Table of Contents
Erratum

An erratum for this article has been published. To view the erratum, please click here.

ISRN Ecology
Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 619842, 11 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2012/619842
Research Article

Development of a Rapid and Precise Method of Digital Image Analysis to Quantify Canopy Density and Structural Complexity

1Department of Natural and Social Sciences, Francis Close Hall, University of Gloucestershire, Swindon Road, Cheltenham, Glos GL50 4AZ, UK
2St Briavels, Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, UK

Received 21 October 2011; Accepted 4 December 2011

Academic Editors: A. Chappelka and M. Rossetto

Copyright © 2012 Anne E. Goodenough and Andrew S. Goodenough. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. C. McElhinny, P. Gibbons, C. Brack, and J. Bauhus, “Forest and woodland stand structural complexity: its definition and measurement,” Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 218, no. 1–3, pp. 1–24, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. G. Peterken, Woodland Conservation and Management, Chapman and Hall, London, UK, 2nd edition, 1993.
  3. B. Barnes, D. Zak, S. Denton, and S. Spurr, Forest Ecology, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 4th edition, 1998.
  4. S. R. Englund, J. J. O'Brien, and D. B. Clark, “Evaluation of digital and film hemispherical photography and spherical densiometry for measuring forest light environments,” Canadian Journal of Forest Research, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 1999–2005, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. O. M. Fincke, “Interspecific competition for tree holes: consequences for mating systems and co-existence in neotropical damselflies,” The American Naturalist, vol. 139, pp. 80–101, 1992. View at Google Scholar
  6. J. L. Ganey and W. M. Block, “A comparison of two techniques for measuring canopy density,” Western Journal of Applied Forestry, vol. 9, pp. 21–23, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  7. M. J. Wisdom, R. S. Holthausen, B. C. Wales et al., “Source habitats for terrestrial vertebrates of focus in the interior Columbia basin: broadscale trends and management implications,” Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-485, Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Ore, USA, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  8. D. Mudappa, A. Kumar, and R. Chellam, “Abundance and habitat selection of the Malabar spiny dormouse in the rainforests of the southern Western Ghats, India,” Current Science, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 424–427, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. J. L. Ganey, W. M. Block, and S. H. Ackers, “Structural characteristics of forest stands within home ranges of Mexican spotted owls in Arizona and New Mexico,” Western Journal of Applied Forestry, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 189–198, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. D. S. Srivastava, M. C. Melnychuk, and J. T. Ngai, “Landscape variation in the larval density of a bromeliad-dwelling zygopteran Mecistogaster modesta (Odonata: Pseudostigmatidae),” International Journal of Odonatology, vol. 8, pp. 67–79, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  11. G. M. Smith and R. M. Green, “Estimating forest canopy closure using hemispherical photography,” Swansea Geographer, vol. 31, pp. 1–16, 1994. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. N. Brown, S. Jennings, P. Wheeler, and J. Nabe-Nielsen, “An improved method for the rapid assessment of forest understorey light environments,” Journal of Applied Ecology, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 1044–1053, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. S. Hale, “Managing light to enable natural regeneration in british conifer forests,” Forestry Commission Information Note 63, 2004.
  14. A. C. S. Fiala, S. L. Garman, and A. N. Gray, “Comparison of five canopy cover estimation techniques in the western Oregon Cascades,” Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 232, no. 1–3, pp. 188–197, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. S. B. Jennings, N. D. Brown, and D. Sheil, “Assessing forest canopies and understorey illumination: Canopy closure, canopy cover and other measures,” Forestry, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 59–73, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. A. C. Newton, Forest Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2007.
  17. K. J. Kirby, A Woodland Survey Handbook, Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, UK, 1988.
  18. M. Kent and P. Coker, Vegetation Description and Analysis—A Practical Approach, Wiley Blackwell, London, UK, 1993.
  19. B. Goldsmith, “Vegetation Monitoring,” in Monitoring for Conservation and Ecology, F. B. Goldsmith, Ed., pp. 77–86, Chapman and Hall, London, UK, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  20. W. J. Sutherland and R. E. Green, “Habitat assessment,” in Bird Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of Techniques, W. J. Sutherland, I. Newton, and R. E. Green, Eds., pp. 251–268, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  21. B. M. J. Engelbrecht and H. M. Herz, “Evaluation of different methods to estimate understorey light conditions in tropical forests,” Journal of Tropical Ecology, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 207–224, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. D. A. Clark and D. B. Clark, “Life history diversity of canopy and emergent trees in a neotropical rain forest,” Ecological Monographs, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 315–344, 1992. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. P. E. Lemmon, “A spherical densiometer for estimating forest overstory density,” Forest Science, vol. 2, pp. 314–320, 1956. View at Google Scholar
  24. M. W. Robinson, “An instrument to measure forest crown cover,” Forestry Chronicle, vol. 23, pp. 222–225, 1947. View at Google Scholar
  25. J. G. Cook, T. W. Stutzman, C. W. Bowers, K. A. Brenner, and L. I. Irwin, “Spherical densiometers produce biased estimates of forest canopy cover,” Wildlife Society Bulletin, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 711–717, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. D. J. Vales and F. L. Bunnell, “Comparison of methods for estimating forest overstory cover. I. Observer effects,” Canadian Journal of Forest Research, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 606–609, 1988. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. G. W. Frazer, C. D. Canham, and K. P. Lertzman, “Gap Light Analyzer (GLA), Version 2.0: Imaging software to extract canopy structure and gap light transmission indices from true-colour fisheye photographs,” Simon Fraser University, British Columbia, and the Institute of Ecosystem Studies, New York, NY, USA, 1999.
  28. I. Moorthy, J. R. Miller, J. A. J. Berni, P. J. Zarco-Tejada, and L. Qingmou, “Extracting tree crown properties from ground-based scanning laser data,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS '07), pp. 2830–2832, Barcelona, Spain, 2007.
  29. K. Yamamoto, K. Kobayashi, T. Nonoda, A. Inoue, and N. Mizoue, “Effect of settings of digital fisheye photography to estimate relative illuminance within forest under low light conditions,” Journal of Forest Research, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 283–288, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. P. J. Radtke and P. V. Bolstad, “Laser point-quadrat sampling for estimating foliage-height profiles in broad-leaved forests,” Canadian Journal of Forest Research, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 410–418, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. S. S. Chan, R. W. McCreight, J. D. Walstad, and T. A. Spies, “Evaluating forest vegetative cover with computerized analysis of fisheye photographs,” Forest Science, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1085–1091, 1986. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. T. C. Whitmore, N. D. Brown, M. D. Swaine, D. Kennedy, C. I. Goodwin-Bailey, and W. K. Gong, “Use of hemispherical photographs in forest ecology: measurement of gap size and radiation totals in a Bornean tropical rain forest,” Journal of Tropical Ecology, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 131–151, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. G. C. Evans and D. E. Coombe, “Hemispherical and woodland canopy photography and the light climate,” Journal of Ecology, vol. 47, pp. 103–113, 1959. View at Google Scholar
  34. P. M. Rich, “Characterizing plant canopies with hemispherical photographs,” Remote Sensing Reviews, vol. 5, pp. 13–29, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  35. P. M. Rich, J. Wood, D. A. Vieglais, K. Burek, and N. Webb, HemiView, Delta-T Devices Ltd, 1999.
  36. P. L. Mitchell and T. C. Whitmore, Use of Hemispherical Photographs in Forest Ecology: Calculation of Absolute Amount of Radiation Beneath the Canopy, Oxford Forestry Institute, Oxford, UK, 1999, Occasional Papers Number 44.
  37. L. C. Purcell, “Soybean canopy coverage and light interception measurements using digital imagery,” Crop Science, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 834–837, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. M. D. Richardson, D. E. Karcher, and L. C. Purcell, “Quantifying turfgrass cover using digital image analysis,” Crop Science, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1884–1888, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. M. C. Anderson, “Studies of the woodland light climate. 1. The photographic computation of light conditions,” Journal of Ecology, vol. 52, pp. 27–41, 1964. View at Google Scholar
  40. S. Kato and A. Komiyama, “A calibration method for adjusting hemispherical photographs to appropriate black-and-white images,” The Journal of Forest Research, vol. 5, pp. 109–111, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  41. M. Ishida, “Automatic thresholding for digital hemispherical photography,” Canadian Journal of Forest Research, vol. 34, no. 11, pp. 2208–2216, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. M. Nobis and U. Hunziker, “Automatic thresholding for hemispherical canopy-photographs based on edge detection,” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, vol. 128, no. 3-4, pp. 243–250, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. A. Cescatti, “Indirect estimates of canopy gap fraction based on the linear conversion of hemispherical photographs. Methodology and comparison with standard thresholding techniques,” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, vol. 143, no. 1-2, pp. 1–12, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. E. Schwalbe, H. G. Maas, M. Kenter, and S. Wagner, “Hemispheric image modeling and analysis techniques for solar radiation determination in forest ecosystems,” Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 375–384, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. J. H. Myers, “Selecting a measure of dispersion,” Environmental Entomology, vol. 7, pp. 619–621, 1978. View at Google Scholar
  46. J. Nieder, S. Engwald, M. Klawun, and W. Barthlott, “Spatial distribution of vascular epiphytes (including hemiepiphytes) in a lowland Amazonian rain forest (Surumoni crane plot) of southern Venezuela,” Biotropica, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 385–396, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. F. L. Bunnell and D. J. Vales, “Comparison of methods for estimating forest overstory cover: differences among techniques,” Canadian Journal of Forest Research, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 101–107, 1990. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. R. Stafford, A. G. Hart, L. Collins et al., “Eu-social science: the role of internet social networks in the collection of bee biodiversity data,” PLoS ONE, vol. 5, no. 12, Article ID e14381, pp. 1–7, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus