Computer-aided calibration for visual estimation of vegetation cover

Journal of Vegetation Science

Volumn 20, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 973-983

  Gallegos Torell, Åsa ^a   Glimskär, Anders ^a  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Environmental monitoring; Observer error; Plot inventory; Vegetation cover

Indexed keywords

POACEAE;

EID: 79151469553     PISSN: 11009233     EISSN: 16541103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.01111.x     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Allard, A., Nilsson, B., Pramborg, K., Ståhl, G. & Sundquist, S. 2005. Manual for aerial photo interpretation in the National inventory of landscapes in Sweden (NILS). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of ForestResourceManagement, Umeå, SE.
2. Bråkenhielm, S. & Liu, Q. 1995. Comparison of field methods in vegetation monitoring. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 79: 75-87.
3. Carlsson, A.L.M, Bergfur, J. & Milberg, P. 2005. Comparison of data from two vegetation monitoring methods in semi-natural grasslands. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 100: 235-248.
4. Dethier, M., Graham, E.S., Cohen, S. & Tear, L.M. 1993. Visual versus random-point percent cover estimations: 'objective' is not always better. Marine Ecology Progress Series 96: 93-100.
5. Esseen, P-A., Glimskär, A., Ståhl, G. & Sundquist, S. 2007. Field instruction for National Inventory of the Landscape in Sweden, NILS, year 2007. SLU, Department of ForestResourceManagement, Umeå, SE.
6. Floyd, D.A. & Anderson, J.E. 1987. A comparison of three methods for estimating plant cover. Journal of Ecology 75: 221-228.
7. Goodall, D.W. 1952. Some considerations in the use of point quadrats for the analysis of vegetation. Australian Journal of Scientific Research, Series B 5: 1-41.
8. Inghe, O. 2001. The Swedish landscape monitoring programme - current status and prospects for the near future. In: Groom, G. & Reed, T. (eds.) Strategic landscape monitoring for the Nordic countries. TemaNord 2001. 523, pp. 61-67. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen, DK.
9. Jalonen, J., Vanha-Majamaa, I. & Tonteri, T. 1998. Optimal sample and plot size for inventory of field and ground layer vegetation in a mature Myrtillustype boreal spruce forest. Annales Botanici Fennici 35: 191-196.
10. Jukola-Sulonen, E-L. & Salemaa, M. 1985. A comparison of different sampling methods of quantitative vegetation analysis. Silva Fennica 19: 325-337.
11. Karlsson, T. 1998. Förteckning över Svenska Kärlväxter. Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift 91: 241-560 (in Swedish with English summary).
12. Kennedy, K.A. & Addison, P.A. 1987. Some considerations for the use of visual estimates of plant cover in biomonitoring. Journal of Ecology 75: 151-157.
13. Klimeš, L. 2003. Scale-dependent variation in visual estimates of grassland plant cover. Journal of Vegetation Science 14: 815-821.
14. Nilsson, C. 1992. Increasing the reliability of vegetation analyses by using a team of two investigators. Journal of Vegetation Science 3: 565.
15. Økland, T. 1990. Vegetational and ecological monitoring of boreal forests in Norway, SE Norway. Sommerfeltia 10: 1-52.
16. Sykes, J.M., Horrill, A.D. & Mountford, M D. 1983. Use of visual cover assessments as quantitative estimators of some British woodland taxa. Journal of Ecology 71: 437-450.
17. Tonteri, T. 1990. Inter-observer variation in forest vegetation cover assessments. Silva Fennica 24: 189-196.
18. Vanha-Majamaa, I., Salemaa, M., Tuominen, S. & Mikkola, K. 2000. Digitized photographs in vegetation analysis - a comparison of cover estimates. Applied Vegetation Science 3: 89-94.
19. van Hees, W.W.S. & Mead, B.R. 2000. Ocular estimates of understory vegetation structure in a closed Picea glauca/Betula papyrifera forest. Journal of Vegetation Science 11: 195-200.