Choosing A DIVA: A Comparison of Emerging Digital Imagery Vegetation Analysis Techniques

Authors

Christopher F. Jorgensen, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow
Ryan J. Stutzman, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow
Lars C. AndersonFollow
Suzanne E. DeckerFollow
Larkin A. Powell, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow
Walter H. Schacht, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow
Joseph J. Fontaine, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow

Date of this Version

2013

Citation

Published in Applied Vegetation Science 16 (2013) 552–560. DOI: 10.1111/avsc.12037

Comments

© 2013 International Association for Vegetation Science

Abstract

Question: What is the precision of five methods of measuring vegetation structure using ground-based digital imagery and processing techniques?

Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.

Methods: Vertical herbaceous cover was recorded using digital imagery techniques at two distinct locations in a mixed-grass prairie. The precision of five ground-based digital imagery vegetation analysis (DIVA)methods for measuring vegetation structure was tested using a split-split plot analysis of covariance. Variability within each DIVA technique was estimated using coefficient of variation of mean percentage cover.

Results: Vertical herbaceous cover estimates differed among DIVA techniques. Additionally, environmental conditions affected the vertical vegetation obstruction estimates for certain digital imagery methods, while other techniques were more adept at handling various conditions. Overall, percentage vegetation cover values differed among techniques, but the precision of four of the five techniques was consistently high.

Conclusions: DIVA procedures are sufficient for measuring various heights and densities of standing herbaceous cover. Moreover, digital imagery techniques can reduce measurement error associated withmultiple observers’ standing herbaceous cover estimates, allowing greater opportunity to detect patterns associated with vegetation structure.