Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Sight-based field measurements of tree crown projection area and canopy height are common praxis in forest science but difficult to validate. We quantified their measurement errors based on the virtual representation of an 11-species old-growth forest provided by high-resolution terrestrial LIDAR (light detection and ranging) measurements. Based on the expectations (a) that violations of the triangulation theory are the main error source of height measurements, and (b) that approximations of tree crowns with fixed angles are not flexible enough for irregular crown shapes in natural stands, we investigated the relative accuracies of triangulation measurements of height of crown base (B T) vs. tree height (H T) and of different crown projection methods. B T (±0.52 m) showed lower measurement errors than H T (±2.4 m). Larger deviations between field-measured and virtually executed crown projections could partly be attributed to structural differences of the crowns that were two-dimensionally quantified as space capture index (SCI). The largest deviations between both methods occurred on suppressed tree crowns and tall Quercus robur trees in the stand. Because of the method-inherent underestimation of crown projections with fixed angular grid, we propose the use of flexible angles by trained operators.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fleck et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: