Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Abstract Understanding the determinants of urban forest diversity and structure is important for preserving biodiversity and sustaining ecosystem services in cities. However, comprehensive field assessments are resource‐intensive, and landscape‐level approaches may overlook heterogeneity within urban regions. To address this challenge, we combined remote sensing with field inventories to comprehensively map and analyze urban forest attributes in forest patches across the Minneapolis‐St. Paul Metropolitan Area (MSPMA) in a multistep process. First, we developed predictive machine learning models of forest attributes by integrating data from forest inventories (from 40 12.5‐m‐radius plots) with Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) observations and Sentinel‐2‐derived land surface phenology (LSP). These models enabled accurate predictions of forest attributes, specifically nine metrics of plant diversity (tree species richness, tree abundance, and understory plant abundance), structure (average canopy height, dbh, and canopy density), and structural complexity (variability in canopy height, dbh, and canopy density) with relative errors ranging between 11% and 21%. Second, we applied these machine learning models to predict diversity metrics for 804 additional plots from GEDI and Sentinel‐2. Finally, we applied Bayesian multilevel models to the predicted diversity metrics to assess the influence of multiple factors—patch dimensions, landscape attributes, plot position, and jurisdictional agency—on these forest attributes across the 804 predicted plots. The models showed all predictors have some degree of effect on forest attributes, presenting varying explanatory power withR2values ranging from 0.071 to 0.405. Overall, plot characteristics (e.g., distance to nearest trail, proximity to forest edge) and jurisdictional agency explained a large portion of the variability across patches, whereas patch and landscape characteristics did not. The relative effect of plot versus management sets of predictors on the marginal ΔR2was heterogeneous across metrics and ecological subsections (an ecological classification designation). The multiplicity of determinants influencing urban forests emphasizes the intricate nature of urban ecosystems and highlights nuanced, heterogeneous relationships between urban ecological and anthropogenic factors that determine forest properties. Effectively enhancing biodiversity in urban forests requires assessments, management, and conservation strategies tailored for context‐specific characteristics.more » « less
-
This data was primarily collected to assess forest quality within the Minneapolis-St. Paul (MSP) Metropolitan Area and to link above-ground and below-ground properties as part of the goals of the MSP-LTER Urban Tree Canopy research group. Here, we sampled vegetation on 40 circular plots with a 12.5 m radius distributed across 13 parks, registering the date of sampling, park and management agency names, the plot number, and geolocation (latitude, longitude, and elevation). The plots were randomly selected based on GEDI (Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation instrument) 2021 footprints in the MSP Metropolitan Area along accessible forested areas inside public parks, where the management agency allowed sampling. In each plot, we measured forest structure and diversity metrics, species names and abundance, DBH, height, distance from the plot center, the height where each individual canopy starts, and the relative position, exposure, and density of each canopy. We also measured understory plant structure and diversity in 4 subplots per plot, totaling 160 subplots. In these subplots, we surveyed all individual plants with heights over 20 cm, recording species names and abundance, plant basal diameter, plant height, and the total number of branches. Furthermore, we assessed the canopy openness above each subplot by calculating percent DIFN (diffuse non-interceptance) from fish eye pictures of the canopy at 1.3 m over the subplot.more » « less
An official website of the United States government
