2014
DOI: 10.1109/tgrs.2013.2294684
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measurements of Forest Biomass Change Using P-Band Synthetic Aperture Radar Backscatter

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This study extends the work of Sandberg et al (2014), who analyzed the P-band data from the BioSAR 2007 and BioSAR 2010 campaigns, but omitted the L-band data from the analysis. While the coming BIOMASS mission will operate in P-band, in light of both the scarcity of available P-band data over Europe, and North and Central America in the present and foreseeable future, following the restrictions imposed by the US Department of Defense (Carreiras et al 2017), and the present and planned L-band missions including ALOS-2, ALOS-4, NISAR, ROSE-L, and SAOCOM (The CEOS database: Missions, instruments, measurements and datasets 2020), it was of interest to expand the analysis to include the L-band data from the same campaigns.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…This study extends the work of Sandberg et al (2014), who analyzed the P-band data from the BioSAR 2007 and BioSAR 2010 campaigns, but omitted the L-band data from the analysis. While the coming BIOMASS mission will operate in P-band, in light of both the scarcity of available P-band data over Europe, and North and Central America in the present and foreseeable future, following the restrictions imposed by the US Department of Defense (Carreiras et al 2017), and the present and planned L-band missions including ALOS-2, ALOS-4, NISAR, ROSE-L, and SAOCOM (The CEOS database: Missions, instruments, measurements and datasets 2020), it was of interest to expand the analysis to include the L-band data from the same campaigns.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…However, more recent unpublished analysis including the BIOSAR-3 data indicates that further coefficients are needed to achieve adequate accuracy. Another study for Remningstorp (Sandberg et al, 2014) found that AGB change could be estimated more accurately than AGB itself: analysis based on 2007 and 2010 data gave a RMSE of 20 t/ha in the estimated biomass change, i.e. roughly half the RMSEs of the individual AGB estimates.…”
Section: Forest Agb and Height Estimation Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conventional approaches to estimating the net carbon balance of tropical forests rely on satellite-based estimates of forest area change between two time periods combined with information on biomass density (1,7,(9)(10)(11)(12)(13). Alternative strategies based on a range of active (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20) and passive (21) remote-sensing techniques have also been advanced; however, the majority of these are limited in terms of geographic scope, spatial resolution and/or data availability. Although all approaches are designed to capture losses in biomass due to landuse change (i.e., wholesale forest clearing or deforestation), most are limited in their sensitivity to forest degradation (e.g., selective logging and/or disturbance in forest that remains forest), which can account for additional biomass losses on the order of 47 to 75% of deforestation (22,23).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%