Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Remote Sensing-Derived Spectral Vegetation Indices and Forest Carbon:Testing the Validity of Models in Mountainous Terrain Covered with High Biodiversity


Affiliations
1 Forests, Environment and Wildlife Management Department, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok 737 102, India
2 Sikkim Manipal University, Gangtok 737 102, India
 

Sequestration of carbon through forests is an important aspect in global climate change mitigation. Assessment of carbon in forests using remote sensing and GIS tools is one of the most important aspects of rapid and verifiable methodologies. A number of studies have shown the utility of spectral (vegetation) indices like NDVI in the assessment of forest carbon. However, there are limitations to this approach. The mountainous topography and high biodiversity affect the spectral values in pixels in multiple ways. The present article aims to test the validity of use of vegetation indices in high-biodiversity forests in mountains by modelling the ground based forest carbon measurement with vegetation indices of NDVI, EVI, SAVI and MSAVI in a multi-sensor, multi-season data environment with multiple regression methods like linear, power, logarithmic, polynomial and exponential. It is found that all the regressions have a poor coefficient of determination not even exceeding 0.2. It is concluded that the remote sensing-based spectral vegetation indices alone cannot be a proxy for forest carbon calculators in high biodiversity mountain forests.

Keywords

Biodiversity, Forest Carbon, Mountain, Remote Sensing, Vegetation Indices.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • McKinley, D. C. et al., A synthesis of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in the United States. Ecol. Appl., 2011, 21, 1902–1924.

  • FAO, Biomass, Assessment of the Status of the Development of the Standards for the Terrestrial Essential Climate Variables, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy, 2006.

  • Envis Centre, Sikkim; http://www.sikenvis.nic.in/Database/Biodiversity_776.aspx (accessed on 17 December 2015).

  • SFR, India State of Forest Report 2015, Forest Survey of India Dehradun, India, 2015.

  • Forest Survey of India, Carbon Stock in India’s Forests.

  • Asrar, G., Fuchs, M., Kanemasu, E. T. and Hatfield, J. L., Estimating absorbed photosynthetic radiation and leaf area index from spectral reflectance in wheat. Agron. J., 1984, 76, 300–306.

  • Baret, F. and Guyot, G., Potentials and limits of vegetation indices for LAI and APAR assessment. Remote Sensing Environ., 1991, 35, 161–173.

  • Colwell, J. E., Vegetation canopy reflectance. Remote Sensing Environ., 1974, 3, 175–183.

  • Huete, A., Justice, C. and Leeuwen, W. van., MODIS Vegetation Index (Mod 13) Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document, Univeristy of Arizona, University of Virginia, 1999.

  • Masek, J. G. et al., A landsat surface reflectance dataset for North America, 1990– 2000. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sensing Lett., 2006, 3, 68–72.

  • Solano, R., Didan, K., Jacobson, A. and Huete, A., MODIS vegetation index user’s guide (MOD13 series). Veg. Index Phenol. Lab., 2010.

  • Huete, A. et al., Overview of the radiometric and biophysical performance of the MODIS vegetation indices. Remote Sensing Environ., 2002, 83, 195–213.

  • Lu, D., The potential and challenge of remote sensing‐based biomass estimation. Int. J. Remote Sensing, 2006, 27, 1297–1328.

  • Lu, D. et al., A survey of remote sensing-based aboveground biomass estimation methods in forest ecosystems. Int. J. Digit. Earth, 9, 2016, 63–105.

  • Goswami, S., Gamon, J., Vargas, S. and Tweedie, C., Relationships of NDVI, biomass, and leaf area index (LAI) for six key plant species in Barrow, Alaska, 2015; doi:10.7287/peerj.preprints.913v1.

  • Zhu, X. and Liu, D., Improving forest aboveground biomass estimation using seasonal Landsat NDVI time-series. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sensing, 2015, 102, 222–231.

  • Wulder, M. A., Hall, R. J., Coops, N. C. and Franklin, S. E., High spatial resolution remotely sensed data for ecosystem characterization. BioScience, 2004, 54, 511.

  • Kerr, J. T. and Ostrovsky, M., From space to species: ecological applications for remote sensing. Trends Ecol. Evol., 2003, 18, 299–305.

  • Nagendra, H., Using remote sensing to assess biodiversity. Int. J. Remote Sensing, 2001, 22, 2377–2400.

  • Benson, M., Pierce, L. and Sarabandi, K., Estimating boreal forest canopy height and above ground biomass using multi-modal remote sensing; a database driven approach. in 2498–2501, IEEE, 2016; doi:10.1109/IGARSS.2016.7729645.

  • Wu, Z., Dye, D., Vogel, J. and Middleton, B., Estimating forest and woodland aboveground biomass using active and passive remote sensing. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sensing, 2016, 82, 271–281.

  • Latifi, H. et al., Stratified aboveground forest biomass estimation by remote sensing data. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinform., 2015, 38, 229–241.


Abstract Views: 400

PDF Views: 120




  • Remote Sensing-Derived Spectral Vegetation Indices and Forest Carbon:Testing the Validity of Models in Mountainous Terrain Covered with High Biodiversity

Abstract Views: 400  |  PDF Views: 120

Authors

Pradeep Kumar
Forests, Environment and Wildlife Management Department, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok 737 102, India
M. K. Ghose
Sikkim Manipal University, Gangtok 737 102, India

Abstract


Sequestration of carbon through forests is an important aspect in global climate change mitigation. Assessment of carbon in forests using remote sensing and GIS tools is one of the most important aspects of rapid and verifiable methodologies. A number of studies have shown the utility of spectral (vegetation) indices like NDVI in the assessment of forest carbon. However, there are limitations to this approach. The mountainous topography and high biodiversity affect the spectral values in pixels in multiple ways. The present article aims to test the validity of use of vegetation indices in high-biodiversity forests in mountains by modelling the ground based forest carbon measurement with vegetation indices of NDVI, EVI, SAVI and MSAVI in a multi-sensor, multi-season data environment with multiple regression methods like linear, power, logarithmic, polynomial and exponential. It is found that all the regressions have a poor coefficient of determination not even exceeding 0.2. It is concluded that the remote sensing-based spectral vegetation indices alone cannot be a proxy for forest carbon calculators in high biodiversity mountain forests.

Keywords


Biodiversity, Forest Carbon, Mountain, Remote Sensing, Vegetation Indices.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv112%2Fi10%2F2043-2050