Spatial distribution and drivers of aboveground forest biomass in Mexico using <scp>GEDI</scp> and national forest inventory data

Abstract Accurate assessment of forest aboveground biomass density (AGBD) is essential for understanding the role of vegetation in climate change mitigation and developing forest management and environmental policies at national and regional levels. The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) uses full‐waveform LiDAR and provides a valuable tool for estimating AGBD. Calibrating GEDI biomass products with local field data is vital for improving model accuracy, as current estimates rely on global datasets. Additionally, evaluating key factors that influence biomass estimation is essential to refine GEDI‐based models. In this research, we calibrated linear models with field AGBD as the dependent variable and GEDI metrics as independent variables, and compared the performance against the GEDI L4A product across forest types. Additionally, we evaluated the effects of terrain slope, forest structural complexity, and forest type on the accuracy of the models. Finally, we mapped AGBD in Mexico by aggregating footprint‐level estimates with local models and compared it with the GEDI AGBD map (L4B product). Model validation showed R 2 values from 0.35 to 0.46 across forest types, with most models having %RMSE below 52.0. Errors were 32.7 to 34.2% lower than GEDI L4A, highlighting a notable accuracy improvement. The total carbon stocks in Mexico estimated here are approximately 1.78 Gt, aligning closely with official FAO estimates, whereas GEDI estimates are 33.5% higher than the official estimate. Biomass estimation with GEDI is most accurate in areas with moderate slopes and low forest structural complexity. Coniferous and tropical forests showed the lowest errors in estimating AGBD with GEDI (46.7 and 47.3 of %RMSE, respectively) likely due to the widespread presence of uniformly structured coniferous trees and the moderate terrain slopes found in tropical forests. Our findings highlight the importance of calibrating local AGBD data with GEDI forest structure metrics to improve biomass estimations at the footprint and national levels.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation
Published
2025-07-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/rse2.70019
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.60

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Spatial distribution and drivers of aboveground forest biomass in Mexico using GEDI and national forest inventory data

José Luis Hernández‐Stefanoni, Víctor Alexis Peña‐Lara, Juan Andres‐Mauricio, Stephanie P. George‐Chacón et al.
2 citations
Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation
Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
1.60
article

Spatial distribution and drivers of aboveground forest biomass in Mexico using GEDI and national forest inventory data

José Luis Hernández‐Stefanoni, Víctor Alexis Peña‐Lara, Juan Andres‐Mauricio, Stephanie P. George‐Chacón, Luis Ángel Hernández-Martínez, Eric Antonio Gamboa‐Blanco, Carlos Portillo‐Quintero, Fernando Tun‐Dzul, Karina Elizabeth González‐Muñoz
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Accurate assessment of forest aboveground biomass density (AGBD) is essential for understanding the role of vegetation in climate change mitigation and developing forest management and environmental policies at national and regional levels. The Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) uses full‐waveform LiDAR and provides a valuable tool for estimating AGBD. Calibrating GEDI biomass products with local field data is vital for improving model accuracy, as current estimates rely on global datasets. Additionally, evaluating key factors that influence biomass estimation is essential to refine GEDI‐based models. In this research, we calibrated linear models with field AGBD as the dependent variable and GEDI metrics as independent variables, and compared the performance against the GEDI L4A product across forest types. Additionally, we evaluated the effects of terrain slope, forest structural complexity, and forest type on the accuracy of the models. Finally, we mapped AGBD in Mexico by aggregating footprint‐level estimates with local models and compared it with the GEDI AGBD map (L4B product). Model validation showed R 2 values from 0.35 to 0.46 across forest types, with most models having %RMSE below 52.0. Errors were 32.7 to 34.2% lower than GEDI L4A, highlighting a notable accuracy improvement. The total carbon stocks in Mexico estimated here are approximately 1.78 Gt, aligning closely with official FAO estimates, whereas GEDI estimates are 33.5% higher than the official estimate. Biomass estimation with GEDI is most accurate in areas with moderate slopes and low forest structural complexity. Coniferous and tropical forests showed the lowest errors in estimating AGBD with GEDI (46.7 and 47.3 of %RMSE, respectively) likely due to the widespread presence of uniformly structured coniferous trees and the moderate terrain slopes found in tropical forests. Our findings highlight the importance of calibrating local AGBD data with GEDI forest structure metrics to improve biomass estimations at the footprint and national levels.

Remote Sensing in Ecology and ConservationVol. 11(6)
California Institute of Technology (US), Texas Tech University (US), University of California, Los Angeles (US), National University of Mar del Plata (AR), Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales Agrícolas y Pecuarias (MX), Secretaría de Investigación, Innovación y Educación Superior (MX)
Comisión Nacional Forestal
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
1.60
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.