1 / 7

Field campaign 2009 - Hyytiälä

Field campaign 2009 - Hyytiälä. Aims 1) Fully mapped understory tree layers, 2-3 sites, preferably with variation in site fertility and/or upper tree layer. To investigate LiDAR data in the assessment of density and species admixture in the understory layer.

orsen
Download Presentation

Field campaign 2009 - Hyytiälä

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Field campaign 2009 - Hyytiälä

  2. Aims 1) Fully mapped understory tree layers, 2-3 sites, preferably with variation in site fertility and/or upper tree layer. To investigate LiDAR data in the assessment of density and species admixture in the understory layer. 2) Collect data on tree growth, bore corer (ir5a(2004-2008)) and dbh, above bark id(200#-2009). To see if LiDAR features explain intertree variation in ig. 3) To add trees in the experiment utilizing the students’ workforce. To support species classification research efforts in LiDAR and image data.

  3. Implementation June 15  Sept 15 Pauliina  Aarne in Hyytiälä June  Aug IK in Hyytiälä, 18 days, Office preparations 6 daysSept  Oct Putting database in orderBLOG: http://evoliitti.blogit.fi/ Costs: ca. 28000 €, excl. marv1-teachers, salary + travel + accommodation. UH ~ 75%, UJ ~ 25%.

  4. Output 1 MARV1 5 plots, 2.68 ha, 3090 trees 1072 triangulated positions, 640 h/hc obs Understory 2 plots, 6060 m and 30100 m,5 m bufferMapping Upper layer ~220 + 180: dbh, h, hc, irLower layer ~2100 + 1500 trees: xy, sp, h Old plots P1,P2,P3,P4,P6; 5050 m, 52 yrs. Pine. Tallying + sample tree sub-plot with 50 dominant –co-dominant trees (h/hc/ir). In total ~ 2050 trees. Previous 2002. LK1, LK2, 50x50-m, 100-yr-old, pine, barren dbh, h, hc, ir in all trees. In total 200 trees. Previous 2002.

  5. Output 2 Texas – pine – spruce plot. 40 x 100 m. 60-yr. h in 33%, hc and ir in 100% trees | hrel > 0.5425 trees. Previous 2005. FT/KM, pine – spruce, r = 22 m. 40 yr. h, hc, ir in all trees. In total 250 trees. Previous 2002. TELE – pine-spruce-alder-birch, 40 yrs. h/hc 33% of trees. NO ir data.400 trees, Previous 2005. S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6 Spruce plots, 55 yrs. Tallying only. 2100 trees. Previous 2002. B1, B2, B3, B4. Birch plots. 450 trees. 2010.

  6. IN TOTAL • Ca. 12250 trees were identified / tallied, incl. understory •  1.85 € / tree • Bore corer observations in ~ 1300 trees (ir(2004-2008)) • DBH re-measurements in ~ 5300 trees (id) • h/hc measurements in ~ 2000 trees

  7. Quality issuesMay 2009; simulation says 15-cm xy-accuracy in understory mapping is possible using the tape-method. Exterior orientation. Strip level, between strip and block level accuracy. Evaluated continuously. Re-measurements in dbh, h/hc, irSome problems with the older data, mostly coherent.  dbh accuracy 2-3 mm, h ~ 0.3 m, hc ~ 0.8 mSystem calibration with Vertex and other eq.?

More Related