Table 2 A comparison of selected studies detailing previous work with DTP to that of the proposed methodology. Single asterisk indicates values not explicitly reported but calculated based on values presented in study. Double asterisk indicates values not reported but estimated based on figures in study. NR not explicitly reported
Study | Goal | Scale | No. of species | No. of trees | No. of images | Avg. no. of images/tree | RMSE of DBH—cm (RMSE%) | Mean DBH (SD; cm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liang et al. 2014a | Tree detection and DBH | Plot | 2+ (NR) | 25 | 973 | 38.9 | 2.39 (6.60 %) | 31.86 (NR) |
Miller et al. 2015 | Crown and stem attributes | Tree | 4 | 30 | 150–180 | 150–180 | 0.021 (9.60%) | 2.198 (0.013) |
Forsman et al. 2016 | DBH and tree location | Plot | 3+ (NR) | 12–38 | 36 | 0.95–3 | 7.4 (33.8%*) | 21.92* (NR) |
Mikita et al. 2016 | DBH and volume | Stand | 1 | 118 | 1774 | 15 | 0.911 (2.39%) | 38.16 (7.01) |
Bauwens et al. 2017 | Trunk shape | Tree | 3 | 37 | 188 | 188 | < 1 (NR) | 122.5 (53.57*) |
Fang and Strimbu 2017 | DBH, taper | Tree | 1 | 18 | 32** | 32** | 1.71 (5.60 %) | 30.61 (6.85) |
Mokroš et al. 2018 | DBH, detection | Plot | 1 | 74 | 440–1271 | 6–17.2 | 4.41–5.98 (16.7–20.9%) | 25.30 (NR) |
Proposed | DBH, taper, volume | Tree | 6 | 15 | 12 | 12 | – | 24.73 (8.93) |