Published October 23, 2021 | Version v1

Data for: Characterizing individual tree-level snags using airborne lidar-derived forest canopy gaps within closed-canopy conifer forests

  • 1. University of Idaho
  • 2. Rocky Mountain Research Station
  • 3. University of Florida

Description

1. Airborne lidar is often used to calculate forest metrics about trees but it may also provide a wealth of information about the space between trees. Forest canopy gaps are defined by the absence of vegetative structure and serve important roles for wildlife, such as facilitating animal movement. Forest canopy gaps also occur around snags, keystone structures that provide important substrates to wildlife species for breeding, roosting, and foraging.

2. We wanted to test a method for quantifying canopy gaps around individual snags and live trees, with the working hypothesis that snags would have more gaps surrounding them overall than live trees. We evaluated canopy gaps around individual snags (n=270) and live trees (n=2186) and evaluated correlations between canopy structure and snag occurrence in dense conifer stands of the Idaho Panhandle National Forest, USA. We paired airborne lidar with ground reference data collected at fixed-radius plots (n=53) to evaluate local gap structure. The R package ForestGapR was used to quantify canopy gaps throughout the canopy to determine where the differences were greatest. A canopy space profile was created for each tree by mapping gaps (a) vertically every 2 m in height (2–50 m above ground), and (b) horizontally across small (16 m2), medium (36 m2), and large (64 m2) footprint sizes.

3. Our results suggest this method is robust for quantifying canopy gaps around individual trees. The canopy space profiles were distinctly different for snags and live trees, with more canopy gaps within the area surrounding snags relative to live trees. The greatest differences occurred at mid-canopy heights (~20 m above ground) and at the smallest footprint size (16 m2).

4. These results show potential to improve understanding of gap dynamics in closed-canopy conifer forests, and we suggest snag modeling could be improved by incorporating lidar-derived canopy gap analyses alongside existing methodologies.

Files

elev_cda2016.tif

Files (21.0 MB)

Name Size
md5:bb2e769250fd91fb560328f5a1f84641
10.5 MB Preview Download
md5:2f7ebdee9e18c609c2a54c08574d93fc
705.2 kB Preview Download
md5:832e6487fd2ef98980ffa37876a6fcc9
705.2 kB Preview Download
md5:bf445f3b661378b66065d07fa10cd8c7
2.7 MB Preview Download
md5:a531d32a37b8f064cadb20b58b346235
286.8 kB Preview Download
md5:66737f7d0df24b1398c6fc0e5bc34f4c
13.9 kB Download
md5:89a29d5be28ab61da9bd769725344d09
14.6 kB Preview Download
md5:91ff5e99ed0e9fd18a559a18ad419737
3.1 kB Preview Download
md5:f5bf06516242d93d53ad5cb6fca732b1
5.8 MB Preview Download
md5:57574beac9246246312956657bb5692b
22.3 kB Preview Download
md5:baf8455cb138b85a625eb3a435332f03
13.3 kB Preview Download
md5:a4ee33131241900134c7d0afb3c102b2
10.3 kB Preview Download
md5:9fc471cd7f8fa6e4ec8b3959e5ae0c10
8.9 kB Preview Download
md5:ac36e5deef3ac0f544638079e9a10343
96.2 kB Preview Download
md5:9bbe9420b3d822fe4322e440e803a0c1
4.2 kB Download
md5:e607b148ee2ea53ac37d5f256892d071
2.8 kB Preview Download
md5:90929c6bee5fe1e17e8bab157000cd55
17.3 kB Preview Download
md5:0166e1b4f8aa810e60bd88376a89cb81
1.7 kB Preview Download

Additional details

Related works

Is derived from
10.5281/zenodo.5518024 (DOI)