Compares modeling strategies for tree carbon estimation in radiata pine plantations, suggesting local calibration improves accuracy.
Accurate and transferable estimation of forest carbon is essential for operational forest management and national greenhouse gas reporting, yet it remains challenging because of variation in stand structure and site conditions. Unmanned aerial vehicle-based light detection and ranging (UAV-LiDAR) provides detailed structural information for modelling tree-level carbon, but model transferability across sites is often limited. In this study, we compared three modelling approaches—a linear mixed-effects model (LMM), a generalised additive model (GAM), and Random Forest (RF)—within a unified framework of multi-site, locally post hoc calibrated, and fully local model-fitting strategies. Using data from 20 radiata pine (Pinus radiata D. Don) plantation stands across New Zealand (35,201 trees), a leave-one-site-out (LOSO) framework was used to assess multi-site model transferability and support post hoc calibration, while local models were evaluated using repeated within-site train/test splits. We also evaluated how prediction accuracy changed with increasing local sample size and compared random tree selection with plot-based sampling. Multi-site models showed poor generalisation, with mean relative RMSE ranging from 35.9% to 56.9% and substantial site-level bias. Applying post hoc calibration to the multi-site model using a 50-tree sample reduced prediction error by 30 to 60% (mean relative RMSE 22.8–25.0%) and substantially reduced bias across sites. The fitting of fully local models with the same sample size yielded only modest further improvements (mean relative RMSE 21.9–23.1%). Gains in accuracy were minimal with increasing sample sizes above 50 trees for post hoc calibration and 175 trees for the fully local models, and differences in accuracy between sampling strategies were small. These results show that post hoc calibration of multi-site UAV-LiDAR models with a small local sample provides a practical and efficient approach for tree-level carbon estimation in plantation forests.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Watt et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: