The increasingly affordable price point of terrestrial laser scanners has led to a democratization of instrument availability, but the most common low-cost instruments have yet to be compared in terms of the consistency to measure forest structural attributes. Here, we compared two low-cost terrestrial laser scanners (TLS): the Leica BLK360 and the Faro Focus 120 3D. We evaluate the instruments in terms of point cloud quality, forest inventory estimates, tree-model reconstruction, and foliage profile reconstruction. Our direct comparison of the point clouds showed reduced noise in filtered Leica data. Tree diameter and height were consistent across instruments (4.4% and 1.4% error, respectively). Volumetric tree models were less consistent across instruments, with ~29% bias, depending on model reconstruction quality. In the process of comparing foliage profiles, we conducted a sensitivity analysis of factors affecting foliage profile estimates, showing a minimal effect from instrument maximum range (for forests less than ~50 m in height) and surprisingly little impact from degraded scan resolution. Filtered unstructured TLS point clouds must be artificially re-gridded to provide accurate foliage profiles. The factors evaluated in this comparison point towards necessary considerations for future low-cost laser scanner development and application in detecting forest structural parameters.

Structural diversity is a key feature of forest ecosystems that influences ecosystem functions from local to macroscales. The ability to measure structural diversity in forests with varying ecological composition and management history can improve the understanding of linkages between forest structure and ecosystem functioning. Terrestrial LiDAR has often been used to provide a detailed characterization of structural diversity at local scales, but it is largely unknown whether these same structural features are detectable using aerial LiDAR data that are available across larger spatial scales. We used univariate and multivariate analyses to quantify cross-compatibility of structural diversity metrics from terrestrial versus aerial LiDAR in seven National Ecological Observatory Network sites across the eastern USA. We found strong univariate agreement between terrestrial and aerial LiDAR metrics of canopy height, openness, internal heterogeneity, and leaf area, but found marginal agreement between metrics that describe heterogeneity of the outer most layer of the canopy. Terrestrial and aerial LiDAR both demonstrated the ability to distinguish forest sites from structural diversity metrics in multivariate space, but terrestrial LiDAR was able to resolve finer-scale detail within sites. Our findings indicate that aerial LiDAR can be of use in quantifying broad-scale variation in structural diversity across macroscales.

Terrestrial LiDAR becomes more and more popular to estimate leaf and plant area density. Voxel-based approaches account for this vegetation heterogeneity and significant work has been done in this recent research field, but no general theoretical analysis is available. Although estimators have been proposed and several causes of biases have been identified, their consistency and efficiency have not been evaluated. Also, confidence intervals are almost never provided. In the present paper, we solve the transmittance equation and use the Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE), to derive unbiased estimators and confidence intervals for the attenuation coefficient, which is proportional to leaf area density. The new estimators and confidence intervals are defined at voxel scale, and account for the number of beams crossing the voxel, the inequality of path lengths in voxel, the size of vegetation elements, as well as for the variability of element positions between vegetation samples. They are completed by numerous numerical simulations for the evaluation of estimator consistency and efficiency, as well as the assessment of the coverage probabilities of confidence intervals. • Although commonly used when the beam number is low, the usual estimators are strongly biased and the 95% confidence intervals can be ≈±100% of the estimate. • Our unbiased estimators are consistent in a wider range of validity than the usual ones, especially for the unbiased MLE, which is consistent when the beam number is as low as 5. The unbiased MLE is efficient, meaning it reaches the lowest residual errors that can be expected (for an unbiased estimator). Also the unbiased MLE does not require any bias correction when path lengths are unequal. • When elements are small (or voxel is large), 103 beams entering the voxel leads to some confidence intervals ≈±10%, but when elements are larger (or voxel smaller), it can remain wider than ±50%, even for a large beam number. This is explained by the variability of element positions between vegetation samples. Such a result shows that a significant part of residual error can be explained by random effects. • Confidence intervals are much smaller (±5 to 10%) when LAD estimates are averaged over several small voxels, typically within a horizontal layer or in the crown of individual plants. In this context, our unbiased estimators show a reduction of 50% of the radius of confidence intervals, in comparison to usual estimators. Our study provides some new ready-to-use estimators and confidence intervals for attenuation coefficients, which are consistent and efficient within a fairly large range of parameter values. The consistency is achieved for a low beam number, which is promising for application to airborne LiDAR data. They entail to raise the level of understanding and confidence on LAD estimation. Among other applications, their usage should help determine the most suitable voxel size, for given vegetation types and scanning density, whereas existing guidelines are highly variable among studies, probably because of differences in vegetation, scanning design and estimators.

The amount and spatial distribution of foliage in a tree canopy have fundamental functions in ecosystems as they affect energy and mass fluxes through photosynthesis and transpiration. They are usually described by the Leaf Area Index (LAI) and the Leaf Area Density (LAD), which can be measured through a variety of methods, including voxel-based methods applied to LiDAR point clouds. A theoretical study recently compared the numerical errors arising from different voxel-based estimation methods for Plant Area Density (PAD) based on Beer’s law-based, contact frequency and Maximum-Likelihood Estimation, showing that the bias-corrected Maximum Likelihood Estimator was theoretically the most efficient. However, this earlier study i) ignored wood volumes; ii) neglected vegetation clumping inside the voxel; iii) ignored instrument characteristics in terms of effective footprint, iv) was limited to a single viewpoint. In practice, retrieving LAD from PAD is not straightforward, vegetation is not randomly distributed in volumes of interest, beams are divergent and forestry plots are usually sampled from more than one viewpoint, to mitigate the effect of occlusion. In the present short communication, we extend the previous efficient formulation to actual field conditions to i) account for the presence of both wood volumes and wood hits, ii) rigorously include correction terms for vegetation and instrument characteristics, iii) integrate multiview data. A numerical comparison with other methods commonly used to combine information from different viewpoints led to error reduction, especially in poorly-explored volumes, which are frequent in actual canopies. Beyond its concision, completeness and efficiency, this new formulation -which can be applied to multiview TLS, but also UAV LiDAR scanning - can help reducing errors in LAD estimation.

This paper intends to discuss SSLs, how they work, their advantages and drawbacks. It will end with the author’s thoughts on the efficacy of the system and whether it is a viable solution for the majority of network security problems or if those drawbacks prevent that.