This analysis identifies cypress trees infested by bark beetles, indicating implications for forest management and ecosystem health.
Forest pests and diseases are some of the major disturbances affecting the stability of forest ecosystems. Accurate identification of insect-infested trees is therefore crucial for assessing forest health and implementing precision forestry management. This study focuses on stand-level detection of cypress trees (Cupressus funebris Endl.) that were affected by the cypress bark beetle (Phloeosinus aubei Perris), and the framework enables individual tree segmentation, insect-infested tree detection, and stand infestation assessment. Firstly, individual trees were extracted from Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) point cloud data using the layer-stacking seed point algorithm. Based on the segmented tree crowns, four vegetation indices (Visible Atmospherically Resistant Index (VARI), Visible-band Difference Vegetation Index (VDVI), Red-Green Index (RGI), and Color Index of Vegetation Extraction (CIVE)) were calculated from Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) RGB imagery. Insect-infested cypress trees were extracted through threshold segmentation. Through visual interpretation, the optimal vegetation index was determined and the infestation rate at the stand level was calculated. Based on the above framework, a total of 1368 trees were identified in the cypress stand, with a segmentation Precision of 82.51%, a Recall of 80.00%, and an F1-score of 81.24%. RGI achieved the best performance (Precision = 100.00%, Recall = 86.96%, F1-score = 93.02%) and identified 20 infested trees, accounting for 1.46% of the cypress stand. Supplementary experiments further confirm the superiority of the RGI index and the μ ± 2σ thresholding method. These results demonstrate that the proposed method enables rapid detection of the infested cypress trees, effective monitoring of stand health and infestation severity, thereby supporting informed decision-making in pest control and forest management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: