Comparing the accuracy of three non-destructive methods in estimating aboveground plant biomass

G. Ónodi, G. Kröel-Dulay, E. Kovács-Láng, P. Ódor, Z. Botta-Dukát, B. Lhotsky, S. Barabás, J. Garadnai, M. Kertész

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aboveground plant biomass is one of the most important features of ecosystems, and it is widely used in ecosystem research. Non-destructive biomass estimation methods provide an important toolkit, because the destructive harvesting method is in many cases not feasible. However, only few studies have compared the accuracy of these methods in grassland communities to date. We studied the accuracy of three widely used methods for estimation of aboveground biomass: the visual cover estimation method, the point intercept method, and field spectroscopy. We applied them in three independent series of field samplings in semi-arid sand grasslands in Central Hungary. For each sampling method, we applied linear regression to assess the strength of the relationship between biomass proxies and actual aboveground biomass, and used coefficient of determination to evaluate accuracy. We found no evidence that the visual cover estimation, which is generally considered as a subjective method, was less accurate than point intercept method or field spectroscopy in estimating biomass. Based on our three datasets, we found that accuracy was lower for the point intercept method compared to the other two methods, while field spectroscopy and visual cover estimation were similar to each other in the semi-arid sand grassland community. We conclude that visual cover estimation can be as accurate for estimating aboveground biomass as other approaches, thus the choice amongst the methods should be based on additional pros and cons associated with each of the method and related to the specific research objective.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)56-62
Number of pages7
JournalCommunity Ecology
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 1 2017

Fingerprint

nondestructive methods
aboveground biomass
biomass
methodology
grassland
spectroscopy
estimation method
grasslands
phytomass
method
sand
field method
sampling
ecosystems
Hungary
ecosystem

Keywords

  • Biomass proxies
  • Coefficient of determination
  • Field experiment
  • Field spectroscopy
  • Point intercept method
  • Semiarid grassland
  • Visual cover estimation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Ecology

Cite this

Ónodi, G., Kröel-Dulay, G., Kovács-Láng, E., Ódor, P., Botta-Dukát, Z., Lhotsky, B., ... Kertész, M. (2017). Comparing the accuracy of three non-destructive methods in estimating aboveground plant biomass. Community Ecology, 18(1), 56-62. https://doi.org/10.1556/168.2017.18.1.7

Comparing the accuracy of three non-destructive methods in estimating aboveground plant biomass. / Ónodi, G.; Kröel-Dulay, G.; Kovács-Láng, E.; Ódor, P.; Botta-Dukát, Z.; Lhotsky, B.; Barabás, S.; Garadnai, J.; Kertész, M.

In: Community Ecology, Vol. 18, No. 1, 01.04.2017, p. 56-62.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ónodi, G, Kröel-Dulay, G, Kovács-Láng, E, Ódor, P, Botta-Dukát, Z, Lhotsky, B, Barabás, S, Garadnai, J & Kertész, M 2017, 'Comparing the accuracy of three non-destructive methods in estimating aboveground plant biomass', Community Ecology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 56-62. https://doi.org/10.1556/168.2017.18.1.7
Ónodi, G. ; Kröel-Dulay, G. ; Kovács-Láng, E. ; Ódor, P. ; Botta-Dukát, Z. ; Lhotsky, B. ; Barabás, S. ; Garadnai, J. ; Kertész, M. / Comparing the accuracy of three non-destructive methods in estimating aboveground plant biomass. In: Community Ecology. 2017 ; Vol. 18, No. 1. pp. 56-62.
@article{ba4c30d5394e49318fd4104e59445d8d,
title = "Comparing the accuracy of three non-destructive methods in estimating aboveground plant biomass",
abstract = "Aboveground plant biomass is one of the most important features of ecosystems, and it is widely used in ecosystem research. Non-destructive biomass estimation methods provide an important toolkit, because the destructive harvesting method is in many cases not feasible. However, only few studies have compared the accuracy of these methods in grassland communities to date. We studied the accuracy of three widely used methods for estimation of aboveground biomass: the visual cover estimation method, the point intercept method, and field spectroscopy. We applied them in three independent series of field samplings in semi-arid sand grasslands in Central Hungary. For each sampling method, we applied linear regression to assess the strength of the relationship between biomass proxies and actual aboveground biomass, and used coefficient of determination to evaluate accuracy. We found no evidence that the visual cover estimation, which is generally considered as a subjective method, was less accurate than point intercept method or field spectroscopy in estimating biomass. Based on our three datasets, we found that accuracy was lower for the point intercept method compared to the other two methods, while field spectroscopy and visual cover estimation were similar to each other in the semi-arid sand grassland community. We conclude that visual cover estimation can be as accurate for estimating aboveground biomass as other approaches, thus the choice amongst the methods should be based on additional pros and cons associated with each of the method and related to the specific research objective.",
keywords = "Biomass proxies, Coefficient of determination, Field experiment, Field spectroscopy, Point intercept method, Semiarid grassland, Visual cover estimation",
author = "G. {\'O}nodi and G. Kr{\"o}el-Dulay and E. Kov{\'a}cs-L{\'a}ng and P. {\'O}dor and Z. Botta-Duk{\'a}t and B. Lhotsky and S. Barab{\'a}s and J. Garadnai and M. Kert{\'e}sz",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1556/168.2017.18.1.7",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "56--62",
journal = "Community Ecology",
issn = "1585-8553",
publisher = "Akademiai Kiado",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing the accuracy of three non-destructive methods in estimating aboveground plant biomass

AU - Ónodi, G.

AU - Kröel-Dulay, G.

AU - Kovács-Láng, E.

AU - Ódor, P.

AU - Botta-Dukát, Z.

AU - Lhotsky, B.

AU - Barabás, S.

AU - Garadnai, J.

AU - Kertész, M.

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - Aboveground plant biomass is one of the most important features of ecosystems, and it is widely used in ecosystem research. Non-destructive biomass estimation methods provide an important toolkit, because the destructive harvesting method is in many cases not feasible. However, only few studies have compared the accuracy of these methods in grassland communities to date. We studied the accuracy of three widely used methods for estimation of aboveground biomass: the visual cover estimation method, the point intercept method, and field spectroscopy. We applied them in three independent series of field samplings in semi-arid sand grasslands in Central Hungary. For each sampling method, we applied linear regression to assess the strength of the relationship between biomass proxies and actual aboveground biomass, and used coefficient of determination to evaluate accuracy. We found no evidence that the visual cover estimation, which is generally considered as a subjective method, was less accurate than point intercept method or field spectroscopy in estimating biomass. Based on our three datasets, we found that accuracy was lower for the point intercept method compared to the other two methods, while field spectroscopy and visual cover estimation were similar to each other in the semi-arid sand grassland community. We conclude that visual cover estimation can be as accurate for estimating aboveground biomass as other approaches, thus the choice amongst the methods should be based on additional pros and cons associated with each of the method and related to the specific research objective.

AB - Aboveground plant biomass is one of the most important features of ecosystems, and it is widely used in ecosystem research. Non-destructive biomass estimation methods provide an important toolkit, because the destructive harvesting method is in many cases not feasible. However, only few studies have compared the accuracy of these methods in grassland communities to date. We studied the accuracy of three widely used methods for estimation of aboveground biomass: the visual cover estimation method, the point intercept method, and field spectroscopy. We applied them in three independent series of field samplings in semi-arid sand grasslands in Central Hungary. For each sampling method, we applied linear regression to assess the strength of the relationship between biomass proxies and actual aboveground biomass, and used coefficient of determination to evaluate accuracy. We found no evidence that the visual cover estimation, which is generally considered as a subjective method, was less accurate than point intercept method or field spectroscopy in estimating biomass. Based on our three datasets, we found that accuracy was lower for the point intercept method compared to the other two methods, while field spectroscopy and visual cover estimation were similar to each other in the semi-arid sand grassland community. We conclude that visual cover estimation can be as accurate for estimating aboveground biomass as other approaches, thus the choice amongst the methods should be based on additional pros and cons associated with each of the method and related to the specific research objective.

KW - Biomass proxies

KW - Coefficient of determination

KW - Field experiment

KW - Field spectroscopy

KW - Point intercept method

KW - Semiarid grassland

KW - Visual cover estimation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021164772&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021164772&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1556/168.2017.18.1.7

DO - 10.1556/168.2017.18.1.7

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85021164772

VL - 18

SP - 56

EP - 62

JO - Community Ecology

JF - Community Ecology

SN - 1585-8553

IS - 1

ER -