Forest Canopy Structural Complexity and Light Absorption Relationships at the Subcontinental Scale

Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences

Volumn 123, Issue 4, 2018, Pages 1387-1405

  Atkins, J W ^a   Fahey, R T ^b   Hardiman, B H ^c   Gough, C M ^a  

^a VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^c PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

canopy structure; LiDAR; National Ecological Observatory Network fpar; photosynthetically active radiation; radiative transfer

Indexed keywords

ABSORPTION; BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLE; COMPLEXITY; FOREST CANOPY; LIDAR; LIGHT SCATTERING; OBSERVATORY; PHOTOSYNTHETICALLY ACTIVE RADIATION; PREDICTION; RADIATIVE TRANSFER; STAND STRUCTURE; VEGETATION INDEX;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 85046040202     PISSN: 21698953     EISSN: 21698961     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/2017JG004256     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. In Selected Papers of Hirotugu Akaike (pp. 371–386). New York, NY: Springer.
2. Alton, P. B., North, P. R., & Los, S. O. (2007). The impact of diffuse sunlight on canopy light-use efficiency, gross photosynthetic product and net ecosystem exchange in three forest biomes. Global Change Biology, 13(4), 776–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01316.x
3. Atkins, J. W., Bohrer, G., Fahey, R. T., Hardiman, B. H., Gough, C. M., Morin, T., et al. (2018). Forestr: Ecosystem and canopy structural complexity metrics from LiDAR. R package version 1.0.1. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=forestr
4. Barton, K. (2017). MuMIn: Multi-modal inference. R package version 1.40.0. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=MuMIn
5. Béland, M., Baldocchi, D. D., Widlowski, J.-L., Fournier, R. A., & Verstraete, M. M. (2014). On seeing the wood from the leaves and the role of voxel size in determining leaf area distribution of forests with terrestrial LiDAR. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 184, 82–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.09.005
6. Binkley, D., Campoe, O. C., Gspaltl, M., & Forrester, D. I. (2011). Light absorption and use efficiency in forests: Why patterns differ for trees and stands. Forest Ecology and Management, 288, 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.11.002
7. Canham, C. D., Denslow, J. S., Platt, W. J., Runkle, J. R., Spies, T. A., & White, P. S. (1990). Light regimes beneath closed canopies and tree-fall gaps in temperate and tropical forests. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 20(5), 620–631. https://doi.org/10.1139/x90-084
8. Cao, R., Shen, M., Chen, J., & Tang, Y. (2014). A simple method to simulate diurnal courses of PAR absorbed by grassy canopy. Ecological Indicators, 46, 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.06.017
9. Chen, J. M., Menges, C. H., & Leblanc, S. G. (2005). Global mapping of foliage clumping index using multi-angular satellite data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 97(4), 447–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2005.05.003
10. Cheng, S. J., Bohrer, G., Steiner, A. L., Hollinger, D. Y., Suyker, A., Phillips, R. P., & Nadelhoffer, K. J. (2015). Variations in the influence of diffuse light on gross primary productivity in temperate ecosystems. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 201, 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.11.002
11. Disney, M., Muller, J.-P., Kharbouche, S., Kaminski, T., Voßbeck, M., Lewis, P., & Pinty, B. (2016). A new global fAPAR and LAI dataset derived from optimal albedo estimates: Comparison with MODIS products. Remote Sensing, 8(4), 275. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8040275
12. D'Odorico, P., Gonsamo, A., Pinty, B., Gobron, N., Coops, N., Mendez, E., & Schaepman, M. (2014). Intercomparison of fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation products derived from satellite data over Europe. Remote Sensing of Environment, 142, 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSE.2013.12.005
13. Duursma, R. A., Falster, D. S., Valladares, F., Sterck, F. J., Pearcy, R. W., Lusk, C. H., et al. (2012). Light interception efficiency explained by two simple variables: A test using a diversity of small- to medium-sized woody plants. The New Phytologist, 193(2), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03943.x
14. Eitel, J. U. H., Höfle, B., Vierling, L. A., Abellán, A., Asner, G. P., Deems, J. S., et al. (2016). Beyond 3-D: The new spectrum of lidar applications for Earth and ecological sciences. Remote Sensing of Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.08.018
15. Fahey, R. T., Fotis, A. T., & Woods, K. D. (2015). Quantifying canopy complexity and effects on productivity and resilience in late-successional hemlock? Hardwood forests. Ecological Applications, 25(3), 834–847. https://doi.org/10.1890/14-1012.1
16. Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Anderegg, W. R. L., Christoffersen, B. O., Dietze, M. C., Farrior, C. E., et al. (2017). Vegetation demographics in Earth system models: A review of progress and priorities. Global Change Biology, 24(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13910
17. Fotis, A. T., & Curtis, P. S. (2017). Effects of structural complexity on within-canopy light environments and leaf traits in a northern mixed deciduous forest, edited by H. Ishii. Tree Physiology, 170, 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpw124
18. Fotis, A. T., Morin, T. H., Fahey, R. T., Hardiman, B. S., Bohrer, G., & Curtis, P. S. (2018). Forest structure in space and time: Biotic and abiotic determinants of canopy complexity and their effects on net primary productivity. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 250, 181–191.
19. Gitelson, A. A., Peng, Y., Arkebauer, T. J., & Schepers, J. (2014). Relationships between gross primary production, green LAI, and canopy chlorophyll content in maize: Implications for remote sensing of primary production. Remote Sensing of Environment, 144, 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.01.004
20. Gower, S. T., Kucharik, C. J., & Norman, J. M. (1999). Direct and indirect estimation of leaf area index, f APAR, and net primary production of terrestrial ecosystems. Remote Sensing of Environment, 70(1), 29–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(99)00056-5
21. Hardiman, B. S., Bohrer, G., Gough, C., & Curtis, P. (2013). Canopy structural changes following widespread mortality of canopy dominant trees. Forests, 4(3), 537–552. https://doi.org/10.3390/f4030537
22. Hardiman, B. S., Bohrer, G., Gough, C. M., Vogel, C. S., & Curtis, P. S. (2011). The role of canopy structural complexity in wood net primary production of a maturing northern deciduous forest. Ecology, 92(9), 1818–1827. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-2192.1
23. Hardiman, B. S., Gough, C. M., Halperin, A., Hofmeister, K. L., Nave, L. E., Bohrer, G., & Curtis, P. S. (2013). Maintaining high rates of carbon storage in old forests: A mechanism linking canopy structure to forest function. Forest Ecology and Management, 298, 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.02.031
24. Hilker, T., Coops, N. C., Wulder, M. A., Black, T. A., & Guy, R. D. (2008). The use of remote sensing in light use efficiency based models of gross primary production: A review of current status and future requirements. Sci. Total Environ., 404(2–3), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.11.007
25. Hovi, A., Korhonen, L., Vauhkonen, J., & Korpela, I. (2016). LiDAR waveform features for tree species classification and their sensitivity to tree- and acquisition related parameters. Remote Sensing of Environment, 173, 224–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2015.08.019
26. Hutchison, B. A., Matt, D. R., & McMillen, R. T. (1980). Effects of sky brightness distribution upon penetration of diffuse radiation through canopy gaps in a deciduous forest. Agricultural Meteorology, 22(2), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-1571(80)90040-0
27. Jennings, S., Brown, N., & Sheil, D. (1999). Assessing forest canopies and understorey illumination: Canopy closure, canopy cover and other measures. Forestry, 72(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/72.1.59
28. Kao, R. H., Gibson, C. M., Gallery, R. E., Meier, C. L., Barnett, D. T., Docherty, K. M., et al. (2012). NEON terrestrial field observations: Designing continental-scale, standardized sampling. Ecosphere, 3(12), art115. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES12-00196.1
29. Kim, H.-S., Palmroth, S., Therezien, M., Stenberg, P., Oren, R., & Niinemets, Ü. (2011). Analysis of the sensitivity of absorbed light and incident light profile to various canopy architecture and stand conditions. Tree Physiology, 31(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpq098
30. Lee, H., Slatton, K. C., Roth, B. E., & Cropper, W. P. (2009). Prediction of forest canopy light interception using three-dimensional airborne LiDAR data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 30(1), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160802261171
31. Lefsky, M. A., Cohen, W. B., Parker, G. G., & Harding, D. J. (2002). Lidar remote sensing for ecosystem studies: Lidar, an emerging remote sensing technology that directly measures the three-dimensional distribution of plant canopies, can accurately estimate vegetation structural attributes and should be of particular interest to forest, landscape, and global ecologists. Bioscience, 52(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052%5B0019:lrsfes%5D2.0.co;2
32. Li, W., & Fang, H. (2015). Estimation of direct, diffuse, and total FPARs from Landsat surface reflectance data and ground-based estimates over six FLUXNET sites. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 120, 96–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JG002754
33. 2 exchange: Vegetation photosynthesis and respiration model (VPRM). Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 22, GB2005. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GB002735
34. Majasalmi, T., Rautiainen, M., & Stenberg, P. (2014). Modeled and measured fPAR in a boreal forest: Validation and application of a new model. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 189-190, 118–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.01.015
35. Martens, S. N., Ustin, S. L., & Rousseau, R. A. (1993). Estimation of tree canopy leaf area index by gap fraction analysis. Forest Ecology and Management, 61(1-2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(93)90192-P
36. McCrady, R. L., & Jokela, E. J. (1998). Canopy dynamics, light interception, and radiation use efficiency of selected loblolly pine families. Forest Science, 44(1), 64–72.
37. Mcmahon, S. M., Bebber, D. P., Butt, N., Crockatt, M., Kirby, K., Parker, G. G., et al. (2015). Ground based LiDAR demonstrates the legacy of management history to canopy structure and composition across a fragmented temperate woodland. Forest Ecology and Management, 335, 255–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2014.08.039
38. 2 exchange. Forest Ecology and Management, 52(1–4), 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(92)90505-4
39. Morton, D. C., Nagol, J., Carabajal, C. C., Rosette, J., Palace, M., Cook, B. D., et al. (2014). Amazon forests maintain consistent canopy structure and greenness during the dry season. Nature, 506(7487), 221–224. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13006
40. Myneni, R. B., Ramakrishna, R., Nemani, R., & Running, S. W. (1997). Estimation of global leaf area index and absorbed par using radiative transfer models. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 35(6), 1380–1393. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.649788
41. Niinemets, Ü. (2007). Photosynthesis and resource distribution through plant canopies. Plant, Cell & Environment, 30(9), 1052–1071. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.01683.x
42. Niinemets, Ü. (2010a). A review of light interception in plant stands from leaf to canopy in different plant functional types and in species with varying shade tolerance. Ecological Research, 25(4), 693–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-010-0712-4
43. Niinemets, Ü. (2010b). A review of light interception in plant stands from leaf to canopy in different plant functional types and in species with varying shade tolerance. Ecological Research, 25(4), 693–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-010-0712-4
44. Niinemets, Ü., & Tenhunen, J. D. (1997). A model separating leaf structural and physiological effects on carbon gain along light gradients for the shade-tolerant species Acer saccharum. Plant, Cell and Environment, 20(7), 845–866. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.1997.d01-133.x
45. Panferov, O., Knyazikhin, Y., Myneni, R. B., Szarzynski, J., Engwald, S., Schnitzler, K. G., & Gravenhorst, G. (2001). The role of canopy structure in the spectral variation of transmission and absorption of solar radiation in vegetation canopies. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 39(2), 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.905232
46. Parker, G. G., Davis, M. M., & Chapotin, S. M. (2002). Canopy light transmittance in Douglas-fir-western hemlock stands. Tree Physiology, 22(2–3), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/22.2-3.147
47. Parker, G. G., & Russ, M. E. (2004). The canopy surface and stand development: Assessing forest canopy structure and complexity with near-surface altimetry. Forest Ecology and Management, 189(1–3), 307–315.
48. Qi, W., & Dubayah, R. O. (2016). Combining tandem-X InSAR and simulated GEDI lidar observations for forest structure mapping. Remote Sensing of Environment, 187, 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.10.018
49. R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/
50. Robinson, D. (2017). Broom: Convert statistal analysis objects into tidy data frames. R package version 0.4.3. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=broom
51. Schimel, D., Pavlick, R., Fisher, J. B., Asner, G. P., Saatchi, S., Townsend, P., et al. (2015). Observing terrestrial ecosystems and the carbon cycle from space. Global Change Biology, 21(5), 1762–1776. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12822
52. Sellers, P. J., Dickinson, R. E., Randall, D. A., Betts, A. K., Hall, F. G., Berry, J. A., et al. (1997). Modeling the exchanges of energy, water, and carbon between continents and the atmosphere until the early 1980s, global atmospheric. Science, 275(5299), 502–509.
53. Shabanov, N. V., Wang, Y., Buermann, W., Dong, J., Hoffman, S., Smith, G. R., et al. (2003). Effect of foliage spatial heterogeneity in the MODIS LAI and FPAR algorithm over broadleaf forests. Remote Sensing of Environment, 85(4), 410–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(03)00017-8
54. Shugart, H. H., Saatchi, S., & Hall, F. G. (2010). Importance of structure and its measurement in quantifying function of forest ecosystems. Journal of Geophysical Research, 115, G00E13. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JG000993
55. Slowikowski, K. (2017). ggrepel: Repulsive Text and Label Geoms for ‘ggplot2’. R package version 0.7.0. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggrepel
56. Stark, S. C., Leitold, V., Wu, J. L., Hunter, M. O., de Castilho, C. V., Costa, F. R., et al. (2012). Amazon forest carbon dynamics predicted by profiles of canopy leaf area and light environment. Ecology Letters, 15(12), 1406–1414.
57. Stenberg, P., Kangas, T., Smolander, H., & Linder, S. (1999). Shoot structure, canopy openness, and light interception in Norway spruce. Plant, Cell and Environment, 22(9), 1133–1142. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.1999.00484.x
58. Thorpe, A. S., Barnett, D. T., Elmendorf, S. C., Hinckley, E.-L. S., Hoekman, D., Jones, K. D., et al. (2016). Introduction to the sampling designs of the National Ecological Observatory Network Terrestrial Observation System. Ecosphere, 7(12), e01627. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1627
59. Van Pelt, R., Sillett, S. C., Kruse, W. A., Freund, J. A., & Kramer, R. D. (2016). Emergent crowns and light-use complementarity lead to global maximum biomass and leaf area in Sequoia sempervirens forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 375, 279–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2016.05.018
60. Walcroft, A. S., Brown, K. J., Schuster, W. S. F., Tissue, D. T., Turnbull, M. H., Griffin, K. L., & Whitehead, D. (2005). Radiative transfer and carbon assimilation in relation to canopy architecture, foliage area distribution and clumping in a mature temperate rainforest canopy in New Zealand. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 135(1–4), 326–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.12.010
61. Wang, K., Franklin, S. E., Guo, X., & Cattet, M. (2010). Remote sensing of ecology, biodiversity and conservation: A review from the perspective of remote sensing specialists. Sensors, 10(11), 9647–9667. https://doi.org/10.3390/s101109647
62. Watt, A. S. (1947). Pattern and process in the plant community. Journal of Ecology, 35(1/2), 1. https://doi.org/10.2307/2256497
63. Wickham, H. (2009). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3
64. Wickham, H. (2011). The split-apply-combine strategy for data analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 40(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v040.i01
65. Wickham, H., Francois, R., Henry, L., & Muller, K. (2017). dplyr: A grammar of data manipulation. R Package version 0.7.4. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=dplyr
66. Wickhham, H., & Henry, L. (2017). tidyr: Easily tidy data with ‘spread()’ and ‘gather()’ functions. R package version 0.7.2. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=tidyr
67. Widlowski, J.-L., Mio, C., Disney, M., Adams, J., Andredakis, I., Atzberger, C., et al. (2015). The fourth phase of the radiative transfer model intercomparison (RAMI) exercise: Actual canopy scenarios and conformity testing. Remote Sensing of Environment, 169, 418–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2015.08.016
68. Yan, K., Park, T., Yan, G., Chen, C., Yang, B., Liu, Z., et al. (2016). Evaluation of MODIS LAI/FPAR product collection 6. Part 1: Consistency and improvements. Remote Sensing, 8(5), 359. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8050359
69. Yang, B., Knyazikhin, Y., Mõttus, M., Rautiainen, M., Stenberg, P., Yan, L., et al. (2017). Estimation of leaf area index and its sunlit portion from DSCOVR EPIC data: Theoretical basis. Remote Sensing of Environment, 198, 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.05.033
70. Zhang, M., Zhu, J., Li, M., Zhang, G., & Yan, Q. (2013). Different light acclimation strategies of two coexisting tree species seedlings in a temperate secondary forest along five natural light levels. Forest Ecology and Management, 306, 234–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.06.031
71. Zhao, C., Li, H., Li, P., Yang, G., Gu, X., & Lan, Y. (2017). Effect of vertical distribution of crop structure and biochemical parameters of winter wheat on canopy reflectance characteristics and spectral indices. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 55(1), 236–247. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2016.2604492
72. Zhou, Y., Wu, X., Ju, W., Chen, J. M., Wang, S., Wang, H., et al. (2016). Global parameterization and validation of a two-leaf light use efficiency model for predicting gross primary production across FLUXNET sites. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 121, 1045–1072. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JG002876
73. Zolkos, S. G., Goetz, S. J., & Dubayah, R. (2013). A meta-analysis of terrestrial aboveground biomass estimation using lidar remote sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment, 128, 289–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.10.017