SpringerLink
Log in

Canopy cover or remotely sensed vegetation index, explanatory variables of above-ground biomass in an arid rangeland, Iran

  • Published:
Journal of Arid Land Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Estimation of above-ground biomass is vital for understanding ecological processes. Since direct measurement of above-ground biomass is destructive, time consuming and labor intensive, canopy cover can be considered as a predictor if a significant correlation between the two variables exists. In this study, relationship between canopy cover and above-ground biomass was investigated by a general linear regression model. To do so, canopy cover and above-ground biomass were measured at 5 sub-life forms (defined as life forms grouped in the same height classes) using 380 quadrats, which is systematic-randomly laid out along a 10-km transect, during four sampling periods (May, June, August, and September) in an arid rangeland of Marjan, Iran. To reveal whether obtained canopy cover and above-ground biomass of different sampling periods can be lumped together or not, we applied a general linear model (GLM). In this model, above-ground biomass was considered as a dependent or response variable, canopy cover as an independent covariate or predictor factor and sub-life forms as well as sampling periods as fixed factors. Moreover, we compared the estimated above-ground biomass derived from remotely sensed images of Landsat-8 using NDVI (normalized difference vegetation index), after finding the best regression line between predictor (measured canopy cover in the field) and response variable (above-ground biomass) to test the robustness of the induced model. Results show that above-ground biomass (response variable) of all vegetative forms and periods can be accurately predicted by canopy cover (predictor), although sub-life forms and sampling periods significantly affect the results. The best regression fit was found for short forbs in September and shrubs in May, June and August with R2 values of 0.96, 0.93 and 0.91, respectively, whilst the least significant was found for short grasses in June, tall grasses in August and tall forbs in June with R2 values of 0.71, 0.73 and 0.75, respectively. Even though the estimated above-ground biomass by NDVI is also convincing (R2=0.57), the canopy cover is a more reliable predictor of above-ground biomass due to the higher R2 values (from 0.75 to 0.96). We conclude that canopy cover can be regarded as a reliable predictor of above-ground biomass if sub-life forms and sampling periods (during growing season) are taken into account. Since, (1) plant canopy cover is not distinguishable by remotely sensed images at the sub-life form level, especially in sparse vegetation of arid and semi-arid regions, and (2) remotely sensed-based prediction of above-ground biomass shows a less significant relationship (R2=0.57) than that of canopy cover (R2 ranging from 0.75 to 0.96), which suggests estimating of plant biomass by canopy cover instead of cut and weighting method is highly recommended. Furthermore, this fast, nondestructive and robust method that does not endanger rare species, gives a trustworthy prediction of above-ground biomass in arid rangelands.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler P B, Milchunas D G, Lauenroth W K, et al. 2004. Functional traits of graminoids in semi-arid steppes: a test of grazing histories. Journal of Applied Ecology, 41(4): 653–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson E W. 1986. A guide for estimating cover. Rangelands, 8(5): 236–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arzani H, Basiri M, Dehdari S, et al. 2008. Relationships between canopy cover, foliage cover and basal cover with production. Iranian Journal of Natural Resources, 61(3): 763–773.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arzani H, Dehdari S, King G. 2011. Models for estimating range production by cover measurement. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Reseach, 18(1): 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkmann K, Dickhoefer U, Schlecht E, et al. 2011. Quantification of aboveground rangeland productivity and anthropogenic degradation on the Arabian Peninsula using Landsat imagery and field inventory data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 115(2): 465–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonham C D. 2013. Measurements for Terrestrial Vegetation. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 260.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Caprioli M, Figorito B, Tarantino E. 2006. Radiometric normalization of Landsat ETM+ data for multitemporal analysis. In: Proceedings of the ISPRS Commission VII Mid-Term Symposium on Remote Sensing: From Pixels to Processes. Enschede, The Netherlands, 8–11 May 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drake J B, Knox R G, Dubayah R O, et al. 2003. Above-ground biomass estimation in closed canopy Neotropical forests using lidar remote sensing: factors affecting the generality of relationships. Global Ecology & Biogeography, 12(2): 147–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Bella C, Faivr R, Ruget F, et al. 2005. Using VEGETATION satellite data and the crop model STICS-Prairie to estimate pasture production at the national level in France. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 30(1–3): 3–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durbin J, Watson G S. 1951. Testing for serial correlation in least squares regression.II. Biometrika, 38(1–2): 159–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du Plessis W P. 1999. Linear regression relationships between NDVI, vegetation and rainfall in Etosha National Park, Namibia. Journal of Arid Environments, 42(4): 235–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahimi A, Bossuyt B, Hoffmann M. 2008. Effects of species aggregation, habitat and season on the accuracy of double sampling to measure herbage mass in a lowland grassland ecosystem. Grass and Forage Science, 63(1): 79–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahimi A. 2017. Effect of sampling groups and life forms on relationship between above-ground biomass and canopy cover. Journal of Range and Watershed Management, 70(1): 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etienne M. 1989. Non destructive methods for evaluating shrub biomass: a review. Acta oecologica Oecologia applicata, 10: 115–128. (In French)

    Google Scholar 

  • Flombaum P, Sala O E. 2007. A non-destructive and rapid method to estimate biomass and aboveground net primary production in arid environments. Journal of Arid Environments, 69(2): 352–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foroughbakhch R, Reyes G, Alvarado-Vázquez M A, et al. 2005. Use of quantitative methods to determine leaf biomass on 15 woody shrub species in northeastern Mexico. Forest Ecology and Management, 216(1–3): 359–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank T D, Tweddale S A, Lenschow S J. 2005. Non-destructive estimation of canopy gap fractions and shrub canopy volume of dominant shrub species in the Mojave desert. Journal of Terramechanics, 42(3–4): 231–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ji L, Wylie B K, Nossov D R, et al. 2012. Estimating aboveground biomass in interior Alaska with Landsat data and field measurements. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 18: 451–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guevara J C, Gonnet J M, Estevez O R. 2002. Biomass estimation for native perennial grasses in the plain of Mendoza, Argentina. Journal of Arid Environments, 50(4): 613–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gholami baghi N, Sepehri A, Barani H, et al. 2013. Estimating plant biomass by using non-destructive parameters in arid regions (case study: Inche-Broun Winter Rangelands, Golestan, Iran). Journal of Rangeland Science, 3(4): 295–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghorbani A, Pournemati A, Panahandeh M. 2017. Estimating and map** Sabalan rangelands aboveground phytomass using Landsat 8 images. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research, 24(1): 165–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glenn N F, Neuenschwander A, Vierling L A, et al. 2016. Landsat 8 and ICESat-2: Performance and potential synergies for quantifying dryland ecosystem vegetation cover and biomass. Remote Sensing of Environment, 185: 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasen Yusuf M, Treydte A C, Abule E, et al. 2013. Predicting aboveground biomass of woody encroacher species in semi-arid rangelands, Ethiopia. Journal of Arid Environments, 96: 64–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes H G, Varner L W, Blackenship L H. 1987. Estimating shrub production from plant dimension. Journal of Range Management, 40(4): 367–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Q Y, Tuo D B, Zhang L Z, et al. 2014. Impacts of climate change on net primary productivity of grasslands in Inner Mongolia. The Rangeland Journal, 36(5): 493–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu D, Mausel P, Moran E F, et al. 2004. Change detection techniques. International Journal Remote Sensing, 25(12): 2365–2407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ke Y, Im J, Lee J, et al. 2015. Characteristics of Landsat 8 OLI-derived NDVI by comparison with multiple satellite sensors and in-situ observations. Remote sensing of environment, 164: 298–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu S L, Su X K, Dong S K, et al. 2015. Modeling aboveground biomass of an alpine desert grassland with SPOT-VGT NDVI. GIScience & Remote Sensing, 52(6): 680–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Migliavacca M, Galvagno G, Cremonese E, et al. 2011. Using digital repeat photography and eddy covariance data to model grassland phenology and photosynthetic CO2 uptake. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 151(10): 1325–1337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mokhtariasl A, Mesdaghi M. 2008. Estimating production of Atriplex veruciferum and Salsola dendroides by using canopy cover and volume parameters. Pajouhesh-Va-Sazandegi, 20(4): 141–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montès N, Ballin, C, Bonin G, et al. 2004. A comparative study of aboveground biomass of three Mediterranean species in a post-fire succession. Acta Oecologica, 25(1–2): 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montès N. 2009. A non-destructive method to estimate biomass in arid environments: A comment on Flmbaun and Sala (2007). Journal of Arid Environments, 73(6–7): 599–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Návar J, Méndez E, Nájera A. 2004. Biomass equations for shrub species of Tamaulipan thornscrub of North-eastern Mexico. Journal of Arid Environments, 59(4): 657–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olofsson J, Kitti H, Rautiainen P, et al. 2001. Effects of summer grazing by reindeer on composition of vegetation, productivity and nitrogen cycling. Ecography, 24(1): 13–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pordel F. 2015. Evaluation of spatio-temporal changes of phytomass and canopy cover of Mrajan rangeland, Boroujen using Landsat remotely sensed data. MSc Thesis. Shahrekord University: Faculty of Natural Resources and Earth Science Department of Rangeland and Watershed Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter T F, Chen C, Long J A, et al. 2014. Estimating biomass on CRP pastureland: A comparison of remote sensing techniques. Biomass and Bioenergy, 66: 268–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radloff F G T, Mucina L. 2007. A quick and robust method for biomass estimation in structurally diverse vegetation. Journal of Vegetation Science, 18(5): 719–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sala O E, Austin A T. 2000. Methods of estimating aboveground net primary productivity. In: Sala O E, Jackson R B, Mooney H A, et al. Methods in Ecosystem Science. New York: Springer, 31–43.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shiyomi M, Yoshimura J. 2000. Measures of spatial heterogeneity for species occurrence or disease incidence with finite-counts. Ecological Research, 15(1): 13–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyman H. 1998. Dynamics and sustainable utilization of rangeland ecosystems in arid and semi-arid climates of southern Africa. Journal of Arid Environments, 39(4): 645–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tackenberg O. 2007. A new method for non-destructive measurement of biomass, growth rates, vertical biomass distribution and dry matter content based on digital image analysis. Annals of Botany, 99(4): 777–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tahmasebi P, Ebrahimi A A, and Yarali N A. 2012. The most appropriate quadrate size and shape for determining some characteristics of a semi-steppic rangeland. Journal of Range and Watershed Management, 65(2): 203–216. (In Persian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Thursby G B, Chintala M M, Stetson D, et al. 2002. A rapid, non-destructive method for estimating aboveground biomass of salt marsh grasses. Wetlands, 22(3): 626–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker C J. 1979. Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring vegetation. Remote Sensing of Environment, 8(2): 127−150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang M, Overland J E. 2004. Detecting arctic climate change using KÖppen climate classification. Climatic Change, 67(1): 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang H T, Wang Z R, Tan H J, et al. 2017. Allometric models for estimating shrub biomass in desert grassland in northern China. Arid Land Research and Management, 31(3): 283–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu X L, Liu D S. 2015. Improving forest aboveground biomass estimation using seasonal Landsat NDVI time-series. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 102: 222–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our thanks to the anonymous reviewers and Dr. Mansour MESDAGHI for their generous and insightful suggestions, which certainly improved the quality of this paper. The authors wish to thank Mrs. Maryam AHMADI, Mr. Babak CHABOK and Mr. Jahangir NAREHI for their assistance in the field work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Range and Watershed Management, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, 8818634141, Iran

    Fatemeh Pordel & Ataollah Ebrahimi

  2. Department of RS-GIS, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehra, 1477893855, Iran

    Zahra Azizi

Authors
  1. Fatemeh Pordel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ataollah Ebrahimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zahra Azizi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ataollah Ebrahimi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pordel, F., Ebrahimi, A. & Azizi, Z. Canopy cover or remotely sensed vegetation index, explanatory variables of above-ground biomass in an arid rangeland, Iran. J. Arid Land 10, 767–780 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-018-0017-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-018-0017-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation