Upload
henry-bailey
View
218
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Estimating Forest Biomass Using Geostatistics Techniques: a case Study of
Rondônia, Southern Brazilian Amazon
Marcio SalesCarlos Souza
Phaedon KyriakidsDar RobertsEdson Vidal
2
Biomass estimates diverge: (Houghton et al, 2001)
Preview biomass estimates *
Approachs:
1- Interpolation.
2- Estimation on 44 forest ecossystems
3- Interpolation of field measurements.
4- Modeling
5- Interpolation.
6- Based on satellite data.
7- Purely Based on Satellite data.
• Total biomassa ranged from 78 to 279 PgC.• Resulting biomass profiles also differ.
1 2 3 4
5 6 7
* Picture modified from Houghton et al, 2001
3
Common Methods to Estimate Biomass
• Extrapolation of forest surveys;
• Estimates based on satellite data;
• Estimates based on models relating biomass on environmental parameters: (ex. vegetation type and soil);
4
Problems of the Common Methods
•Do not provide a measure of local uncertainty
•Do not account for spatial correlation
5
Objective
– Evaluate geostatistics to improve biomass estimation in the Amazon region
• Takes into account spatial autocorrelation• Provides a measure of local uncertainty
6
MethodsStudy area and data base
Origin: RADAMBRASIL
Data on timber volume from 330 samples inside and up to a
distance of 100km around Rondônia.
RADAMBRASIL plots:- 1 ha (20 m x 500 m).- All trees which DBH≥45 cm.
7
MethodsAuxiliary
data
Volume data
Auxiliary data
Estimating trend
Trend model
ResidualsVariogram
AnalysisVariogram parameters
Kriging
Volume map
VolumeStd error map
BiomassConvertion
Biomass map
BiomassStd error map
1- Trend Estimation 2- Geoestatistics
3- Biomass Mapping
Sample data
Population data
8
Methods• Data Layers:
Soil Texture (re-classified from IBGE’s Classification of Soils (1980)).
Forest type (re-classified from IBGE’s vegetation classification).
Topography(SRTM)
9
Use information of neighbor samples to predict values atnon-sampled locations
Data Analysis
:)(swi
i
iiSSs ywywywywy 2211ˆ
ii dsw
1)(
Spatial Interpolation Geostatistical Interpolation (Kriging)
Weighting factors of samples nearby location s
Ex.: Classical (inverse distance) interpolation:
Choice of weighting factors :)(swi
min)()()()(ˆ
1)(
sYsYwVarsYsYVar
sw
iii
i
Best Linear Unbiased Estimator!
Kriging Requires:
• Volume values must be free of any trend (regression on external variables or coordinates)
•Estimation of variogram function (Variogram analysis):
))(),(()( huYuYCovhC
w1(s1) w2(s1) w2(s3)
w3(s3)w3(s1)
w4(s2)
w3(s2)
w1(s2)
w2(s2)
w1(s1) w2(s1) w2(s3)
w3(s3)w3(s1)
w4(s2)
w3(s2)
w1(s2)
w2(s2)
10
• In the samples:
Trend Model Estimation
• In the population:
Trend Model Application
•Rondônia was divided in a 1km x 1km grid
•Trend model applied using data layers
Data Analysis
Estatistical Model for volume:
)()(ˆ sRsmY
)(,, sRtopogsoiltexttopogfortypetopogsoiltextfortypeVolumes
)(sm )(sR
)(,, sRtopogsoiltexttopogfortypetopogsoiltextfortypeVolumes
)(sm )(sR
fortype: Set of dummy variables for forest classes
soiltext : Set of dummy variables for soil texture classes
topog: Topography
R: Regression residuals
11
Sample residual variogram
)(
1
2)()()(2
1)(
hN
iii huyuy
hNh
Sample residual variogram
)(
1
2)()()(2
1)(
hN
iii huyuy
hNh
Variogram Model:Nested Structure: nugget+gaussian+spherical
299.7 Km1855.2 (1.00)Spherical component:
99.9 Km1117.2 (0.60)Gaussian component:
-70.1 (0.04)Nugget:
RangesSillsComponent
299.7 Km1855.2 (1.00)Spherical component:
99.9 Km1117.2 (0.60)Gaussian component:
-70.1 (0.04)Nugget:
RangesSillsComponent
Model Parameters:
Results
00 55.5 111 166.5 222 277.5 333 388.5 444
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Lag distance (Km)
Sem
ivari
an
ce Sill of spherical component: 1855.2
Sill of gaussiancomponent: 1117.2
Range of Gaussian Component: 99.9 Km
Range of Spherical Component: 299.7 Km
Variogram Model
Sample Variogram
Omnidirectional semivariogramof residuals
0 55.5 111 166.5 222 277.5 333 388.5 444
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Sill of
Sill of gaussiancomponent:
Range of Gaussian Component: 99.9 Km
Variogram Model
Sample Variogram
Omnidirectional semivariogramof residuals
0
Variogram Analysis of Residuals
Nugget Effect:70.1
12
Kriging Results
Volume Estimates
Deforestation up to 2003
Standard Errors (m3/ha)
Degrees West
Deg
ree
s N
ort
h
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
15.5
16.5
17.5
18.5
19.5
19.5
-72 -71 -70 -69 -68 -67 -66
Expected Volume (m3/ha)
Degrees West
Deg
ree
s N
ort
h
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
15.5
16.5
17.5
18.5
19.5
19.5
-72 -71 -70 -69 -68 -67 -66
13
Converting volume to biomass Fearnside, 1997:
Biomass = SB x BEF x CF
SB = Volume x VEF x WD: Stemwood biomass
Volume Expansion Factor = 1.25 for dense forests
= 1.5 otherwise.
Wood Density = 0.404 for savanas (Barbosa & Fearnside); = 0.68 otherwise (Nogueira et al, 2005).
BEF = exp(3.213-0.506 ln(SB)) if SB<190
= 1.74 o.t.c
CF = 1.68: Sum of correction factors for lianas, non-trees, belowground biomass, trees <10cm DAP, trees with 30<DAP<31.8 cm DAP, hollow trees, bark and palms.
14
Results
Biomass Estimates
Deforestation up to 2003
Standard Errors (Mg.C/ha)
Degrees West
Deg
ree
s N
ort
h
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
15.5
16.5
17.5
18.5
19.5
19.5
-72 -71 -70 -69 -68 -67 -66
Expected Biomass (Mg.C/ha)
Degrees West
Deg
ree
s N
ort
h
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
15.5
16.5
17.5
18.5
19.5
19.5
-72 -71 -70 -69 -68 -67 -66
450
600
15
Relative RMSE reduction vs sample size inside variogram range .
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90# nearby samples (inside gaussian range of variogram range)
RM
SE
rel
ativ
e re
du
ctio
nResults
Validation
16
Conclusions
- Biomass estimation has to take into account the spatial correlation.
- The volume in 1 ha plots is spatially correlated up to 100 km.
- Kriging improves estimation at locations with high samples density.
- The maps can be used to generate confidence intervals for the expected local mean biomass /ha.