156–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Englund SR, O’Brien JJ, Clark DB (2000) Evaluation of digital and film hemispherical photography and spherical densitometry for measuring forest light environments. Can J For Res 30(12):1999–2005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eriksson H, Eklundh L, Hall K, Lindroth A (2005) Estimating LAI in deciduous forest stands. Agric For Meteorol 129(1–2):27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fournier RA, Landry R, August NM, Fedosejevs G, Gauthier RP (1996) Modelling light obstruction in three conifer forests using hemispherical photography and fine tree architecture. Agric For Meteorol 82:47–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frazer GW, Trofymow J, Lertzman KP (2000) Canopy openness and leaf area in chronosequences of coastal temperate rainforests. Can J For Res 30:239–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gonsamo A, Chen JM (2014) Continuous observation of leaf area index at Fluxnet-Canada sites. Agric For Meteorol 189:168–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gonsamo A, Walter J-MN, Pellikka P (2010) Sampling gap fraction and size for estimating leaf area and clumping indices from hemispherical photographs. Can J For Res 40(8):1588–1603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gower ST, Norman JM (1991) Rapid estimation of leaf area index in conifer and broad-leaf plantations. Ecology 72(5):1896–1900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Guiterman CH, Seymour RS, Weiskittel AR (2012) Long-Term thinning effects on the leaf area of Pinus strobus L. as estimated from litterfall and individual-tree allometric models. For Sci 58(1):85–93Google Scholar
  25. Jonckheere I, Fleck S, Nackaerts K, Muys B, Coppin P, Weiss M, Baret F (2004) Review of methods for in situ leaf area index determination: part I. Theories, sensors and hemispherical photography. Agric For Meteorol 121(1–2):19–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jonckheere I, Muys B, Coppin P (2005) Allometry and evaluation of in situ optical LAI determination in Scots pine: a case study in Belgium. Tree Physiol 25:723–732PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kalácska M, Calvo-Alvarado JC, Sanchez-Azofeifa GA (2005) Calibration and assessment of seasonal changes in leaf area index of a tropical dry forest in different stages of succession. Tree Physiol 25:733–744PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kucharik CJ, Norman JM, Gower ST (1998) Measurements of leaf orientation, light distribution and sunlit leaf area in a boreal aspen forest. Agric For Meteorol 91(1):127–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Küßner R, Mosandl R (2000) Comparison of direct and indirect estimation of leaf area index in mature Norway spruce stands of eastern Germany. Can J For Res 30(3):440–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leblanc SG, Chen JM, Fernandes R, eering DW, Conley A (2005) Methodology comparison for canopy structure parameters extraction from digital hemispherical photography in boreal forests. Agric For Meteorol 129(3–4):187–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu ZL, Jin GZ, Qi YJ (2012) Estimate of leaf area index in an old-growth mixed broadleaved-Korean pine forest in northeastern China. PLoS One 7(3):e32155PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Macfarlane C, Hoffman M, Eamus D, Kerp N, Higginson S, McMurtrie R, Adams M (2007) Estimation of leaf area index in eucalypt forest using digital photography. Agric For Meteorol 143(3–4):176–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marshall JD, Waring RH (1986) Comparison of methods of estimating leaf-area index in old-growth Douglas-fir. Ecology 67(4):975–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mason EG, Diepstraten M, Pinjuv GL, Lasserre JP (2012) Comparison of direct and indirect leaf area index measurements of Pinus radiata D. Don. Agric For Meteorol 166–167:113–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mussche S, Samson R, Nachtergale L, De Schrijver A, Lemeur R, Lust N (2001) A comparison of optical and direct methods for monitoring the seasonal dynamics of leaf area index in deciduous forests. Silva Fenn 35(4):373–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Neumann HH, Den Hartog G, Shaw RH (1989) Leaf area measurements based on hemispheric photographs and leaf-litter collection in a deciduous forest during autumn leaf-fall. Agric For Meteorol 45(3–4):325–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Qi YJ, Jin GZ, Liu ZL (2013) Optical and litter collection methods for measuring leaf area index in an old-growth temperate forest in northeastern China. J Forest Res Jpn 18:430–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reich PB, Frelich LE, Voldseth RA, Bakken P, Adair C (2012) Understorey diversity in southern boreal forests is regulated by productivity and its indirect impacts on resource availability and heterogeneity. J Ecol 100:539–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Richardson AD, Dail DB, Hollinger DY (2011) Leaf area index uncertainty estimates for model-data fusion applications. Agric For Meteorol 151(9):1287–1292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ross J (1981) The radiation regime and architecture of plant stands. Junk, The Hague, p 391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ryu Y, Sonnentag O, Nilson T, Vargas R, Kobayashi H, Wenk R, Baldocchi DD (2010) How to quantify tree leaf area index in an open savanna ecosystem: a multi-instrument and multi-model approach. Agric For Meteorol 150(1):63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sampson DA, Allen HL (1995) Direct and indirect estimates of leaf area index (LAI) for lodgepole and loblolly pine stands. Trees 9:119–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sea WB, Choler P, Beringer J, Weinmann RA, Hutley LB, Leuning R (2011) Documenting improvement in leaf area index estimates from MODIS using hemispherical photos for Australian savannas. Agric For Meteorol 151(11):1453–1461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Song GZM, Doley D, Yates D, Chao KJ, Hsieh CF (2014) Improving accuracy of canopy hemispherical photography by a constant threshold value derived from an unobscured overcast sky. Can J For Res 44:17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sonnentag O, Talbot J, Chen JM, Roulet NT (2007) Using direct and indirect measurements of leaf area index to characterize the shrub canopy in an ombrotrophic peatland. Agric For Meteorol 144(3–4):200–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sprintsin M, Karnieli A, Berliner P, Rotenberg E, Yakir D, Cohen S (2007) The effect of spatial resolution on the accuracy of leaf area index estimation for a forest planted in the desert transition zone. Remote Sens Environ 109(4):416–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sprintsin M, Cohen S, Maseyk K, Rotenberg E, Grünzweig J, Karnieli A, Berliner P, Yakir D (2011) Long term and seasonal courses of leaf area index in a semi-arid forest plantation. Agric For Meteorol 151(5):565–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thimonier A, Sedivy I, Schleppi P (2010) Estimating leaf area index in different types of mature forest stands in Switzerland: a comparison of methods. Eur J Forest Res 129(4):543–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wagner S (1998) Calibration of grey values of hemispherical photographs for image analysis. Agric For Meteorol 90:103–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zhang Y, Chen JM, Miller JR (2005) Determining digital hemispherical photograph exposure for leaf area index estimation. Agric For Meteorol 133:166–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zou J, Yan G, Zhu L, Zhang W (2009) Woody-to-total area ratio determination with a multispectral canopy imager. Tree Physiol 29:1069–1080PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhili Liu
    • 1
  • Guangze Jin
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jing M. Chen
    • 2
  • Yujiao Qi
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Ecological ResearchNortheast Forestry UniversityHarbinChina
  2. 2.Department of GeographyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.School of ForestryNortheast Forestry UniversityHarbinChina

Personalised recommendations