The Importance of Consistent Global Forest Aboveground Biomass Product Validation

L Duncanson¹, J Armston¹, M Disney², V Avitabile³, N Barbier⁴, K Calders⁵, S Carter⁶, J Chave⁷, M Herold⁶, T W Crowther⁸, M Falkowski⁹, J R Kellner^{10

11}, N Labrière⁷, R Lucas¹², N MacBean¹³, R E McRoberts¹⁴, V Meyer¹⁵, E Næsset¹⁶, J E Nickeson¹⁷, K I Paul¹⁸, O L Phillips¹⁹, M Réjou-Méchain⁴, M Román²⁰, S Roxburgh¹⁸, S Saatchi¹⁵, D Schepaschenko²¹, K Scipal²², P R Siqueira²³, A Whitehurst²⁴, M Williams²⁵

Affiliations

¹ 1Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, 2181 Lefrak Hall, College Park, MD 20742 USA.
² 2Department of Geography, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT UK.
³ 3European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Via E. Fermi 2749, 21027 Ispra, Italy.
⁴ 4AMAP, IRD, CIRAD, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier University, TA A51/PS2, 34398 Montpellier cedex 5, France.
⁵ 5CAVElab - Computational and Applied Vegetation Ecology, Ghent University, Room A2.089, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
⁶ 6Laboratory of Geo-Information Science and Remote Sensing, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 3, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands.
⁷ 7Laboratoire Evolution et Diversit. Biologique, UMR 5174, CNRS, Universit. Toulouse Paul Sabatier, 118 route de Narbonne, 31062 Toulouse cedex 9, France.
⁸ 8Institute of Integrative Biology, ETH Zürich, Univeritätstrasse 16, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland.
⁹ 9Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 USA.
¹⁰ 10Institute at Brown for Environment and Society, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912 USA.
¹¹ 11Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912 USA.
¹² 12Earth Observation and Ecosystem Dynamics Research Group, Department of Geography and Earth Sciences (DGES), Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, Wales SY23 3DB UK.
¹³ 13Department of Geography, Indiana University, 701 E. Kirkwood Ave., Bloomington, IN 47405 USA.
¹⁴ 14USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Saint Paul, 1992 Folwell Ave, St Paul, MN 55108 USA.
¹⁵ 15Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109 USA.
¹⁶ 16Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, NMBU, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway.
¹⁷ NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/Science Systems and Applications Inc., 10210 Greenbelt Rd #600, Lanham, MD 20706 USA.
¹⁸ 18CSIRO Land and Water, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT 2601 Australia.
¹⁹ 19School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT UK.
²⁰ 25Earth from Space Institute, Universities Space Research Association, Columbia, MD USA.
²¹ 20International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Schlossplatz 1, 2361 Laxenburg, Austria.
²² 21European Space Agency, ESTEC, Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ Noordwijk, The Netherlands.
²³ 22Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 201 Marcus Hall, University of Massachusetts, 100 Natural Resources Road, Amherst, MA 01003 USA.
²⁴ Arctic Slope Federal Technical Services, 7000 Muirkirk Meadows Dr #100, Laurel, MD 20707 USA.
²⁵ 24School of GeoScience, University of Edinburgh, Drummond St, Edinburgh, EH8 9XP UK.

PMID: 31395994
PMCID: PMC6647371
DOI: 10.1007/s10712-019-09538-8

Review

The Importance of Consistent Global Forest Aboveground Biomass Product Validation

L Duncanson et al. Surv Geophys. 2019.

. 2019;40(4):979-999.

doi: 10.1007/s10712-019-09538-8. Epub 2019 May 30.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ 1Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, 2181 Lefrak Hall, College Park, MD 20742 USA.
² 2Department of Geography, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT UK.
³ 3European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Via E. Fermi 2749, 21027 Ispra, Italy.
⁴ 4AMAP, IRD, CIRAD, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier University, TA A51/PS2, 34398 Montpellier cedex 5, France.
⁵ 5CAVElab - Computational and Applied Vegetation Ecology, Ghent University, Room A2.089, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
⁶ 6Laboratory of Geo-Information Science and Remote Sensing, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 3, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands.
⁷ 7Laboratoire Evolution et Diversit. Biologique, UMR 5174, CNRS, Universit. Toulouse Paul Sabatier, 118 route de Narbonne, 31062 Toulouse cedex 9, France.
⁸ 8Institute of Integrative Biology, ETH Zürich, Univeritätstrasse 16, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland.
⁹ 9Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 USA.
¹⁰ 10Institute at Brown for Environment and Society, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912 USA.
¹¹ 11Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912 USA.
¹² 12Earth Observation and Ecosystem Dynamics Research Group, Department of Geography and Earth Sciences (DGES), Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, Wales SY23 3DB UK.
¹³ 13Department of Geography, Indiana University, 701 E. Kirkwood Ave., Bloomington, IN 47405 USA.
¹⁴ 14USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Saint Paul, 1992 Folwell Ave, St Paul, MN 55108 USA.
¹⁵ 15Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109 USA.
¹⁶ 16Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, NMBU, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway.
¹⁷ NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/Science Systems and Applications Inc., 10210 Greenbelt Rd #600, Lanham, MD 20706 USA.
¹⁸ 18CSIRO Land and Water, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT 2601 Australia.
¹⁹ 19School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT UK.
²⁰ 25Earth from Space Institute, Universities Space Research Association, Columbia, MD USA.
²¹ 20International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Schlossplatz 1, 2361 Laxenburg, Austria.
²² 21European Space Agency, ESTEC, Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ Noordwijk, The Netherlands.
²³ 22Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 201 Marcus Hall, University of Massachusetts, 100 Natural Resources Road, Amherst, MA 01003 USA.
²⁴ Arctic Slope Federal Technical Services, 7000 Muirkirk Meadows Dr #100, Laurel, MD 20707 USA.
²⁵ 24School of GeoScience, University of Edinburgh, Drummond St, Edinburgh, EH8 9XP UK.

PMID: 31395994
PMCID: PMC6647371
DOI: 10.1007/s10712-019-09538-8

Abstract

Several upcoming satellite missions have core science requirements to produce data for accurate forest aboveground biomass mapping. Largely because of these mission datasets, the number of available biomass products is expected to greatly increase over the coming decade. Despite the recognized importance of biomass mapping for a wide range of science, policy and management applications, there remains no community accepted standard for satellite-based biomass map validation. The Committee on Earth Observing Satellites (CEOS) is developing a protocol to fill this need in advance of the next generation of biomass-relevant satellites, and this paper presents a review of biomass validation practices from a CEOS perspective. We outline the wide range of anticipated user requirements for product accuracy assessment and provide recommendations for the validation of biomass products. These recommendations include the collection of new, high-quality in situ data and the use of airborne lidar biomass maps as tools toward transparent multi-resolution validation. Adoption of community-vetted validation standards and practices will facilitate the uptake of the next generation of biomass products.

Keywords: Biomass mapping; Committee on Earth Observing Satellites; Lidar; Map validation; Reference data; Remote sensing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

**Fig. 1**
Existing or planned field and airborne lidar datasets for use in spaceborne mission biomass model fitting or product validation. The red points have been compiled by the NASA GEDI team and are used in their biomass model development. The blue points, compiled by the NISAR team, are planned sites for both model development and product validation. The turquoise sites, compiled by the Forest Observation System (FOS, Chave et al. 2019), represent high-quality standardized field estimates of biomass

See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

1. Abshire JB, Sun X, Riris H, Sirota JM, McGarry JF, Palm S, Yi D, Liiva P. Geoscience laser altimeter system (GLAS) on the ICESat mission: on-orbit measurement performance. Geophys Res Lett. 2005;32:15–20. doi: 10.1029/2005GL024028. - DOI
1. Ahmed R, Siqueira P, Hensley S, Bergen K. Uncertainty of forest biomass estimates in north temperate forests due to allometry: implications for remote sensing. Remote Sens. 2013;5:3007–3036. doi: 10.3390/rs5063007. - DOI
1. Andersen H-E, Strunk J, Temesgen H. Using airborne light detection and ranging as a sampling tool for estimating forest biomass resources in the Upper Tanana Valley of Interior Alaska. West J Appl For. 2011;26:157–164. doi: 10.1093/wjaf/26.4.157. - DOI
1. Avitabile V, Camia A. An assessment of forest biomass maps in Europe using harmonized national statistics and inventory plots. For Ecol Manag. 2018;409:489–498. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2017.11.047. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
1. Avitabile V, Herold M, Heuvelink GBM, Lewis SL, Phillips OL, Asner GP, Armston J, Ashton PS, Banin L, Bayol N, Berry NJ, Boeckx P, de Jong BHJ, DeVries B, Girardin CAJ, Kearsley E, Lindsell JA, Lopez-Gonzalez G, Lucas R, Malhi Y, Morel A, Mitchard ETA, Nagy L, Qie L, Quinones MJ, Ryan CM, Ferry SJW, Sunderland T, Laurin GV, Gatti RC, Valentini R, Verbeeck H, Wijaya A, Willcock S. An integrated pan-tropical biomass map using multiple reference datasets. Global Change Biol. 2016;22:1406–1420. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13139. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Actions

Save citation to file

Email citation

Add to Collections

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search

Create a file for external citation management software

Your RSS Feed

The Importance of Consistent Global Forest Aboveground Biomass Product Validation

Affiliations

The Importance of Consistent Global Forest Aboveground Biomass Product Validation

Authors

Affiliations

Abstract

Figures

References

Publication types