IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 54, NO.
6, JUNE 2016
Scale Effect in Indirect Measurement
of Leaf Area Index
Guangjian Yan, Ronghai Hu, Yiting Wang, Huazhong Ren, Wanjuan Song, Jianbo Qi, and Ling Chen
Abstract—Scale effect, which is caused by a combination of
model nonlinearity and surface heterogeneity, has been of interest
to the remote sensing community for decades. However, there is
no current analysis of scale effect in the ground-based indirect
measurement of leaf area index (LAI), where model nonlinearity
and surface heterogeneity also exist. This paper examines the scale
effect on the indirect measurement of LAI. We built multiscale
data sets based on realistic scenes and field measurements. We
then implemented five representative methods of indirect LAI
measurement at scales (segment lengths) that range from meters to
hundreds of meters. The results show varying degrees of deviation
and fluctuation that exist in all five methods when the segment
length is shorter than 20 m. The retrieved LAI from either Beer’s
law or the gap-size distribution method shows a decreasing trend
with increasing segment lengths. The length at which the LAI
values begin to stabilize is about a full period of row in row
crops and 100 m in broadleaf or coniferous forests. The impacts
of segment length on the finite-length averaging method, the com-
bination of gap-size distribution and finite-length methods, and the
path-length distribution method are relatively small. These three
methods stabilize at the segment scale longer than 20 m in all
scenes. We also find that computing the average LAI of all of the
short segment lengths, which is commonly done, is not as good as
merging these short segments into a longer one and computing the
LAI value of the merged one.
Index Terms—Beer’s law, gap probability, indirect measure-
ment, leaf area index (LAI), scale effect, segment length.
I. I NTRODUCTION
S CALE effect has attracted wide attention in the remote
sensing community for decades because remote sensing re-
Manuscript received November 18, 2015; revised December 31, 2015;
accepted January 7, 2016. Date of publication February 5, 2016; date of current
version April 27, 2016. This work was supported in part by the National Basic
Research Program of China under Grant 2013CB733402, by the key program
of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant
41331171, and by the NSFC under Grant 41301357. (Corresponding author:
Ronghai Hu.)
G. Yan, R. Hu, W. Song, and J. Qi are with the State Key Laboratory
of Remote Sensing Science, Beijing Key Laboratory for Remote Sensing
of Environment and Digital Cities, School of Geography, Beijing Normal
University, Beijing 100875, China (e-mail: gjyan@bnu.edu.cn; sea@mail.bnu.
edu.cn; songwanjuan@126.com; jianboqi@126.com).
Y. Wang is with the State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, School
of Geography, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China, and also
with the National Marine Data and Information Service, Tianjin 300171, China
(e-mail: wyt_nmdis@foxmail.com).
H. Ren is with the Institute of Remote Sensing and Geographic Information
System, School of Earth and Space Sciences, Peking University, Beijing
100871, China (e-mail: renhuazhong@pku.edu.cn).
L. Chen is with the Key Laboratory for Silviculture and Conservation of
Ministry of Education, School of Forestry, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing
100083, China (e-mail: chenling8247@126.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TGRS.2016.2519098
0196-2892 © 2016 IEEE. Translations and content mining are permitted for academic research only. Personal use is also permitted, but republication/redistribution
requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
3475
trieval suffers from self-inconsistency at different spatial scales
when using the same model [1]–[8].
Scale effect in remote sensing and other fields of geography
is caused by a combination of model nonlinearity and surface
heterogeneity [9]–[11]. A model is created for a specific scale
and thus has its own assumptions and appropriate application
scale [12], [13]. When applied to different scales, the surface
characteristics will change and deviate from the original as-
sumption that the model is developed, particularly in hetero-
geneous areas [14]–[17]. This mismatch between the modeling
scale and application scale is the essential reason that scale
effect exists.
The indirect measurement of leaf area index (LAI), which
provides estimates of LAI on the field scale efficiently through
portable optical instruments, is commonly adopted to measure
LAI at ground and validate remote sensing products [18]–[22].
Various methods have been developed based on Beer’s law
for indirect LAI measurement, including the finite-length av-
eraging method [23], gap-size distribution method [24], [25],
combination of gap-size distribution method and finite-length
averaging method [26], and path-length distribution method
[27]. The inputs of Beer’s law and all aforementioned methods
are the gap information of canopies. Optical instruments such
as LAI-2000, Tracing Radiation and Architecture of Canopies
(TRAC; Third Wave Engineering, ON, Canada), and HemiView
are used to measure gap information that the light passes
through the canopies. Then, LAI is retrieved by using these
Beer law-based methods.
The two factors causing scale effect, model nonlinearity and
surface heterogeneity, also exist in indirect LAI measurements.
First, the theoretical basis of indirect LAI measurement, Beer’s
law, is basically an exponential form and is therefore nonlinear.
The scale effect of Beer’s law has already been reported at
pixel scale [28]. Second, most of the vegetation canopies show
obvious heterogeneity and put great difficulty upon indirect LAI
measurement [29]. Field experiments show that the heterogene-
ity of the surface may cause a 30%–70% underestimation of
LAI using Beer’s law [24], [30], [31]. As a result, we believe
that the scale effect also exists in indirect LAI measurement.
The importance of variances and covariance of gap fraction
in indirect LAI measurement is reported, and the required
number of LAI-2000 or digital hemispheric image observations
is analyzed [32]. It is generally recognized that a longer transect
length will carry more information and represent the sample
plot better. When the transect length is determined, however,
the influence of the segment length is still overlooked. The
scale effect of segment length, which is essential for indirect
3476 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 54, NO. 6, JUNE 2016
LAI measurement and clumping effect correction, has not been
documented up to now.
The scale in this paper refers to the length of segments for
performing LAI calculation. We analyzed the scale effect in
indirect LAI measurement based on multiscale gap data sets.
We built the data sets by using both realistic scenes and field
measurements. Then, five representative models for indirect
LAI measurement were run and compared at different segment
scales. The existence of scale effect in indirect LAI measure-
ment was illustrated and analyzed based on these realistic scene
simulation and field measurements. This paper is organized
as follows. Section II defines the scales in indirect LAI mea-
surement. Section III introduces the theoretical background
and five representative methods in indirect LAI measurement.
Section IV describes the experiment design and multiscale data
sets. Section V presents and analyzes the scale effect on indirect
LAI measurement at segment scales that range from meters
to hundreds of meters. Section VI concludes the findings on
scale effect in indirect LAI measurement and discusses future
directions of research.
II. D EFINITION OF S CALE IN I NDIRECT
LAI M EASUREMENT
A. Scales in Measurements With Different Instruments
With instruments which observe canopies along transects,
scale is related to the length of a segment in data acquisition
and processing. The representative instrument is TRAC, which
is hand carried by a person walking at a steady pace to obtain
the gap profile along transects [26]. TRAC can provide detailed
gap information which is essential for clumping correction and
thus is widely used in indirect LAI measurement, particularly
in forests [27], [33]–[37].
With instruments that observe hemispheric information at
view points, such as LAI-2000 and digital hemispheric pho-
tographs (DHPs), the definition of scale is more complex.
Because there is no length or area property that can be related to
the sample plot, the length of data will change with the change
of observation distance. Thus, only the numbers and azimuth
angles of measurement are chosen to analyze the required
amount of data in relative research works [32], [38].
In this paper, we employ the transect data like TRAC to
analyze the scale effect of indirect measurement as the TRAC
data have an explicit length property rather than an angle
property of the hemispheric data whose observing area varies
with distances. The analysis of TRAC will also be a reference
for hemispheric instruments potentially, as they have the same
theoretical basis, Beer’s law.
B. Segment Scale
It is often the case that a transect might be composed of
several segments. Certain amounts of observations are always
needed to represent the sample plot, but it can hardly be finished
at one time due to the restrictions of plot boundary, instrument,
and so on. Thus, several observations might be taken in a plot to
get gap data. The transect length is the length of all the gap data
in a sample plot. The segment length is the length of segments
or units for performing the LAI retrieval.
We distinguish the segment length from the transect length
because different segment lengths will result in different results
even with the determined transect length. In addition, field
measurements are always performed on several segments. For
example, in a 25 m × 25 m sample plot, a single measurement
is generally conducted from one side of the sample plot to the
other side, namely, 25 m. As one 25-m data is not sufficient
to represent the sample plot, eight parallel 25-m measurements
are conducted. Then, the transect length is determined as 8 ×
25 m = 200 m, while the segment length is still variable. If we
perform LAI retrieval on eight 25-m data and average the eight
results, the segment length is 25 m. If we combine the eight
25-m data to a 200-m data and then perform LAI retrieval on the
200-m data, the segment length is 200 m. The aforementioned
example shows that segment length could be variable for a
determined transect length.
Segment length is important because different segment
lengths will result in different results, even with the same
amount of data in the same area. It is a typical scale problem
due to the model nonlinearity of Beer’s law and surface het-
erogeneity. Therefore, it is important to know how the segment
length affects the indirect LAI measurement and how long the
appropriate segment length is to produce an accurate result. In
this paper, we keep the transect length determined and analyze
the influence of segment scale (segment length) in indirect LAI
measurement.
III. I NDIRECT LAI M EASUREMENT M ETHODS
A. Beer’s Law and Clumping Index
Beer’s law is the theoretical basis of indirect LAI mea-
surement. It was originally used to calculate the transmission
of optical radiation in the atmosphere and particle medium
[39], [40] and was later extended to describe the radiative
transfer process in vegetation canopies [41], [42]. However,
significant differences exist between atmospheric media and
vegetation elements. To compensate for the difference, some
additional information, such as leaf orientation, leaf projection,
and viewing angle, was introduced to modify the equation [30],
[43]–[45]
PAIe = − ln [P (θ)] · cos θ/G (1)
LAI = (1 − α) · PAIe · γE /ΩE (2)
where P (θ) is the gap fraction, G is the leaf projection co-
efficient that can be calculated from leaf angle distribution
(LAD), θ is the viewing zenith angle, PAIe is the effective
plant area index that can be used to get LAI if the clumping
effect and woody components are removed, ΩE is the clumping
index defined by Chen and Cihlar [33], γE (needle-to-shoot
area ratio) is introduced to convert shoot area to needle area in
coniferous forest, γE = 1 in broad-leaved forest, and α is the
woody-to-total area ratio [35].
Several methods have been proposed to quantify the
clumping index (ΩE ) and calculate LAI based on Beer’s law.
YAN et al.: SCALE EFFECT IN INDIRECT MEASUREMENT OF LEAF AREA INDEX
Representative methods include the finite-length averaging
method [23], gap-size distribution method [24], [25], combina-
tion of gap-size distribution method and finite-length averaging
method [26], and path-length distribution method [27].
B. Finite-Length Averaging Method
The finite-length averaging method (LX) is an algorithm
that addresses clumping effect. Lang and Xiang [23] proposed
averaging the logarithms of gap probabilities of subsegments,
with a characteristic width of ten times the leaf width. The
method is easy to use and can correct the nonrandomness
among subsegments.
According to the finite-length averaging method, LAI can be
calculated using the gap probability at viewing direction θ
ln (P (θ)) · cos θ
LAILX (θ) = − (3)
G Since the large segments might not be homogeneous, the CC
where ln[P (θ)] is the mean value of logarithmic gap fractions
of all segments.
This method is based on two assumptions: 1) The leaves
within the finite length/subsegments are randomly distributed,
and 2) each subsegment contains gaps.
When the subsegment does not contain any gap, the method
will fail because a logarithm of zero (no gaps) is undefined [34].
At this time, a half pixel of gap will be assigned, and the LAI
of subsegments with no gaps was given by
 
0.5
LAImax (θ) = − ln · cos θ/G (4)
Npixel
where Npixel is the number of pixels in a subsegment and high
LAI values that are too high are forced to the upper limit of 10
[26], [37].
C. Gap-Size Distribution Method
The gap-size distribution method (CC) was proposed by
Chen and Cihlar [33] to quantify the clumping effect in a forest
and was later corrected by Leblanc [25]. The method removes
nonrandom gaps on the basis of gap-size distribution theory and
thereby can largely eliminate the large gaps between canopies
[25], [33].
LAI in the total transect can be expressed as
ln [Fmr (0, θ)] · cos θ 1 − Fm (0, θ)
LAICC = − · . (5)
G 1 − Fmr (0, θ)
The measured gap-size accumulation function Fm (λ, θ), de-
fined as the fraction of gaps larger than λ, can be obtained
through an optical instrument, such as TRAC or DHP.
Fm (0, θ) is the accumulated canopy gap fraction, and
Fmr (0, θ) is the reduced gap-size accumulation fraction after
the removal of the large nonrandom gaps based on the gap-size
accumulation function of random canopy, Fr (λ, θ)
    
λ λ
Fr (λ, θ) = 1+Lp(θ) exp −Lp (θ) 1+
Wp (θ) Wp (θ)
(6)
3477
where Lp is the projected LAI and first taken as − ln[Fm (0, θ)]
and Wp is the mean projected width of the foliage element.
As the presence of large gaps is the main cause for the under-
estimation of LAI, the measured gaps appearing at probabilities
in excess of Fr (λ, θ) are then removed. After each round of
gap removal, a new gap-size accumulation function Fmr (λ, θ)
is computed, and Lp is assigned a new value of − ln[Fmr (λ, θ)].
The final Fmr (λ, θ) and Fmr (0, θ) are found after sev-
eral iterations until the new distribution closely overlaps
Fr (λ, θ) [33].
D. Combination of Gap-Size Distribution and Finite-Length
Averaging Method
To address the two problems of segment length in the finite-
length averaging method, Leblanc et al. [34] developed a new
method (CLX method) by combining CC and LX methods.
method is used within every segment to address the heterogene-
ity within segments. The final LAI is then calculated over n
segments as
n
ln [Pk (θ)] /ΩCCk (θ) · cos θ
LAICLX (θ) = − k=1 (7)
n·G
where ΩCCk (θ) is the clumping index within segment k using
the CC method and Pk (θ) is the gap fraction of segment k.
E. Path-Length Distribution Method
The path-length distribution method (PATH) was proposed
by Hu et al. [27] to address not only the clumping effect
between canopies but also the crown-shape-induced nonran-
domness within canopies. It was developed based on the path-
length distribution and a theoretical prototype of Beer’s law.
Path-length distribution theory can characterize and handle
nonrandomness within canopies, which may cause an underes-
timation of LAI of up to 25%. Previous algorithms cannot deal
with such a problem.
The final LAI can be expressed as
1
LAIPATH = (FAVD · lmax ) · cos θ · lr · plr (lr)d(lr) (8)
0
where FAVD is the foliage area volume density, lmax is the
maximum path length along the transect, and the intermediate
variables FAVD · lmax can be retrieved by (9) with root-finding
algorithms. The relative path length lr and the path-length
distribution function plr (lr) can be obtained from the measured
gap transect or an ellipse section assumption [27]
1
P = e−G·(FAVD·lmax )·lr · plr (lr)d(lr) (9)
0
where P is the total gap probability along the transect. As all
other quantities are known in (9), FAVD · lmax can be retrieved,
and the final LAI is then obtained.
3478 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 54, NO. 6, JUNE 2016

TABLE I
S CENE C HARACTERISTICS OF ROW C ROP S CENES

Fig. 1. Overview of the cylindrical row canopy scene. Disk-shaped leaves

with a radius of 0.05 m are colored green, soil ground is colored brown, and
observing angles are represented by pink planes.

Fig. 2. Overview of (a) discrete cylindrical and (b) spherical tree canopy
IV. M ETHODOLOGY AND DATA S ETS scenes.

To examine the scale effect, we ran and analyzed the five

aforementioned representative methods for indirect LAI mea-
surement at segment scales that range from meters to hundreds
of meters. First, we conducted gap information measurements
in two realistic structural scenes and two field sites. Second,
we generated multiscale gap data sets from the gap informa-
tion obtained earlier. Third, we applied the five representative
methods for indirect LAI measurement using the multiscale gap
data sets. Finally, we analyzed the results at multiple scales and
compared among five methods.
Fig. 3. Two coniferous forest sites (a) L5 and (b) L6 located in the Genhe
forestry reserve of Hulunbeier League, Inner Mongolia, China.

A. Realistic Structural Scenes

TABLE II
Two kinds of realistic structural scenes, including cylindrical S CENE C HARACTERISTICS OF T WO C ONIFEROUS F OREST S ITES
row crop scenes and discrete broadleaf forest scenes, were
simulated using the data sets from the third and fourth radiation
transfer model intercomparison exercises [46]–[48]. Each scene
is exclusively composed of disk-shaped leaves with a radius of
0.05 m so that the true LAI can be precisely calculated. The
LAD is also known, so the error caused by the leaf projection
coefficient G is avoided. All observations were performed at a
57.3◦ zenith angle, where G is close to 0.5 for all LADs.
As the size of each leaf is known, the true LAIs can be
calculated as

Ai
LAItrue = (10)
2As
B. Field Experiments
where Ai is the total area of each leaf and As is the area of the LAI measurements were performed in the Genhe forest
horizontal ground surface. No approximations or assumptions reserve of Hulunbeier League, Inner Mongolia, China. The
are made in calculating the true LAIs. forest is mainly composed of Larix gmelinii. Measurements
Cylindrical row canopy scenes (25 m × 25 m) were gen- of the TRAC and Multispectral Canopy Imager (MCI) were
erated to represent row crop scenes. Leaves are randomly carried out in two 45 m × 45 m coniferous sites (see Fig. 3)
distributed in cylinders with different periods, radii, and LAIs with different densities (see Table II).
(see Fig. 1 and Table I). TRAC measurements were conducted on August 19, 2013,
Discrete broadleaf forest scenes (270 m × 270 m) were and MCI measurements were conducted on August 10, 2013.
generated to represent natural forests (see Fig. 2), containing A 200-m TRAC transect was employed at each site, where
a series of nonoverlapped cylindrical or spherical volumes. The markers were set every 10 m. The TRAC transects can provide
LAIs of the scenes range from 1.19 to 6.35, covering the vast detailed photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) and gap-
majority of forests in the world. probability data for scale-effect research. The gap probability
YAN et al.: SCALE EFFECT IN INDIRECT MEASUREMENT OF LEAF AREA INDEX
Fig. 4. Validations of the retrieved LAIs at multiple segment scales in cylindrical row canopy scenes with different cylindrical radii and periods, using the gap-size
distribution method (LAI_CC), finite-length averaging method (LAI_LX), and path-length distribution method based on gap data (LAI_PATH).
of each segment was obtained using the integration approach
described in the TRAC manual [26], which is able to ensure that
the gap probability equals the mean beam transmittance. LX
and PATH methods were done using PPFD raw data measured
by TRAC. The CC method and Beer’s law [effective LAI
(LAIe)] were done using TRACwin software. A conversion
from PPFD data to gap-size distribution data is required for the
CC and CLX methods. The CLX method was not done here
because it is not fully supported by TRACwin. A needle-to-
shoot area ratio of 1.27 for Larix gmelinii [49] was used for
converting shoot area to needle area.
The MCI is a device developed for woody-to-total area
ratio determination from multispectral images, based on the
characteristics of strong absorbance in a visible band and high
scattering in the near-infrared band for canopies [35], [50]. We
employed it to eliminate the effect of woody components that
account for a large proportion of coniferous forests.
C. Multiscale Gap Data Sets
Gap information is the input for indirect LAI measurement.
To analyze the scale effect in the indirect LAI measurement,
multiscale gap data were generated from the aforementioned
scenes. First, an identical long transect was used in each scene
for further segmentation, guaranteeing that the total amount of
information was the same in the multiscale data set. Second,
the long transects were partitioned into several segments. The
segmentation process was then repeated with different segment
scales, after which the multiscale gap data sets were built.
3479
In cylindrical row crop scenes (25 m×25 m), 12 parallel 25-m
transects were employed and combined into a uniform 300-m
transect for each scene. The 12 transects are perpendicular to
the row and are equispaced to represent the whole scene. The
long transect was then partitioned into 300 × 1 m, 150 × 2 m,
100 × 3 m, 75 × 4 m, 60 × 5 m, 50 × 6 m, 30 × 10 m, 25 ×
12 m, 20 × 15 m, 15 × 20 m, 10 × 30 m, 5 × 60 m, 2 × 150 m,
and 1 × 300 m multiscale gap data sets.
In discrete broadleaf forest scenes (270 m × 270 m),
12 parallel 250-m transects were employed and combined into
a uniform 3000-m transect for each scene. The 12 transects are
equispaced to represent the whole scene. The long transect was
then partitioned into 600 × 5 m, 300 × 10 m, 150 × 20 m,
60 × 50 m, 30 × 100 m, 15 × 200 m, 5 × 600 m, and 1 × 3000 m
multiscale gap data sets.
In coniferous forests (45 m × 45 m), one 200-m TRAC
transect was employed for each scene. The 200-m long transect
was partitioned into 40 × 5 m, 20 × 10 m, 10 × 20 m, 4 × 50 m,
2 × 100 m, and 1 × 200 m multiscale gap data sets.
V. R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSION
A. Impact of Segment Scale in Cylindrical Row
Canopy Scenes
LAI values were retrieved in four row canopy scenes with
different cylindrical radii, periods (see Fig. 4), and LAIs (see
Fig. 5). The deviation and fluctuation were significant when the
segment scale was shorter than 10 m for all of the five indirect
3480
Fig. 5. Validations of the retrieved LAIs at multiple segment scales in cylindrical row canopy scenes with different LAIs.
LAI measurement methods. The retrieved LAI then tended to
stabilize when the segment scale was longer than approximately
20 m. The convergence scale was highly related to the period of
row canopy, rather than cylindrical radius and LAI.
The LAIe decreased when the segment scale increased from
1 m to a full period of row canopy, and then, it began to
converge (see Fig. 4). The decrease of LAIe was caused by
the heterogeneity inside the segments, which can lead to an
underestimation of Beer’s law. This was consistent with pre-
vious findings that the longer the segment is, the greater the
heterogeneity in each segment and the more serious the under-
estimation [23]. From Fig. 4, we can find that LAIe reaches a
stable low value when the segment scale is longer than a row
period. We can infer that the heterogeneity inside a full period
of row canopy reaches its maximum. We can also find that the
results of the LAIe and LX methods are close to each other
when the segment scale is short. This is understandable since
calculating LAIe in segments is exactly the LX method, which
calculates LAIs on subsegments and averages the results [23].
The trends of LAI_CC and LAIe were similar, decreasing
when the segment scale increases from 1 m to a full period
of row canopy and then beginning to converge. Overestimation
was observed in LAI_CC when the segment scale was less than
a full period of row canopy. Because the CC method needs
detailed gap information to perform the algorithms, when it is
performed at a short segment scale, great fluctuations will exist
in the gap-size distribution. As a result, more gaps will then
be removed in the gap removal process, which results in the
overestimation.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 54, NO. 6, JUNE 2016
The results of the LX, CLX, and PATH methods are less
sensitive to segment scale since each of them contains a
segmentation process itself [23], [27], [34]. Nevertheless, a
larger segment scale improves their stability. Employing these
three methods at different scales has little impact on the fi-
nal result, particularly when the segment scale of data is an
integer multiple of the segmentation size of the algorithm.
Both LX and CLX methods dip at the scale equal to a
full period of row canopy. This is because the segment pat-
tern is the same in all periods and the underestimation will
accumulate.
LAI_LX showed overestimation or underestimation in the
four scenes with different LAIs (see Fig. 5). The emergence
of gapless subsegments resulted in the overall deviation in
dense scenes [27]. For the LX method, a maximum LAI is
assigned when gapless subsegments are observed because the
logarithm of zero is not defined. There is not a universal
maximum LAI value that is optimal for all of the situations.
Both overall overestimation and underestimation are possible
in scenes with different densities. Erroneous results caused by
numerous gapless segments have also been found in previous
studies [27], [34], [51].
LAI_CLX had the same trend as LAI_LX, but it had larger
values. The relative magnitudes of the CLX, LX, and CC
methods have also been observed in previous studies [34],
[52]. The CLX method and the LX method have the same
subsegments and produce the same trend. In addition, the CLX
method applies the CC method to deal with the heterogeneity
inside the subsegments. However, due to the overestimation
YAN et al.: SCALE EFFECT IN INDIRECT MEASUREMENT OF LEAF AREA INDEX
Fig. 6. Validations of the retrieved LAIs at multiple segment scales in discrete broadleaf forest scenes.
of the CC method at a short segment scale, the CLX method
generally overestimates LAI in sparse scenes.
The LAI_PATH was the least sensitive to segment scale and
was almost fully consistent with the true LAI in three scenes
(LAI = 1, 2, 3). It performed better because it can charac-
terize crown-shape-induced nonrandomness within canopies.
It resulted in some underestimation in dense scenes (LAI =
4), which was almost fully consistent with LAI_LX at large
segment scales. This was because the scene was too dense
and few gaps were observed; thus, the gap information was
inadequate for path-length distribution calculation.
B. Impact of Segment Scale in Discrete Broadleaf
Forest Scenes
LAI values were retrieved in five discrete broadleaf forest
scenes with true LAI values of 1.19, 4.23, 6.35, 2.12, and
4.14, respectively (see Fig. 6). The scale trends were somewhat
similar to that of the four cylindrical canopy scenes. For Beer’s
law and CC methods, the retrieved LAI began to converge when
the segment scale was longer than about 100 m in broadleaf
forest scenes.
The trends for all the indirect LAI measurement methods
here were quite smooth and showed continuous derivatives.
One reason for this was that none of these segment scales was
shorter than 5 m, and they provided enough gap information for
the algorithms. Another reason might be that the canopies were
randomly distributed in discrete broadleaf forest scenes, unlike
the periodic pattern of row canopies.
3481
LAI_LX, LAI_CLX, and LAI_PATH were less sensitive to
the segment scale for their segmentation process and began
to converge when the segment scale was longer than 20 m
in all scenes. LAI_CC had a long process of decreasing and
began to converge when the segment scale was longer than
approximately 100 m.
The relative magnitudes of all methods in broadleaf forests
were consistent with row canopy scenes. LAI_CC was un-
derestimated at large segment scales. This was because the
heterogeneity inside canopies dominated the gap data and few
large gaps could be observed at a 57.3◦ zenith angle. The
CC method can mostly eliminate the effect of large gaps be-
tween canopies, but it still underestimates the heterogeneity
inside canopies. LAI_LX was overestimated in low LAI scenes
and underestimated in high LAI scenes. This was caused by the
emergence of gapless subsegments. LAI_CLX was larger than
LAI_LX overall, but it was significantly overestimated in low
LAI scenes. LAI_PATH was closest to the true LAIs at all of
the scales for all the five scenes.
C. Impact of Segment Scale in Coniferous Forest Scenes
LAI values were retrieved in two coniferous forest sites with
different densities (see Fig. 7) based on TRAC data. The overall
trends were consistent with the trend in discrete broadleaf
forest scenes, particularly in those scenes with near density [see
Fig. 6(a) and (d)]. LAI_LX and LAI_PATH were not sensitive
to segment scale. LAI_CC began to converge when the segment
scale was longer than approximately 100 m.
3482
Fig. 7. Validations of the retrieved LAIs at multiple segment scales in coniferous forest scenes.
The relative magnitudes of all methods in coniferous for-
est sites were substantially consistent with those in broadleaf
forest scenes. LAI_LX was larger than LAI_PATH since both
coniferous forest sites were not very dense. The LAI_CC was
larger than the others when the segment scale was small but
tended to be smaller with the increase of the segment scale at
the L5 site. LAI_CC was larger than the others at the L6 site.
This might be because more large gaps between canopies were
observed at this site since the site was quite sparse. Although
true LAIs were hard to obtain in coniferous forests, the trends
of all methods at multiple scales were analyzed and proved to
be consistent with those in row canopy scenes and broadleaf
forest scenes.
VI. C ONCLUSION
The scale effect in indirect LAI measurements was analyzed
using multiscale gap data sets. We performed several represen-
tative methods at different segment scales based on realistic
scenes and field measurements. We confirmed the existence of
scale effect in indirect LAI measurements and found varying
degrees of scale effect in these methods.
The scale effect in indirect LAI measurement is that the
results change with the segment length even when the transect
length is determined and the amount of input data is the same.
Beer’s law and the CC method show a decrease with the
increase of segment scale and a trend of converging. Their
convergence scale is about a full period of row in row crop
scenes and about 100 m in broadleaf and coniferous forest
scenes. The LX method, CLX method, and PATH method are
not sensitive to segment scale since each of them contains
a segmentation process itself. Varying degrees of deviation
and fluctuation are found in all of the five methods when the
segment scale is shorter than 20 m, and even more so when the
segment scale is shorter than 10 m.
The convergence value of the LX method may be close to the
true LAI. However, varying degrees of overall overestimation
or underestimation may be observed in scenes with different
densities. The CLX method mostly overestimates LAI in low-
LAI scenes. The convergence value of the PATH method is
consistent with the true LAI in most scenes but shows a slight
underestimation in overly dense scenes.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 54, NO. 6, JUNE 2016
Once the transect length, namely, the input data, is deter-
mined, the results of indirect LAI measurement are still change-
able with different segment lengths. To obtain the reliable
and stable results, enough gap data are always necessary to
represent the plot. We also recommend using no less than a
20-m segment length for calculation in indirect LAI mea-
surement. Larger segment scales are preferred for all of the
methods. A large segment scale (approximately 100 m) is
particularly helpful for the CC method to perform stably in
forests. Computing the average LAI of all of the short segments,
which is commonly done, is not as good as merging these short
segments into a longer one and computing the LAI value for the
merged one.
The specification of the segment scale should be paid more
attention in indirect LAI measurements. In addition, other
heterogeneous factors such as LAD and the amount of woody
components will make this problem more serious. Failing to
consider these factors may lead to large uncertainties in indirect
measurements of LAI which cannot be solved by improving the
instruments only.
R EFERENCES
[1] C. E. Woodcock and A. H. Strahler, “The factor of scale in remote sens-
ing,” Remote Sens. Environ., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 311–332, Apr. 1987.
[2] M. F. Goodchild and D. A. Quattrochi, “Scale, Multiscaling, Remote
Sensing, and GIS,” in Scale in Remote Sensing and GIS M. Goodchild
and D. Quattrochi, Eds. Boca Raton, FL, USA: IEEE, 1997, p. 406.
[3] D. J. Marceau, “The scale issue in the social and natural sciences,” Can.
J. Remote Sens., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 347–356, Oct. 1999.
[4] A.-X. Zhu, “Spatial scale and neighborhood size in spatial data processing
for modeling the natural environment,” in Representing, Modeling and
Visualizing the Natural Environment: Innovations in GIS 13 N. J. Mount
et al., Eds. Boca Raton, FL, USA: IEEE, 2008, pp. 147–165.
[5] H. Wu and Z. L. Li, “Scale issues in remote sensing: A review on analy-
sis, processing and modeling,” Sensors, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1768–1793,
Mar. 2009.
[6] X. Li and Y. Wang, “Prospects on future developments of quantitative
remote sensing,” Acta Geographica Sinica, vol. 68, no. 9, pp. 1163–1169,
Sep. 2013.
[7] J. L. Ohmann, M. J. Gregory, and H. M. Roberts, “Scale considerations for
integrating forest inventory plot data and satellite image data for regional
forest mapping,” Remote Sens. Environ., vol. 151, pp. 3–15, Aug. 2014.
[8] H. Ren et al., “Impact of sensor footprint on measurement of directional
brightness temperature of row crop canopies,” Remote Sens. Environ.,
vol. 134, pp. 135–151, Jul. 2013.
[9] H. Wu, B. H. Tang, and Z. L. Li, “Impact of nonlinearity and discontinuity
on the spatial scaling effects of the leaf area index retrieved from remotely
YAN et al.: SCALE EFFECT IN INDIRECT MEASUREMENT OF LEAF AREA INDEX
sensed data,” Int. J. Remote Sens., vol. 34, no. 9/10, pp. 3503–3519,
May 2013.
[10] L. Wang, W. J. Fan, X. R. Xu, and Y. Liu, “Scaling transform method
for remotely sensed FAPAR based on FAPAR-P model,” IEEE Geosci.
Remote Sens. Lett., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 706–710, Apr. 2015.
[11] H. Ren et al., “Angular normalization of land surface temperature
and emissivity using multiangular middle and thermal infrared data,”
IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 52, no. 8, pp. 4913–4931,
Aug. 2014.
[12] X. W. Li, J. D. Wang, and A. H. Strahler, “Scale effect of Planck’s law
over nonisothermal blackbody surface,” Sci. Chin. Ser. E, Technol. Sci.,
vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 652–656, Dec. 1999.
[13] X. W. Li, J. D. Wang, and A. H. Strahler, “Scale effects and scaling-up by
geometric-optical model,” Sci. Chin. Ser. E, Technol. Sci., vol. 43, no. S1,
pp. 17–22, Dec. 2000.
[14] X. Zhang et al., “Evaluating the fraction of vegetation cover based on
NDVI spatial scale correction model,” Int. J. Remote Sens., vol. 27,
no. 23/24, pp. 5359–5372, Dec. 2006.
[15] W. J. Fan, B. Y. Yan, and X. R. Xu, “Crop area and leaf area index simulta-
neous retrieval based on spatial scaling transformation,” Sci. Chin.-Earth
Sci., vol. 53, no. 11, pp. 1709–1716, Nov. 2010.
[16] A. Ershadi, M. F. McCabe, J. P. Evans, and J. P. Walker, “Effects of spatial
aggregation on the multi-scale estimation of evapotranspiration,” Remote
Sens. Environ., vol. 131, pp. 51–62, Apr. 2013.
[17] Y. Tian et al., “Exploring scale-dependent ecohydrological responses in a
large endorheic river basin through integrated surface water-groundwater
modeling,” Water Resour. Res., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 4065–4085,
Jun. 2015.
[18] S. T. Gower, C. J. Kucharik, and J. M. Norman, “Direct and indirect
estimation of leaf area index, fAPAR, and net primary production of
terrestrial ecosystems,” Remote Sens. Environ., vol. 70, no. 1, pp. 29–51,
Oct. 1999.
[19] R. H. Zhang et al., “Principles and methods for the validation of quan-
titative remote sensing products,” Sci. Chin.-Earth Sci., vol. 53, no. 5,
pp. 741–751, May 2010.
[20] Q. Liu, S. L. Liang, Z. Q. Xiao, and H. Fang, “Retrieval of leaf area index
using temporal, spectral, and angular information from multiple satellite
data,” Remote Sens. Environ., vol. 145, pp. 25–37, Apr. 2014.
[21] Y. Ryu et al., “Continuous observation of tree leaf area index at ecosystem
scale using upward-pointing digital cameras,” Remote Sens. Environ.,
vol. 126, pp. 116–125, Nov. 2012.
[22] Y. H. Qu et al., “LAINet—A wireless sensor network for coniferous forest
leaf area index measurement: Design, algorithm and validation,” Comput.
Electron. Agriculture, vol. 108, pp. 200–208, Oct. 2014.
[23] A. R. G. Lang and Y. Xiang, “Estimation of leaf area index from trans-
mission of direct sunlight in discontinuous canopies,” Agricultural Forest
Meteorol., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 229–243, Aug. 1986.
[24] J. M. Chen and J. Cihlar, “Quantifying the effect of canopy architecture
on optical measurements of leaf area index using two gap size analysis
methods,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 777–787,
May 1995.
[25] S. G. Leblanc, “Correction to the plant canopy gap-size analysis theory
used by the tracing radiation and architecture of canopies instrument,”
Appl. Opt., vol. 41, pp. 7667–7670, Dec. 2002.
[26] S. Leblanc, J. Chen, and M. Kwong, Tracing Radiation and Architecture
of Canopies MANUAL 2.1.4 Natural Resour. Canada, Vancouver, BC,
Canada, 2005, pp. 1–27.
[27] R. Hu, G. Yan, X. Mu, and J. Luo, “Indirect measurement of leaf area
index on the basis of path length distribution,” Remote Sens. Environ.,
vol. 155, pp. 239–247, Dec. 2014.
[28] B. J. Albers, A. H. Strahler, X. O. Li, S. Liang, and K. Clarke, “Radio-
metric measurements of gap probability in conifer tree canopies,” Remote
Sens. Environ., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 179–192, Dec. 1990.
[29] R. Hu and G. Yan, “Indirect measurement of forest LAI to deal with the
underestimation problem based on Beer-Lambert law,” J. GeoInf. Sci.,
vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 366–375, Jun. 2012.
[30] M. Weiss, F. Baret, G. J. Smith, I. Jonckheere, and P. Coppin, “Review of
methods for in situ leaf area index (LAI) determination: Part II. Estimation
of LAI, errors and sampling,” Agricultural Forest Meteorol., vol. 121,
no. 1/2, pp. 37–53, Jan. 2004.
[31] A. Cutini, G. Matteucci, and G. S. Mugnozza, “Estimation of leaf area
index with the Li-Cor LAI 2000 in deciduous forests,” Forest Ecol. Man-
age., vol. 105, no. 1–3, pp. 55–65, Jun. 1998.
[32] T. Nilson, A. Kuusk, M. Lang, J. Pisek, and A. Kodar, “Sim-
ulation of statistical characteristics of gap distribution in forest
stands,” Agricultural Forest Meteorol., vol. 151, no. 7, pp. 895–905,
Jul. 2011.
3483
[33] J. M. Chen and J. Cihlar, “Plant canopy gap-size analysis theory for
improving optical measurements of leaf-area index,” Appl. Opt., vol. 34,
no. 27, pp. 6211–6222, Sep. 1995.
[34] S. G. Leblanc et al., “Methodology comparison for canopy structure
parameters extraction from digital hemispherical photography in boreal
forests,” Agricultural Forest Meteorol., vol. 129, no. 3/4, pp. 187–207,
Apr. 2005.
[35] J. Zou, G. Yan, L. Zhu, and W. Zhang, “Woody-to-total area ratio de-
termination with a multispectral canopy imager,” Tree Physiol., vol. 29,
no. 8, pp. 1069–1080, Aug. 2009.
[36] Y. Ryu et al., “How to quantify tree leaf area index in an open savanna
ecosystem: A multi-instrument and multi-model approach,” Agricultural
Forest Meteorol., vol. 150, no. 1, pp. 63–76, Jan. 2010.
[37] J. Pisek, M. Lang, T. Nilson, L. Korhonen, and H. Karu, “Comparison of
methods for measuring gap size distribution and canopy nonrandomness
at Järvselja RAMI (RAdiation transfer Model Intercomparison) test sites,”
Agricultural Forest Meteorol., vol. 151, no. 3, pp. 365–377, Mar. 2011.
[38] Y. Ryu et al., “On the correct estimation of effective leaf area index: Does
it reveal information on clumping effects?,” Agricultural Forest Meteorol.,
vol. 150, no. 3, pp. 463–472, Mar. 2010.
[39] F. Beer, “Bestimmung der absorption des rothen Lichts in farbigen flüs-
sigkeiten,” Annalen der Physik, vol. 162, no. 5, pp. 78–88, 1852.
[40] J. Houghton, The Physics of Atmospheres. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002.
[41] P. J. Sellers, “Canopy reflectance, photosynthesis and transpiration,” Int.
J. Remote Sens., vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 1335–1372, Aug. 1985.
[42] R. B. Myneni, J. Ross, and G. Asrar, “A review on the theory of photon
transport in leaf canopies,” Agricultural Forest Meteorol., vol. 45, no. 1/2,
pp. 1–153, 1989.
[43] T. Nilson, “A theoretical analysis of the frequency of gaps in plant stands,”
Agricultural Meteorol., vol. 8, pp. 25–38, Jan. 1971.
[44] I. Jonckheere et al., “Review of methods for in situ leaf area index
determination: Part I. Theories, sensors and hemispherical photography,”
Agricultural Forest Meteorol., vol. 121, no. 1/2, pp. 19–35, Jan. 2004.
[45] W. M. Wang, Z. L. Li, and H. B. Su, “Comparison of leaf angle distri-
bution functions: Effects on extinction coefficient and fraction of sunlit
foliage,” Agricultural Forest Meteorol., vol. 143, no. 1/2, pp. 106–122,
Mar. 2007.
[46] B. Pinty et al., “Radiation Transfer Model Intercomparison (RAMI) exer-
cise: Results from the second phase,” J. Geophys. Res., Atmos., vol. 109,
no. D6, Mar. 2004, Art. ID D06210.
[47] J. L. Widlowski et al., “Third Radiation Transfer Model Intercomparison
(RAMI) exercise: Documenting progress in canopy reflectance models,”
J. Geophys. Res., Atmos., vol. 112, no. D9, May 2007, Art. ID D09111.
[48] J. L. Widlowski et al., “The fourth radiation transfer model intercompar-
ison (RAMI-IV): Proficiency testing of canopy reflectance models with
ISO-13528,” J. Geophys. Res., Atmos., vol. 118, no. 13, pp. 6869–6890,
Jul. 2013.
[49] Z. Liu, G. Jin, and M. Zhou, “Evaluation and correction of optically
derived leaf area index in different temperate forests,” iForest—Biogeosci.
Forestry, vol. 9, pp. 55–62, 2015, doi: 10.3832/ifor1350-008.
[50] Y. Liu, R. Hu, X. Mu, and G. Yan, “A method for leaf gap fraction esti-
mation based on multispectral digital images from multispectral canopy
imager,” in Proc. IEEE IGARSS, 2011, pp. 3042–3045.
[51] J. M. Chen and T. A. Black, “Foliage area and architecture of plant
canopies from sunfleck size distributions,” Agricultural Forest Meteorol.,
vol. 60, no. 3/4, pp. 249–266, Aug. 1992.
[52] A. Gonsamo and P. Pellikka, “The computation of foliage clumping
index using hemispherical photography,” Agricultural Forest Meteorol.,
vol. 149, no. 10, pp. 1781–1787, Oct. 2009.
Guangjian Yan received the Ph.D. degree from the
Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, in 1999.
He is currently a Professor with the State Key
Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, School of
Geography, Beijing Normal University, Beijing. He
has published more than 160 papers. His main re-
search interests are multiangular remote sensing,
vegetation remote sensing, radiation budget, scale
effect, and scale correction of remote sensing.
3484 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 54, NO. 6, JUNE 2016
Ronghai Hu is currently working toward the Ph.D.
degree at Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
His research interests include the indirect leaf-
area-index measurement and retrieval of vegetation
parameters, LiDAR, and scale effect on remote
sensing.
Yiting Wang is currently working toward the Ph.D.
degree at Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Her research interests include the scale effects
in remote sensing of vegetation parameters and the
spatial and temporal expansion of remote sensing
products.
Huazhong Ren received the Ph.D. degree from
Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China, and
from Université de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France,
in 2013.
He is currently an Assistant Professor in the In-
stitute of Remote Sensing and GIS, School of Earth
and Space Sciences, Peking University, Beijing. His
current research interests focus on the retrieval of
land surface temperature/emissivity and angular ef-
fect correction. He has also devoted his efforts to the
spectral calibration of broad-band images for air- and
spaceborne instruments.
Wanjuan Song is currently working toward the
Ph.D. degree at Beijing Normal University, Beijing,
China.
Her current research interests focus on remote
sensing modeling and fractional vegetation cover
retrieval.
Jianbo Qi is currently working toward the Ph.D.
degree at Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
His research interests include 3-D radiative trans-
fer modeling, realistic forest scene simulation, and
vegetation parameter retrieval.
Ling Chen received the Ph.D. degree in cartography
and geographic information systems from Beijing
Normal University, Beijing, China, in 2012.
She is currently an Assistant Professor with
Beijing Forestry University, Beijing. Her research
interests include the estimation of surface solar ra-
diation and forest structural parameters based on
satellite images.