Canopy gaps and associated losses of biomass – combining UAV imagery and field data in a central Amazon forest

• Published in: Biogeosciences Vol. 20; no. 17; pp. 3651 - 3666
• Main Authors: Simonetti, Adriana, Araujo, Raquel Fernandes, Celes, Carlos Henrique Souza, da Silva e Silva, Flávia Ranara, dos Santos, Joaquim, Higuchi, Niro, Trumbore, Susan, Magnabosco Marra, Daniel
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Katlenburg-Lindau Copernicus GmbH 13.09.2023; Copernicus Publications
• Subjects: Aerial surveys; Analysis; Assessments; Biomass; Branches; Canopies; Canopy; Canopy gaps; Carbon; Climate change; Color imagery; Dead wood; Deforestation; Disturbances; Extreme weather; Flying-machines; Forests; Geometry; Ground truth; Gusts; Health aspects; Image acquisition; Imagery; Landscape; Mortality; Photogrammetry; Plant cover; Precipitation; Precipitation variability; Rain; Rainfall; Remote observing; Remote sensing; Size distribution; Storms; Temporal variations; Topography; Trees; Understory; Unmanned aerial vehicles; Uprooting; Brazil
• ISSN: 1726-4189; 1726-4170; 1726-4189
• DOI: 10.5194/bg-20-3651-2023

Understanding mechanisms of tree mortality and the dynamics of associated canopy gaps is relevant for robust estimates of carbon balance in forests. We combined monthly RGB images acquired from an unoccupied aerial vehicle with field surveys to identify gaps in an 18 ha plot installed in an old-growth central Amazon forest. We measured the size and shape of gaps and analyzed their temporal variation and correlation with rainfall over a period of 28 months. We further described associated modes of tree mortality (i.e., snapping, uprooting and standing dead) and branch fall and quantified associated losses of biomass. In total, we detected 32 gaps either in the images or field ranging in area from 9 to 835 m2. Relatively small gaps (< 39 m2) opened by branch fall were the most frequent (11 gaps). Out of 18 gaps for which both field and image data were available, three could not be detected remotely. Gaps observed in the field but not captured on the imagery were relatively small and mainly formed by the fall of branches from live and standing dead trees. Our data show that ∼ 17 % of the tree-mortality and branch-fall events only affected the lower canopy and the understory of the forest and are likely neglected by top-of-the-canopy assessments. Regardless of the detection method, the size distribution was best described by a lognormal function for gaps starting from the smallest detected size (9 and 10 m2 for field and imagery data, respectively), and the Weibull and Power functions for gaps larger than 25 m2. Properly assessing associated confidence intervals requires larger sample sizes. Repeated field measurements reveal that gap area does not differ significantly among modes of tree mortality or branch fall in central Amazon forests, with the last contributing the least to biomass loss. Predicting mechanisms of gap formation based on associated area and biomass loss remains challenging, which highlights the need for larger datasets. The rate of gap area formation was positively correlated with the frequency of extreme rainfall events, which may be related to a higher frequency of storms propagating extreme rain and wind gusts. While remote sensing has proven to be an accurate and precise method for mapping gaps compared to field data (i.e., ground truth), it is important to note that our sample size was relatively small. Therefore, the extrapolation of these results beyond our study region and landscape shall be made cautiously. Apart from improving landscape assessments of carbon balance, regional information on gap dynamics and associated mechanisms of formation are fundamental to address forest responses to altered disturbance regimes resulting from climate change.