2012
DOI: 10.1080/01431161.2012.657363
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Single tree detection in heterogeneous boreal forests using airborne laser scanning and area-based stem number estimates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
66
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 102 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
66
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Solberg et al (2006), investigating a heterogeneous spruce forest, used LiDAR data to correctly identify 93% of dominant trees, 63% of co-dominant trees, 38% of the subdominant trees, 19% of suppressed trees and 9% of dead trees. Ene et al (2012) detected approximately 46-50% of the total number of trees in a structurally heterogeneous boreal forest dominated by Norway spruce and Scots pine. Edson and Wing (2011) used Fusion software to identify trees in structurally different stands, not by employing an automatic local maxima algorithm but instead by (Solberg et al, 2006;Ene et al, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Solberg et al (2006), investigating a heterogeneous spruce forest, used LiDAR data to correctly identify 93% of dominant trees, 63% of co-dominant trees, 38% of the subdominant trees, 19% of suppressed trees and 9% of dead trees. Ene et al (2012) detected approximately 46-50% of the total number of trees in a structurally heterogeneous boreal forest dominated by Norway spruce and Scots pine. Edson and Wing (2011) used Fusion software to identify trees in structurally different stands, not by employing an automatic local maxima algorithm but instead by (Solberg et al, 2006;Ene et al, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ene et al (2012) detected approximately 46-50% of the total number of trees in a structurally heterogeneous boreal forest dominated by Norway spruce and Scots pine. Edson and Wing (2011) used Fusion software to identify trees in structurally different stands, not by employing an automatic local maxima algorithm but instead by (Solberg et al, 2006;Ene et al, 2012). In our study, we used a resolution of 0.5 m, which is consistent with those used in similar studies (Hyyppä et al, 2001;Lindberg and Hollaus, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The segmentation was carried out in a rasterized representation of the ALS data, but the crown segments used in the subsequent analysis were constructed as a convex hull in the horizontal plane of the ALS echoes within each raster segment (depicted in Figure 4). The reader is referred to Ene et al [6] for further details about the segmentation algorithm. Figure 4.…”
Section: Single-tree Segmentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ALS data were in the present study delineated into single-tree segments using a fully automated segmentation algorithm [6]. A marker-based watershed algorithm was used to delineate single-tree segments from a canopy height model.…”
Section: Single-tree Segmentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation