Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Aboveground biomass was estimated from active and passive remote sensing sources, including airborne lidar and Landsat-8 satellites, in an eastern Arizona (USA) study area comprised of forest and woodland ecosystems. Compared to field measurements, airborne lidar enabled direct estimation of individual tree height with a slope of 0.98 (R 2 = 0.98). At the plot-level, lidar-derived height and intensity metrics provided the most robust estimate for aboveground biomass, producing dominant species-based aboveground models with errors ranging from 4 to 14 Mg ha −1 across all woodland and forest species. Land-sat-8 imagery produced dominant species-based aboveground biomass models with errors ranging from 10 to 28 Mg ha −1 . Thus, airborne lidar allowed for estimates for fine-scale aboveground biomass mapping with low uncertainty, while Landsat-8 seems best suited for broader spatial scale products such as a national biomass essential climate variable (ECV) based on land cover types for the United States.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: