Reference site selection protocols for mine site ecosystem restoration

Regarding reference state to identify priority areas for ecological restoration in a karst region

Widespread degradation of natural ecosystems around the globe has resulted in several ecological problems. Ecological restoration is considered a global priority as an important means of mitigating ecosystem degradation and enhancing ecosystem services provision. Regarding ecosystem reference state is a prerequisite for ecological restoration. However, there were few studies focusing on how to regard reference state for ecological restoration, especially under a changing climate. Taking Guizhou Province, a typical karst region in China, as a case study area, in this study we firstly assessed ecosystem services under homogeneous climate conditions. Secondly, we defined the optimal ecosystem services as ecosystem reference state, and then evaluated restoration suitability under a comprehensive framework. Finally, ecological restoration priority areas (EPRAs), which included ecological reconstruction areas, assisted regeneration areas and conservation priority areas needing restoration, were identified by integrating restoration suitability and conservation priority areas. The results showed that the services of water conservation and habitat maintenance only increased less than 10% from 2001 to 2018. Identified ecological reconstruction areas and assisted regeneration areas covered 1078 km2 and 1159 km2 respectively. Additionally, 15 conservation priority areas with the total area of 18,507 km2 were identified as conservation priority areas needing restoration. Accounting for 11.78% of the total area, ERPAs were mostly located in the eastern part of Guizhou, including Qiandongnan, Tongren, and Zunyi. The approach proposed here for regarding ecosystem reference state after controlling climate variables and the framework for identifying ERPAs can provide a scientific reference for large-scale ecological restoration planning.

Modelling the Diameter Distribution of Savanna Trees with Drone-Based LiDAR

The diameter distribution of savanna tree populations is a valuable indicator of savanna health because changes in the number and size of trees can signal a shift from savanna to grassland or forest. Savanna diameter distributions have traditionally been monitored with forestry techniques, where stem diameter at breast height (DBH) is measured in the field within defined sub-hectare plots. However, because the spatial scale of these plots is often misaligned with the scale of variability in tree populations, there is a need for techniques that can scale-up diameter distribution surveys. Dense point clouds collected from uncrewed aerial vehicle laser scanners (UAV-LS), also known as drone-based LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), can be segmented into individual tree crowns then related to stem diameter with the application of allometric scaling equations. Here, we sought to test the potential of UAV-LS tree segmentation and allometric scaling to model the diameter distributions of savanna trees. We collected both UAV-LS and field-survey data from five one-hectare savanna woodland plots in northern Australia, which were divided into two calibration and three validation plots. Within the two calibration plots, allometric scaling equations were developed by linking field-surveyed DBH to the tree metrics of manually delineated tree crowns, where the best performing model had a bias of 1.8% and the relatively high RMSE of 39.2%. A segmentation algorithm was then applied to segment individual tree crowns from UAV-LS derived point clouds, and individual tree level segmentation accuracy was assessed against the manually delineated crowns. 47% of crowns were accurately segmented within the calibration plots and 68% within the validation plots. Using the site-specific allometry, DBH was modelled from crown metrics within all five plots, and these modelled results were compared to field-surveyed diameter distributions. In all plots, there were significant differences between field-surveyed and UAV-LS modelled diameter distributions, which became similar at two of the plots when smaller trees (<10 cm DBH) were excluded. Although the modelled diameter distributions followed the overall trend of field surveys, the non-significant result demonstrates a need for the adoption of remotely detectable proxies of tree size which could replace DBH, as well as more accurate tree detection and segmentation methods for savanna ecosystems.

Leveraging TLS as a Calibration and Validation Tool for MLS and ULS Mapping of Savanna Structure and Biomass at Landscape-Scales

Savanna ecosystems are challenging to map and monitor as their vegetation is highly dynamic in space and time. Understanding the structural diversity and biomass distribution of savanna vegetation requires high-resolution measurements over large areas and at regular time intervals. These requirements cannot currently be met through field-based inventories nor spaceborne satellite remote sensing alone. UAV-based remote sensing offers potential as an intermediate scaling tool, providing acquisition flexibility and cost-effectiveness. Yet despite the increased availability of lightweight LiDAR payloads, the suitability of UAV-based LiDAR for mapping and monitoring savanna 3D vegetation structure is not well established. We mapped a 1 ha savanna plot with terrestrial-, mobile- and UAV-based laser scanning (TLS, MLS, and ULS), in conjunction with a traditional field-based inventory (n = 572 stems > 0.03 m). We treated the TLS dataset as the gold standard against which we evaluated the degree of complementarity and divergence of structural metrics from MLS and ULS. Sensitivity analysis showed that MLS and ULS canopy height models (CHMs) did not differ significantly from TLS-derived models at spatial resolutions greater than 2 m and 4 m respectively. Statistical comparison of the resulting point clouds showed minor over- and under-estimation of woody canopy cover by MLS and ULS, respectively. Individual stem locations and DBH measurements from the field inventory were well replicated by the TLS survey (R2 = 0.89, RMSE = 0.024 m), which estimated above-ground woody biomass to be 7% greater than field-inventory estimates (44.21 Mg ha−1 vs 41.08 Mg ha−1). Stem DBH could not be reliably estimated directly from the MLS or ULS, nor indirectly through allometric scaling with crown attributes (R2 = 0.36, RMSE = 0.075 m). MLS and ULS show strong potential for providing rapid and larger area capture of savanna vegetation structure at resolutions suitable for many ecological investigations; however, our results underscore the necessity of nesting TLS sampling within these surveys to quantify uncertainty. Complementing large area MLS and ULS surveys with TLS sampling will expand our options for the calibration and validation of multiple spaceborne LiDAR, SAR, and optical missions.