A comparison of selected parametric and non-paramentric imputation methods for estimating forest biomass and basal area Public Deposited

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/defaults/tt44pn323

This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by the author(s) and published by Scientific Research Publishing. The published article can be found at:  http://www.scirp.org/

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract or Summary
  • Various methods have been used to estimate the amount of above ground forest biomass across landscapes and to create biomass maps for specific stands or pixels across ownership or project areas. Without an accurate estimation method, land managers might end up with incorrect biomass estimate maps, which could lead them to make poorer decisions in their future management plans. The goal of this study was to compare various imputation methods to predict forest biomass and basal area, at a project planning scale (<20,000 acres) on the Malheur National Forest, located in eastern Oregon, USA. We examined the predictive performance of linear regression, geographic weighted regression (GWR), gradient nearest neighbor (GNN), most similar neighbor (MSN), random forest imputation, and k-nearest neighbor (k-nn) to estimate biomass (tons/acre) and basal area (sq. feet per acre) across 19,000 acres on the Malheur National Forest. To test the different methods, a combination of ground inventory plots, light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data, satellite imagery, and climate data was analyzed, and their root mean square error (RMSE) and bias were calculated. Results indicate that for biomass prediction, the k-nn (k = 5) had the lowest RMSE and least amount of bias. The second most accurate method consisted of the k-nn (k = 3), followed by the GWR model, and the random forest imputation. For basal area prediction, the GWR model had the lowest RMSE and least amount of bias. The second most accurate method was k-nn (k = 5), followed by k-nn (k = 3), and the random forest method. For both metrics, the GNN method was the least accurate based on the ranking of RMSE and bias.
Resource Type
DOI
Date Available
Date Issued
Citation
  • Gagliasso, D., S. Hummel, and H. Temesgen. 2014. A comparison of selected parametric and non-paramentric imputation methods for estimating forest biomass and basal area. Open Fournal of Forestry (OJF)
Academic Affiliation
Series
Keyword
Rights Statement
Publisher
Peer Reviewed
Language
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Steven Van Tuyl(steve.vantuyl@oregonstate.edu) on 2015-04-02T23:01:12Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Donald_etal_2014.pdf: 161366 bytes, checksum: c416ec00c38450c1fc22239fe832e385 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2015-04-02T23:01:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Donald_etal_2014.pdf: 161366 bytes, checksum: c416ec00c38450c1fc22239fe832e385 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Logan Bernart (logan.bernart@gmail.com) on 2015-03-17T00:31:51Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Donald_etal_2014.pdf: 161366 bytes, checksum: c416ec00c38450c1fc22239fe832e385 (MD5)

Relationships

In Administrative Set:
Last modified: 07/06/2017

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Citations:

EndNote | Zotero | Mendeley

Items