Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T04:42:02.616Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Characterisation of Arctic treelines by LiDAR and multispectral imagery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2007

W. G. Rees
W. G. Rees*
Affiliation:
Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, Lensfield Road, Cambridge CB2 1ER
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Arctic treeline, or more precisely the tundra-taiga interface (TTI) region, is poorly defined and characterised despite its high climatological significance. The international coordinated research programme ‘PPS Arctic’, under the auspices of the International Polar Year, represents one response to this gap in our knowledge. This paper presents preliminary work within one of the four principal research areas of PPS Arctic, the characterisation of spatial variations in vegetation, land cover and land use in the TTI using remote sensing methods. Airborne remote sensing data were collected from a 120 km2 TTI study site near Porsangmoen, Finnmark, Norway in 2004 and 2005. Three datasets were acquired: two sets of multispectral visible-infrared imagery with spatial resolutions of around 3 m, and airborne scanning LiDAR data with a horizontal resolution of 2 m and a vertical precision of around 0.2 m. While some difficulties were experienced in processing and analysing the imagery, the LiDAR data proved exceptionally well suited to the task of characterising the structure of the forest edge. Preliminary analyses were strongly suggestive of fractal characteristics, with corresponding consequences for the scale-dependence of descriptors such as canopy density and the location of the forest edge.

Type
Articles
Information
Polar Record , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , October 2007 , pp. 345 - 352
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment). 2004. Impacts of a warming Arctic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Allen, T.R., and Walsh, S.J.. 1996.Spatial and compositional pattern of alpine treeline, Glacier National Park, Montana. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 62: 1261–1268.Google Scholar
Arnold, N.S., Rees, W.G., Devereux, B.J., and Amable, G.S.. 2006. Evaluating the potential of high-resolution airborne LiDAR data in glaciology. International Journal of Remote Sensing 27: 1233–1251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betts, R.A. 2000. Offset of the potential carbon sink from boreal forestation by decreases in surface albedo. Nature 408: 187–190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Callaghan, T.V., Werkman, B., and Crawford, R.M.M.. 2002. The tundra-taiga interface and its dynamics. Stockholm: Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (Report): 63.Google Scholar
Colpaert, A., Kumpula, J. and Nieminen, M.. 1995. Remote Sensing: a tool for reindeer range land management. Polar Record 31: 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, R.M.M., Jeffree, C.E. and Rees, W.G.. 2003. Paludification and forest retreat in Northern Oceanic environments. Annals of Botany 91: 213–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeFries, R.S., Hansen, M.C., and Townshend, J.R.G.. 2000. Global continuous fields of vegetation characteristics: a linear mixture model applied to multi-year 8 km AVHRR data. International Journal of Remote Sensing 21: 1389–1414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eidenshink, J.C., and Faundeen, J.L.. 1994. The 1 km AVHRR global land data set-first stages in implementation. International Journal of Remote Sensing 15: 3443–3462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Häme, T. 1991. Spectral interpretation of changes in forest using satellite scanner images. Acta Forestalia Fennica 222: 1–111Google Scholar
Hansen, M.C., DeFries, R.S., Townshend, J.R.G., Carroll, M., Dimiceli, C. and Sohlberg, R.A.. 2003. Global percent tree cover at a spatial resolution of 500 meters: first results of the MODIS vegetation Continuous Fields algorithm. Earth Interactions 7: 1–15.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, R., Kuhry, P., Christensen, T., Sykes, M.T., Dankers, R., and van de Linden, S.. 2002. Climate feedbacks at the tundra-taiga interface. Ambio (Special Report 12): 47–55.Google Scholar
Harper, K.A., and Macdonald, S.E.. 2001. Structure and composition of riparian boreal forest: new methods for analyzing edge influence. Ecology 82: 649–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, K.A., Macdonald, S.E., Burton, P., Chen, J., Brosofsky, K.D., Saunders, S., Euskirchen, E.S., Roberts, D., Jaiteh, M., and Esseen, P.-A.. 2005. Edge influence on forest structure and composition in fragmented landscapes. Conservation Biology 19: 768–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudak, A.T., Lefsky, M.A., Cohen, W.B., and Berterretche, M.. 2002. Integration of lidar and Landsat ETM +data for estimating and mapping forest canopy height. Remote Sensing of Environment 82: 397–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hustich, I. 1983. Tree-line and tree growth studies during 50 years: some subjective observations. Nordicana 47, pp. 181–188.Google Scholar
MacLean, G.A., and Krabill, W.B.. 1986. Merchantable timber volume estimation using an airborne LiDAR sys-tem. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 12: 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marceau, D. J. 1999. The scale issue in social and natural sciences. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 25: 347–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marceau, D.J., and Hay, G.J.. 1999. Remote sensing contributions to the scale issue. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 25: 357–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Means, J.E., Acker, S.A., Fitt, B.J., Renslow, M., Emerson, L., and Hendrix, C.J.. 2000. Predicting forest stand characteristics with airborne scanning LiDAR. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 66: 1367–1371.Google Scholar
Naesset, E. 1997. Determination of mean tree height of forest stands using airborne laser scanner data. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 52: 49–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, D.M., and Dinerstein, E.. 1998. The Global 200: a representation approach to conserving the Earth's most biologically valuable ecoregions. Conservation Biology 12: 502–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, J.S. 1994a. Global ecosystem framework-definitions. Sioux Falls: USGS EROS Data Center.Google Scholar
Olson, J.S. 1994b. Global ecosystem framework-translation-strategy. Sioux Falls: USGS EROS Data Center.Google Scholar
Payette, S., Fortin, M.-J., and Gamache, I.. 2001. The subarctic forest-tundra: the structure of a biome in a changing climate. BioScience 51: 709–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payette, S., Eronen, M., and Jasinski, J.J.P.. 2002. The circumboreal tundra-taiga interface: late Pleistocene and Holocene changes. Ambio (Special Report 12): 15–22.Google Scholar
Purdue Research Foundation. 1994–2006. Multispec: a freeware multispectral image data analysis system. West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue Research Foundation. URL: http://cobweb.ecn.purdue.edu/~biehl/MultiSpec/ (Last access: 6 July 2006).Google Scholar
Rasband, W.S. 1997–2006. ImageJ. Bethesda, Maryland: US National Institutes of Health. URL: http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/ (Last access: 6 July 2006).Google Scholar
Rees, G., Brown, I., Mikkola, K., Virtanen, T., and Werkman, B.. 2002. How can the dynamics of the tundra-taiga boundary be remotely monitored? Ambio (Special Report 12): 56–62.Google Scholar
Rees, W.G., and Williams, M.. 1997. Monitoring changes in land cover induced by atmospheric pollution in the Kola Peninsula, Russia, using LANDSAT MSS data. International Journal of Remote Sensing 18: 1703–1723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skre, O., Baxter, R., Crawford, R.M.M., Callaghan, T.V., and Fedorkov, A.. 2002. How will the tundra-taiga interface respond to climate change? Ambio (Special Report 12): 37–46.Google Scholar
Stow, D. A., Hope, A., McGuire, D., Verbyla, D., Gamon, J., Huemmrich, F., Houston, S., Racine, C., Sturm, M., Tape, K., Hinzman, L., Yoshikawa, K., Tweedie, C., Noyle, B., Silapaswan, C., Douglas, D., Griffith, B., Jia, G., Epstein, H., Walker, D., Daeschner, S., Petersen, A., Zhou, L., and Myneni, R.. 2004. Remote sensing of vegetation and land-cover change in Arctic Tundra Ecosystems. Remote Sensing of Environment 89: 281–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sveinbjörnsson, B., Hofgaard, A., and Lloyd, A.. 2002. Naturalcauses of the tundra-taiga boundary. Ambio (Special Report 12): 23–29.Google Scholar
Tømmervik, H., Høgda, K.A., and Solheim, I.. 2003. Moni-toring vegetation changes in Pasvik (Norway) and Pechenga in Kola Peninsula (Russia) using multitemporal Landsat MSS/TM data. Remote Sensing of Environment 85: 370–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tømmervik, H., Johansen, B., Tombre, I., Thannheiser, D., Høgda, K.A., Gaare, E., and Wielgolaski, F.E.. 2004. Vegetation changes in the Nordic mountain birch forest: the influence of grazing and climate change. Arctic, Antarctic and Alpine Research 36: 323–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlassova, T. 2002. Human impacts on the tundra-taiga zone dynamics: the case of Russian Lesotundra. Ambio (Special Report 12): 30–36.Google Scholar
Weishampel, J. F., Blair, J.B., Knox, R.G., Dubayah, R. and Clark, D.B.. 2000. Volumetric LiDAR return patterns from an old-growth tropical rainforest canopy. International Journal of Remote Sensing 21: 409–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, J. 1999. Hierarchy and scaling: extrapolating information along a scaling ladder. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 25: 367–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar