European Journal of Forest Research

, Volume 131, Issue 6, pp 1905–1915 | Cite as

Accurate prediction of ice disturbance in European deciduous forests with generalized linear models: a comparison of field-based and airborne-based approaches

  • Réka Aszalós
  • Imelda Somodi
  • Kata Kenderes
  • János Ruff
  • Bálint Czúcz
  • Tibor Standovár
Original Paper

Abstract

We analyzed an ice disturbance event of deciduous forests in Hungary by Generalized Linear Models (GLM). Two statistical models were generated: the first model was based on a disturbance map created from a series of aerial photographs, and the second model was based on a map created by half-year-long intensive field work. The second map was considered as the reference map of ice disturbance. Our hypothesis was that the predictive power of the field-based statistical model would be significantly higher than that of the aerial photo-based model on the reference map. Elevation, slope, aspect, mixture ratio of beech, height of the dominant tree species and their interactions were used in the two (aerial photo- and field-based) GLMs as explanatory variables. The accuracy of the models was measured by the AUC (Area under the ROC curve) values. Sensitive area maps of ice disturbance were generated by both models. Our hypothesis was definitely rejected. Both models performed high predictive accuracy (median AUC > 0.9) with no significant difference in the prediction capacity regarding the reference ice disturbance pattern. Our study demonstrates that ice damage can effectively be predicted if remote sensing interpretation is coupled with GLM as predictive model.

Keywords

Forest damage GLM Susceptibility assessment Probability map Variable interactions 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was partially financed by research grants; OTKA-T043452; EU 5th Framework Programme Nat-Man (Nature-based Management of Beech in Europe) Grant No. QLRT1-CT99-1349, which are greatly acknowledged. We are grateful to Ipoly Erdő Inc. for making this study possible by providing financial support and by being a helpful collaborator, and to János Podani and Kristóf Kelemen for their cordial support. R. Aszalós, K. Kenderes and I. Somodi were financed by OTKA-NI68218.

References

  1. Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 19(6):716–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angelstam PK (1998) Maintaining and restoring biodiversity in European boreal forests by developing natural disturbance regimes. J Veg Sci 9(4):593–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angelstam PK, Kuuluvainen T (2004) Boreal forest disturbance regimes, successional dynamics and landscape structures—a European perspective. Ecol Bull 51:117–136Google Scholar
  4. Austin MP (1985) Continuum concept, ordination methods, and niche theory. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 16:39–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Austin MP (2002) Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling. Ecol Modell 157:101–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aszalós R, Standovár T, Ruff J, Barton Zs (2003) Natural disturbances (ice and wind) in the forest of Börzsöny. The NatMan Project. Working Report 27, p 15Google Scholar
  7. Brommit AG, Charbonneau N, Contreras TA, Fahrig L (2004) Crown loss and subsequent branch sprouting of forest trees in response to a major ice storm. J Torrey Bot Soc 131:169–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown DG (1994) Predicting vegetation at treeline using topography and biophysical disturbance variables. J Veg Sci 5:641–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Busby PE, Motzkin G, Foster DR (2008) Multiple and interacting disturbances lead to Fagus grandifolia dominance in coastal New England. J Torrey Bot Soc 135:346–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chatterjee S, Hadi AS, Price B (2000) Regression analysis by example. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Cox DR (1984) Interactions. Int Stat Rev 52:1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duguay SM, Arii K, Hooper M, Lechowicz MJ (2001) Ice storm damage and early recovery in an old-growth forest. Environ Monit Assess 67:97–108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dunn OJ (1961) Multiple comparisons among means. J Am Stat Assoc 56:54–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Estreguil C, Lambin EF (1996) Mapping forest-cover disturbances in Papua New Guinea with AVHRR data. J Biogeogr 23:757–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. ESRI (2006) ArcGIS® 9.2. Environmental systems research. Institute Inc., Redlands, CAGoogle Scholar
  16. Foster DR, Boose ER (1992) Patterns of forest damage resulting from catastrophic wind in central New-England, USA. J Ecol 80:79–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An {R} companion to applied regression, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Url:http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion
  18. Franklin J (1995) Predictive vegetation mapping: geographic modelling of biospatial patterns in relation to environmental gradients. Prog Phys Geogr 19:474–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Frelich LE (2002) Forest dynamics and disturbance regimes—studies from temperate evergreen-deciduous forests. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 15–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gardiner BA, Quine CP (2000) Management of forests to reduce the risk of abiotic damage—a review with particular reference to the effects of strong winds. For Ecol Manag 135:261–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gromtsev A (2002) Natural disturbance dynamics in the boreal forests of European Russia: a review. Silva Fenn 36(1):41–55Google Scholar
  22. Guisan A, Weiss SB, Weiss AD (1999) GLM versus CCA spatial modeling of plant species distribution. Plant Ecol 143(1):107–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guisan A, Edwards TC, Hastie T (2002) Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distributions: setting the scene. Ecol Model 157:89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gyalog L (2005) Geological map of Hungary (1:100 000). Magyar Állami Földtani Intézet, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  25. Hanewinkel M (2005) Neural networks for assessing the risk of windthrow on the forest division level: a case study in southwest Germany. Eur J For Res 124:243–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hanewinkel M, Breidenbach J, Neeff T, Kublin E (2008) Seventy-seven years of natural disturbances in a mountain forest area—the influence of storm, snow, and insect damage analysed with a long-term time series. Can J For Res 38:2249–2261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. He YH, Franklin SE, Guo XL, Stenhouse GB (2009) Narrow-linear and small-area forest disturbance detection and mapping from high spatial resolution imagery. J Appl Remote Sens 3:033570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hilker T, Coops NC, Coggins SB, Wulder MA, Brown M, Black TA, Nesic Z, Lessard D (2009) Detection of foliage conditions and disturbance from multi-angular high spectral resolution remote sensing. Remote Sens Environ 113:421–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hirka A (2009) Forest biotic and abiotic damages in 2008 (in Hungarian). ERTI, p 138Google Scholar
  30. Hirka A, Csóka Gy (2010) Forest damages in Hungary from 1961 to 2009 (in Hungarian). Erdészeti Lapok CXLV 7–8:246–248Google Scholar
  31. Hooper MC, Arii K, Lechowicz MJ (2001) Impact of a major ice storm on an old-growth hardwood forest. Can J Bot 79:70–75Google Scholar
  32. Irland LC (2000) Ice storms and forest impacts. Sci Total Environ 262:231–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kellner JR, Asner GP (2009) Convergent structural responses of tropical forests to diverse disturbance regimes. Ecol Lett 12:887–897PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kenderes K, Aszalós R, Ruff J, Barton Zs, Standovár T (2007) Effects of topography and tree stand characteristics on susceptibility of forests to natural disturbances (ice and wind) in the Börzsöny Mountains (Hungary). Community Ecol 8(2):209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. King DJ, Olthof I, Pellikka PKE, Seed ED, Butson C (2005) Modelling and mapping damage to forests from an ice storm using remote sensing and environmental data. Nat Hazards 35:321–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kittredge DB, Finley AO, Foster DR (2003) Timber harvesting as ongoing disturbance in a landscape of diverse ownership. For Ecol Manag 180:425–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Konopka B (1977) Analysis of damage caused by wind, snow and ice in the forests of Slovakia. Lesnictvi For 43(7):296–304Google Scholar
  38. Kulakowski D, Veblen TT (2007) Effect of prior disturbances on the extent and severity of wildfire in Colorado subalpine forests. Ecology 88:759–769PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lemon PC (1961) Forest ecology of ice storms. Bull Torrey Bot Club 88:21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Li MS, Huang CQ, Zhu ZL, Wen WS, Xu D, Liu AX (2009) Use of remote sensing coupled with a vegetation change tracker model to assess rates of forest change and fragmentation in Mississippi, USA. Int J Remote Sens 30:6559–6574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Manel S, Williams HC, Ormerod SJ (2001) Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence. J Appl Ecol 38(5):921–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Masek JG, Huang CQ, Wolfe R, Cohen W, Hall F, Kutler J, Nelson P (2008) North American forest disturbance mapped from a decadal Landsat record. Remote Sens Environ 112:2914–2926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized linear models, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Miller DR, Dunham R, Broadgate ML, Aspinall RJ, Law ANR (2000a) A demonstrator of models for assessing wind, snow and fire damage to forests using the WWW. For Ecol Manag 135:355–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Miller DR, Quine CP, Hadley W (2000b) An investigation of the potential of digital photogrammetry to provide measurements of forest characteristics and abiotic damage. For Ecol Manag 135:279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Millward AA, Kraft CE (2004) Physical influences of landscape on a large-extent ecological disturbance: the northeastern North American ice storm of 1998. Landsc Ecol 19:99–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nykänen ML, Peltola H, Quine CP, Kellomäki S, Broadgate M (1997) Factors affecting snow damage of trees with particular reference to European conditions. Silva Fenn 31:193–213Google Scholar
  48. Olthof I, King DJ, Lautenschlager RA (2004) Mapping deciduous forest ice storm damage using Landsat and environmental data. Remote Sens Environ 89:484–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Peterken GF (1996) Natural Woodland: ecology and conservation in northern temperate regions. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  50. Pickett STA, White PS (1985) The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, Orlando, FLGoogle Scholar
  51. Proulx OJ, Greene DF (2001) The relationship between ice thickness and northern hardwood tree damage during ice storms. Can J For Res 31:1758–1767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. R Development Core Team (2008) A language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Available from http://www.R-project.org
  53. Rhoads AG, Hamburg SP, Fahey TJ, Siccama TG, Hane EN, Battles J, Cogbill C, Randall J, Wilson G (2002) Effects of an intense ice storm on the structure of a northern hardwood forest. Can J For Res 32:1763–1775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rich RL, Frelich L, Reich PB, Bauer ME (2010) Detecting wind disturbance severity and canopy heterogeneity in boreal forest by coupling high-spatial resolution satellite imagery and field data. Remote Sens Environ 114:299–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ribeiro Jr PJ, Diggle PJ (2001) {geoR}: a package for geostatistical analysis. R-news 1(2), 15–18. Available from http://leg.ufpr.br/geoR/geoRdoc/geoRintro.html
  56. Scarr TA, Hopkin AA, Howse GM (2003) Aerial sketch-mapping of the 1998 ice storm in eastern Ontario. Forest Chron 79:91–98Google Scholar
  57. Schindler D, Grebhan K, Albrecht A, Schonborn J (2009) Modelling the wind damage probability in forests in Southwestern Germany for the 1999 winter storm ‘Lothar’. Int J Biometeorol 53:543–554PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schindler D, Grebhan K, Albrecht A, Schönborn J, Kohnle U (2011) GIS-based estimation of the winter storm damage probability in forests: a case study from Baden-Wuerttemberg (Southwest Germany). Int J Biometeorol. Published online: 05 January 2011Google Scholar
  59. Schelhaas MJ, Nabuurs GJ, Schuck A (2003) Natural disturbances in the European forests in the 19th and 20th centuries. Glob Change Biol 9:1620–1633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Seischab FK, Bernard JM, Eberle MD (1993) Glaze storm damage to western New-York forest communities. Bull Torrey Bot Club 120:64–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Somodi I, Viragh K, Szekely B, Zimmermann NE (2010) Changes in predictor influence with time and with vegetation type identity in a post-abandonment situation. Basic Appl Ecol 11:225–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Turner MG, Dale VH (1998) Comparing large, infrequent disturbances: what have we learned? Ecosystems 1:493–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, pp 157–159Google Scholar
  65. van Leeuwen M, Nieuwenhuis M (2010) Retrieval of forest structural parameters using LiDAR remote sensing. Eur J For Res 129:749–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wang FG, Xu YJ (2009) Hurricane Katrina-induced forest damage in relation to ecological factors at landscape scale. Environ Monit Assess 156:491–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Waring RH, Running SW (1998) Forest Ecosystems. Analysis at multiple scales. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 205–220Google Scholar
  68. Whitney HE, Johnson WC (1984) Ice storms and forest succession in southwestern Virginia. Bull Torrey Bot Club 111:429–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zielonka T, Malcher P (2009) The dynamics of a mountain mixed forest under wind disturbances in the Tatra Mountains, central Europe—a dendroecological reconstruction. Can J For Res 39:2215–2223CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Réka Aszalós
    • 1
  • Imelda Somodi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kata Kenderes
    • 1
  • János Ruff
    • 3
  • Bálint Czúcz
    • 2
  • Tibor Standovár
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant Systematics, Ecology and Theoretical Biology, Institute of BiologyL. Eötvös UniversityBudapestHungary
  2. 2.MTA Centre for Ecological Research, Institute of Ecology and BotanyVácrátótHungary
  3. 3.Királyrét Forest DirectorateIpoly Erdő Inc.SzokolyaHungary

Personalised recommendations