Accuracy evaluation and effect factor analysis of GEDI aboveground biomass product for temperate forests in the conterminous United States

Le résumé fourni par la source

The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) is expected to revolutionize the quantification of aboveground carbon at continental scales, through its unprecedented dense vertical observations of vegetation structure. As its primary task, GEDI recently introduced GEDI L4A, the 25 m near-global footprint aboveground biomass density (AGBD) product. As a global mission with significant policy and management applications, it is urgent to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of GEDI L4A and to analyze the factors affecting the product’s performance. In this study, the accuracy of GEDI L4A is assessed using co-registered airborne Lidar surveys collected during 2018 ~ 2019 and corresponding AGBD plots at 19 sites of the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON). The analysis included 11 forest types and spanned 17 eco-climatic domains across the conterminous United States to ensure the representativeness and comprehensiveness of the evaluation result. The interplay of nine factors affecting GEDI L4A is quantified, including the simulated waveform strategy deviation (SWSD) used in GEDI L4A, canopy characteristics (tree height, crown size, and canopy cover), canopy heterogeneity (crown size standard deviation, tree height standard deviation, and tree density), and other factors (forest type and topographic slope). Results show that compared with NEON observations, GEDI L4A generally underestimates the AGBD (Bias: −31.65 Mg/ha), with a moderate relative error exhibited in 14 of 19 sites (%RMSE ranging from 19% to 50%). For half of the forest types, the threshold of the lowest accuracy requirement of AGBD products set by GCOS was met or was close to being met. Broadleaf forests with high AGBD values had the lowest %RMSE (less than 35%), while coniferous forests with low AGBD values had the highest %RMSE (over 50%). Among the different factors considered, the SWSD contributed the most to GEDI L4A’s accuracy, with a relative importance of 56.63%, and manifested the indirect impacts of canopy heterogeneity and canopy characteristics. The relative importance of canopy heterogeneity (32.40%) was the second highest after SWSD; it was also much higher than that of canopy characteristics (3.99%). These results indicate the limitation of using only relative heights as predictors in GEDI L4A due to limited representation of horizontal structure and vertical tree complexity within a footprint. The findings in this study are a step forward in GEDI L4A’s appropriate application and provide perspectives to aid its improvement.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.