European Journal of Forest Research

, Volume 130, Issue 4, pp 569–577 | Cite as

Mapping and modeling forest tree volume using forest inventory and airborne laser scanning

  • Sergio Tonolli
  • Michele Dalponte
  • Loris Vescovo
  • Mirco Rodeghiero
  • Lorenzo Bruzzone
  • Damiano GianelleEmail author
Original Paper


In this paper, we present a study on the efficiency of multi-return LIDAR (Light Detection Ranging) data in the estimation of forest stem volume over a multi-layered forest area in the Italian Alps. The goals of this paper are (1) to verify the usefulness of multi-return LIDAR data compared to single-return data in forest volume estimation and (2) to define the optimal resolution of a stem volume distribution raster map over the investigated area. To achieve these goals, raw data were segmented into a net, and different cell dimensions were investigated to maximize the relationship between the LIDAR data and the ground-truth information. Twenty predicting variables (e.g., mean height, coefficient of variation) have been extracted from multi-return LIDAR data, and a multiple linear regression analysis has been used for predicting tree stem volume. Experimental results found that the optimal resolutions of the net square cells were 40 m. The analysis indicated that in a mixed multi-layered forest, characterized by a complex vertical structure, the correct selection of the map spatial resolution and the inclusion of the secondary-return data were important factors for improving the effectiveness of the laser scanning approach in forest inventories. The experimental tests showed that the chosen model is effective for the estimation of stem volume over the analyzed area, providing good results on all the three considered validation methods.


Laser scanning Multi-return LIDAR data Modeling Spatialization Forest inventory Tree stem volume 



The authors gratefully acknowledge A. Cescatti for the help in data elaboration. This work was supported by the CARBOITALY project funded by the FISR program of the Italian Ministry of University and Research. We are grateful to F. Salvagni, R. Zampedri, L. Frizzera, R. Moreschini and M. Cavagna for the sampling.


  1. Altun L, Başkent EZ, Bakkaloğlu M, Günlü A (2008) Comparing methods for determining forest sites: a case study in Gümüşhane-Karanlikdere forest. Eur J Forest Res 127:395–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersen HE, Robert J, McGaughey RJ, Reutebuch SE (2005) Estimating forest canopy fuel parameters using LIDAR data. Remote Sens Environ 94:441–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coops NC, Hilker T, Wulder MA, St-Onge B, Newnham G, Siggins A, Trofymow JA (2007) Estimating canopy structure of Douglas-fir forest stands from discrete-return LiDAR. Trees 21:295–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Garcia M, Fiano D, Chuvieco E, Danson FM (2010) Estimating biomass carbon stocks for a Mediterranean forest in central Spain using LiDAR height and intensity data. Remote Sensi Environ 114:816–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gobakken T, Naesset E (2008) Assessing effects of laser point density, ground sampling intensity, and field sample plot size on biophysical stand properties derived from airborne laser scanner data. Can J For Res 38:1095–1109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grassi G, Minotta G, Giannini R, Bagnaresi U (2003) The structural dynamics of managed uneven-aged conifer stands in the Italian eastern Alps. For Ecol Manage 185:225–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hollaus M, Wagner W, Maier B, Schadauer K (2007) Airborne laser scanning of forest stem volume in a mountainous environment. Sensors 7:1559–1577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hyyppä J, Kelle O, Lehikoinen M, Inkinen M (2001) A segmentation-based method to retrieve stem volume estimates from 3-D tree height models produced by laser scanners. IEEE Trans Geoscie Remote Sens 39(5):969–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lindner M, Karjalainen T (2007) Carbon inventory methods and carbon mitigation potentials of forests in Europe: a short review of recent progress. Eur J Forest Res 126:149–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Magnussen S, Naesset E, Gobakken T (2010) Reliability of LiDAR derived predictors of forest inventory attributes: a case study with Norway spruce. Remote Sens Environ 114:700–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Maltamo M, Packalén P, Yu X, Eerikäinen K, Hyyppä J, Pitkänen J (2005) Identifying and quantifying structural characteristics of heterogeneous boreal forests using laser scanner data. For Ecol Manage 216:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Muukkonen P, Heiskanen J (2007) Biomass estimation over a large area based on standwise forest inventory data and ASTER and MODIS satellite data: a possibility to verify carbon inventories. Remote Sens Environ 107:617–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Naesset E (1997) Determination of mean tree height of forest stands using airborne laser scanner data. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 52:49–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Naesset E (2004) Practical large-scale forest stand inventory using small-footprint airborne scanning laser. Scand J Fore Res 19:164–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Naesset E (2009) Effects of different sensors, flying altitudes, and pulse repetition frequencies on forest canopy metrics and biophysical stand properties derived from small-footprint airborne laser data. Remote Sens Environ 113:148–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Naesset E, Gobakken T (2008) Estimation of above- and below-ground biomass across regions of the boreal forest zone using airborne laser. Remote Sens Environ 112:3079–3090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nilsson M (1996) Estimation of tree heights and stand volume using an airborne lidar system. Remote Sens Environ 56:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Salvadori C, Ambrosi P (2005) EFOMI Valutazione ecologica di cenosi forestali sottoposte a monitoraggio integrato. Museo Tridentino di Scienze Naturali, Trento. Studi Trentini di Scienze Naturali. Acta Biologica 81:1–276Google Scholar
  19. Shiver BD, Borders BE (1996) Sampling techniques for forest resource inventory. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2002) Guidance on choosing a sampling design for environmental data collection. EPA QA/G-5S. Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  21. Wang H, Ouchi K (2008) Accuracy of the K-distribution regression model for forest biomass estimation by high-resolution polarimetric SAR: comparison of model estimation and field data. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 46(4):1058–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zar JH (1996) Biostatistical analysis, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall International, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergio Tonolli
    • 1
  • Michele Dalponte
    • 2
  • Loris Vescovo
    • 2
  • Mirco Rodeghiero
    • 2
  • Lorenzo Bruzzone
    • 3
  • Damiano Gianelle
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Dipartimento Risorse Forestali e MontaneTrentoItaly
  2. 2.IASMA Research and Innovation CenterFondazione E. MachTrentoItaly
  3. 3.Department of Information Engineering and Computer ScienceUniversity of TrentoPovo, TrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations