{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024162780839338704, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00847816871555744, 'mean_word_length': 5.344086021505376, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Integrating lidar with Landsat data for subalpine temperate forest aboveground carbon estimation

Accurate forest carbon accounting forms a basis for promoting the development of ecosystem service markets including forest carbon sinks. However, carbon assessments over large forest areas are challenging. Difficulties are compounded by the lack of adequate field observations especially in mountainous regions. In this study, we describe the development of a two-phase sampling framework to evaluate regional aboveground carbon density (ACD) of subalpine temperate forests in northwestern China that includes integrating ground plots, airborne lidar metrics, and Landsat images. During the first phase, an accurate, lidar-derived, ACD inventory network of a representative forested zone (Dayekou Basin) was established on the basis of a modified allometric model by adding crown coverage (CC) as a supplementary variable; cross-validated R2 was 0.88 and root mean square error (RMSE) was 14.7 Mg C ha−1. The outcomes of this step enabled the extension of quasi-field plots required for the representative carbon evaluations and the amplification of the range of observed values. Further integration of lidar measures and optical Landsat data by using the partial least squares regression (PLSR) method was conducted in the subsequent phase. The final model developed for broad-scale estimates explained 76% of the variance in forest ACD and produced a mean bias error of 27.9 Mg C ha−1. Aboveground carbon stocks for the whole ecoregion averaged 77.2 Mg ha−1, which generated an uncertainty of 13%. Visual patterns revealed a systematic overestimation for low ACD values and an underestimation in those regions with high carbon density. Potential errors in our carbon estimates could be associated with the saturation of optical signals, accuracy of land-cover map, and effects of topographic conditions. Overall, the double-sampling method demonstrated promising means for carbon accounting over large areas in a spatially-explicit manner and provided a good first approximation of carbon quantities for the forests in the ecoregion. Our study illustrated the potential for the use of lidar sampling in facilitating scaling of field surveys to a larger spatial extent than ground-based practices by supplying accurate biophysical measurements (e.g. heights).