Computing maps of forest structural diversity: Aggregate late

point patterns
forests
biodiversity
summary statistics
remote sensing
Authors
Affiliation

Tuomas Rajala

Natural Resources Institute Finland

Annika Kangas

Natural Resources Institute Finland

Mari Myllymäki

Natural Resources Institute Finland

Published

August 26, 2025

Doi

Example data: https://github.com/antiphon/point-pattern-examples

Abstract

Local forest biodiversity hotspots are small areas within a landscape or a single stand, characterized by a high variability in e.g. species composition, size distribution or spatial pattern, in comparison to the surrounding areas. Their identification is important, e.g. for planning routes of harvesters, for selecting retention tree groups from the cutting area, and for selecting set-aside areas at landscape level. Traditional optical remote sensing enables prediction of forest attributes at large areas, but is typically restricted to a fixed spatial resolution. The fixed resolution is problematic especially for diversity indices as it contradicts the ecological meaning of local diversity which varies as a function of scale. While traditionally diversity predictions were produced with area-based approaches, combining 3D point-cloud-data-based single tree detection with field data enables the production of tree-level data, creating new opportunities for forest structure quantification. Particularly, at the single-tree level the ecological scale can be separated from the technical resolution. We demonstrate the importance of distinguishing scales when producing forest diversity maps. Furthermore, local diversity indices are typically computed at systematically or randomly selected locations in the landscape. We present new, alternative indices, defined through individual trees’ neighbourhoods, and show via simulated examples how the new indices greatly improve detection of local diversity. We also compare data from Panama and Finland at a shared ecological scale. We conclude that a tree-level data should not be aggregated to any technical scale before computing indicators. The separation of scales also helps produce indicator maps comparable across different studies. We recommend conditional indicators of local diversity over unconditional ones.

Figure 2. Comparison of local Gini-Simpson diversity maps on a simulated point pattern, with n ≈ (860,870,440) and domain Gini-Simpson diversity 0.64. Top section: The pattern, exhibiting species segregation (west), neutrality (center) and species mingling (east). Bottom section: Gini-Simpson diversity estimated either by aggregate first-approach (top), locally unconditionally (middle) and locally conditionally (bottom). Statistically deviating regions emphasised, tested over scales 5, 10 and 15 meters. Index scaled by the per-map mean index.