Why measure leaf area index?
Leaf area index (LAI) is one of the most widely used measurements for describing plant canopy structure. LAI is also useful for understanding canopy function because many of the biosphere-atmosphere exchanges of mass and energy occur at the leaf surface. For these reasons, LAI is often a key biophysical variable used in biogeochemical, hydrological, and ecological models. Leaf area index is also commonly used as a measure of crop and forest growth and productivity at spatial scales ranging from the plot to the globe. In this article, learn how to measure leaf area index, what it is, and how to use it.
Keep current with knowledge base articles from METER Environment
In the past, measuring leaf area index (LAI) was difficult and time consuming. However, theory and technology developed in recent years have made measuring LAI much simpler and more feasible for a wide range of canopies. Download this application guide for a brief introduction to the theory and instruments used to measure leaf area index. Several scenarios and special considerations are discussed, which will help individuals choose and apply the most appropriate method for their research needs.
What is leaf area index (LAI)?
Leaf area index (LAI) quantifies the amount of leaf material in a canopy. By definition, it is the ratio of one-sided leaf area per unit ground area. LAI is unitless because it is a ratio of areas. For example, a canopy with an LAI of 1 has a 1:1 ratio of leaf area to ground area (Figure 1a). A canopy with an leaf area index of 3 would have a 3:1 ratio of leaf area to ground area (Figure 1b).
Globally, LAI is highly variable. Some desert ecosystems have a leaf area index of less than 1, while the densest tropical forests can have an LAI as high as 9. Mid-latitude forests and shrublands typically have LAI values between 3 and 6.
Seasonally, annual and deciduous canopies and croplands can exhibit large variations in LAI. For example, from seeding to maturity, maize leaf area index can range from 0 to 6. Obviously, LAI is a useful metric for describing both spatial and temporal patterns of canopy growth and productivity.
Learn more about the basics of leaf area index (LAI) in the video below. Dr. Steve Garrity discusses the theory behind the measurement, direct and indirect methods, variability among those methods, things to consider when choosing a method, and applications of leaf area index.
How to measure leaf area index
There is no one best way to measure LAI. Each method has advantages and disadvantages. The method you choose will depend largely on your research objectives. The researcher who needs a single estimate of LAI might use a different method than the one who is monitoring changes in leaf area index over time. For example, the grassland researcher may prefer a different method than the forestry researcher. In this guide, we’ll discuss the theoretical basis of each of the major methods along with key advantages and limitations.
Traditionally, researchers measured leaf area index by harvesting all the leaves from a plot and painstakingly measuring the area of each leaf. Modern equipment like flatbed scanners have made this process more efficient, but it is still labor intensive, time consuming, and destructive. In tall forest canopies, it may not even be feasible. It does, however, remain the most accurate method of calculating leaf area index because each individual leaf is physically measured. Litter traps are another way to directly measure LAI, but they don’t work well in evergreen canopies and can only capture information from leaves that have senesced and abscised from the plant.
Several decades ago, canopy researchers began to look for new ways to measure LAI, both to save time and to avoid destroying the ecosystems they were trying to measure. These indirect methods infer LAI from measurements of related variables, such as the amount of light that is transmitted through or reflected by a canopy.
Hemisphere photography was one of the first methods used to indirectly estimate leaf area index. Researchers would photograph the canopy from the ground using a fisheye lens. Photographs were originally analyzed by researchers themselves. Now, most researchers use specialized software to analyze images and differentiate between vegetated and non-vegetated pixels.
Advantages. Hemispherical photography has decided advantages. First, it delivers more than just leaf area index measurements. It can also provide canopy measurements such as gap fraction, sunfleck timing and duration, and other canopy architecture metrics. Second, the canopy images can be archived for later use or for reanalysis as methods change and software programs improve.
Limitations. Hemispherical photography has drawbacks, however. In spite of the fact that the images are now digitally processed, user subjectivity remains a significant issue. Users must select image brightness thresholds that distinguish sky pixels from vegetation pixels, causing LAI values to vary from user to user or when using different image analysis algorithms.
Hemispherical photography also remains time consuming. It takes time to acquire good quality images in the field and more time to analyze the images in the lab. Also, sky conditions must be uniformly overcast when the pictures are taken. Hemispherical photography does not work well for short canopies like wheat and corn since the camera body, lens, and tripod may not physically fit under the canopy.
Note: For some users, instruments that measure PAR offer a shortcut. Some models use LAI values to estimate PAR. In this case, the PAR instrument can be used to directly estimate below-canopy levels of PAR, improving the accuracy of the model.
Several commercially available instruments, including METER’s LP-80 ceptometer, offer an alternative to hemispherical photography. They estimate LAI using the amount of light energy transmitted by a plant canopy. The idea is fairly simple; a very dense canopy will absorb more light than a sparse canopy. This means there must be some relationship between LAI and light interception. Beer’s law provides the theoretical basis for this relationship. For the purposes of environmental biophysics, Beer’s law is formulated as
where PARt is transmitted photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) measured near the ground surface, PARi is PAR that is incident at the top of the canopy, z is the path length of photons through some attenuating medium, and k is the extinction coefficient. In the case of vegetation canopies, z accounts for LAI, since leaves are the medium through which photons are attenuated. You can see that if we know k and measure PARt and PARi, it may be possible to invert Equation 1 to calculate z as an estimate of LAI. This approach is commonly referred to as the PAR inversion technique. The real world is slightly more complex, but as you will see in Section 3, Beer’s law is the foundation for estimating LAI using measurements of incident and transmitted PAR.
Advantages. The PAR inversion technique is non-destructive, one obvious but major advantage that allows a canopy to be sampled extensively and repeatedly through time. The PAR-inversion technique is also attractive because it has a solid foundation in radiative transfer theory and biophysics and is applicable in a wide variety of canopy types. For these reasons, the PAR-inversion technique is currently a standard and well-accepted procedure.
In addition to handheld instruments like the METER LP-80 ceptometer, standard PAR sensors (a.k.a. quantum sensors) can also be used to measure transmitted radiation for a PAR-inversion model. The advantage to using PAR sensors as opposed to a purpose-built, handheld LAI instrument is that PAR sensors can be left in the field to continuously measure changes in PAR transmittance. This may be useful when studying rapid changes in canopy LAI or when it is not feasible to visit a field site frequently enough to capture temporal variability in LAI with a handheld instrument.
Limitations. The PAR inversion technique has a few limitations. It requires measurements of both transmitted (below-canopy) and incident (above-canopy) PAR under identical or very similar light conditions. This can be challenging in very tall forest canopies, although incident PAR measurements can be made in large canopy gaps or clearings. Also, in extremely dense canopies, PAR absorption may be nearly complete, leaving little transmitted light to be measured at the bottom of a canopy. This makes it difficult to distinguish changes or differences in LAI when LAI is very high. Finally, estimates of LAI obtained from measurements of transmitted PAR can be affected by foliage clumping. Errors in LAI estimation associated with clumping can usually be alleviated by collecting numerous spatially distributed samples of transmitted PAR.
Another method for estimating LAI uses reflected rather than transmitted light. Radiation that has been reflected from green, healthy vegetation has a very distinct spectrum (Figure 3). In fact, some scientists have proposed finding potentially habitable planets outside our solar system by looking for this unique spectral signal. A typical vegetation reflectance spectrum has very low reflectance in the visible portion of the electromagnetic spectrum (~400 to 700 nm, which is also the PAR region). However, in the near-infrared (NIR) region (> 700 nm) reflectance can be as high as 50%. The exact amount of reflectance at each wavelength depends on the concentration of various foliar pigments like chlorophyll and canopy structure (e.g., arrangement and number of leaf layers).
Advantages. Early attempts to use spectral reflectance data to quantify canopy properties found that the ratio of red and NIR reflectance could be used to estimate the percent canopy cover for a given area. Later efforts have produced a number of different wavelength combinations that relate to various canopy properties. These wavelength combinations, or spectral vegetation indices, are now routinely used as proxies for LAI or, through empirical modeling, are used to directly estimate LAI.
Until recently, one of the only ways to collect reflectance data was with a handheld spectrometer—an expensive, delicate instrument designed for the lab, not the field. But sensor options have expanded with the development of lightweight multiband radiometers that measure a specific vegetation index. These little sensors are inexpensive and don’t require a lot of power, making them perfect for field monitoring.
This is good news for anyone who wants to monitor changes in LAI over time, including researchers interested in phenology, canopy growth, detecting canopy stress and decline, or detecting diseased plants.
Vegetation indices offer another advantage: many earth-observing satellites like Quickbird, Landsat, and MODIS measure reflectance that can be used to calculate vegetation indices. Since these satellites observe large areas, they may serve as a way of scaling observations made at the local scale to much broader areas. Conversely, measurements made at the local scale with a multiband radiometer can be a useful source of ground-truth data for satellite-derived vegetation indices.
Multiband radiometers also offer a top-down option for extremely short canopies like shortgrass prairie and forbs. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to use most LAI estimation methods with these canopies because the equipment is too big to fully fit beneath the canopy. Vegetation indices are measured using sensors that view the canopy from the top down, making them a great alternative in cases like these.
Limitations. One of the biggest limitations of vegetation indices is that they are unitless values and when used alone, do not provide an absolute measure of leaf area index. If you don’t need absolute LAI values, the vegetation index value can be used as a proxy for LAI. If you need absolute values of LAI, however, you will need to use another method for measuring LAI in conjunction with the vegetation index until enough colocated data has been gathered to produce an empirical model. This method can also be limited due to the location of sensors. By nature, reflectance must be measured from the top of a plant canopy, which may not be feasible in some tall canopies.
Using the LP-80 ceptometer
The METER LP-80 ceptometer uses the PAR inversion technique for calculating leaf area index (LAI). The LP-80 uses a modified version of the canopy light transmission and scattering model developed by Norman and Jarvis (1975). Five key variables used as inputs are discussed below.
τ (ratio of transmitted and incident PAR): The most influential factor for determining LAI with any PAR inversion model is the ratio of transmitted to incident PAR. This ratio (τ) is calculated using measurements of transmitted PAR near the ground surface and incident PAR above the canopy.
τ is a relatively intuitive variable to understand. When LAI is low, most incident radiation is transmitted through the canopy rather than being absorbed or reflected, thus τ will be close to 1. As the amount of leaf material in the canopy increases, there is a proportional increase in the amount of light absorbed, and a decreasing proportion of light will be transmitted to the ground surface. The LP-80 consists of a light bar, which has 80 linearly spaced PAR sensors and an external PAR sensor. In typical scenarios, the light bar is used to measure PAR under the canopy, whereas the external sensor is meant to quantify incident PAR, either above the canopy or in a clearing.
θ (solar zenith angle): θ is the angular elevation of the sun in the sky with respect to the zenith, or the point directly over your head, at any given time, date, and geographical location (Figure 4). The solar zenith angle is used to describe the path length of photons through the canopy (e.g., in a closed canopy, the path length increases as the sun approaches the horizon) and for determining the interaction between beam radiation and leaf orientation (discussed below).
θ is automatically calculated by the LP-80 using inputs of local time, date, latitude, and longitude. Therefore, it is critical to make sure that these are correctly set in the LP-80 configuration menu.
ƒb (beam fraction): In an outdoor environment, the ultimate source of shortwave radiation is the sun. When the sky is clear, most radiation comes as a beam directly from the sun (Figure 5a). In the presence of clouds or haze, however, some portion of the beam radiation is scattered by water vapor and aerosols in the atmosphere (Figure 5b). This scattered component is referred to as diffuse radiation. ƒb is calculated as the ratio between diffuse and beam radiation. The LP-80 automatically calculates ƒb by comparing measured values of incident PAR to the solar constant, which is a known value of light energy from the sun (assuming clear sky conditions) at any given time and place on earth’s surface.
χ (leaf angle distribution): The leaf angle distribution parameter (χ) describes the projection of leaf area onto a surface. Imagine, for example, a light source directly overhead. The shadow cast by a leaf with a vertical orientation would be much smaller than the shadow cast by a leaf with a horizontal orientation. In nature, canopies are typically composed of leaves with a mixture of orientations. This mixture is often best described by what is known as the spherical leaf distribution with a χ value = 1 (the default in the LP-80). Canopies with predominantly horizontal orientations, such as strawberries, have χ values > 1, whereas canopies with predominantly vertical orientations, like some grasses, have χ values < 1.
In general, χ describes how much light will be absorbed by the leaves in a canopy at different times of day as the sun moves across the sky. The estimation of leaf area index with the PAR inversion technique is not overly sensitive to the χ value, especially when sampling under uniformly diffuse sky conditions (Garrigues et al., 2008). The χ value is most important when working with canopies displaying extremely vertical or horizontal characteristics and when working under clear sky conditions where fb is less than approximately 0.4. For additional information about leaf angle distribution, refer to Campbell and Norman (1998).
K (extinction coefficient): The canopy extinction coefficient, K, describes how much radiation is absorbed by the canopy at a given solar zenith angle and canopy leaf angle distribution. The concept of an extinction coefficient comes from Beer’s law (Equation 1). A detailed explanation of the extinction coefficient can quickly become complicated. For LAI estimation, it is sufficient to know that the angle of solar beam penetration interacts with leaf angle distribution to determine the probability that a photon will be intercepted by a leaf. For purposes of estimating LAI, K is calculated as
From this equation, it should be obvious that, for any given canopy, K only changes as the sun moves across the sky. The LP-80 automatically calculates K each time it measures LAI. Once K is calculated and all other variables quantified, LAI is calculated as
where L is LAI and A is leaf absorptivity. By default, A is set to 0.9 in the LP-80. Leaf absorptivity is a highly consistent property for most healthy green foliage, and a value of 0.9 is a good approximation for most situations. In extreme cases (e.g., extremely young leaves, highly pubescent or waxy leaves, senescent leaves), A may deviate from 0.9, leading to errors in estimates of LAI. If you are using the LP-80 in non-typical conditions, you may need to manually combine the outputs from the LP-80 with a modified A value to calculate LAI.
Using the LP-80 in short canopies (cereal crops, grasslands)
In typical scenarios, it is best to hold the LP-80 ceptometer at a consistent height underneath the canopy, while the attached external PAR sensor is held above the canopy. Use the attached bubble level to ensure that the light bar and external PAR sensor are held level. For row crops or small sample plots, researchers often mount the external sensor on a tripod in between rows or above the canopy. The LP-80 makes simultaneous above- and below-canopy PAR measurements each time the button is pressed, accounting for any changes in light conditions. If the canopy is short enough, an even easier approach is to use the ceptometer to acquire both above- and below-canopy measurements. Simply hold the LP-80 above the canopy to acquire an incident PAR measurement. Update the above-canopy measurement every few minutes or as sky conditions change (e.g., due to variable clouds). In either case, all the other variables are measured and calculated automatically, and leaf area index (LAI) is updated with each below-canopy measurement.
Using the LP-80 in tall canopies (forests, riparian areas)
In tall canopies, it is often not practical to measure above- and below-canopy PAR with one instrument. When using the LP-80 in tall canopies, there are a couple of options available for making above- and below-canopy measurements of PAR.
One option is to mount a PAR sensor above the canopy or in a wide clearing with an unobstructed view of the sky. This method requires some additional post-processing of the data but can give good results. The PAR sensor needs to be attached to its own data logger, which should be configured to acquire measurements at regular intervals (e.g., every 1 to 5 minutes) so that any variation in ambient light levels will be captured. Collect below-canopy measurements with the ceptometer, then combine the data in post processing using the timestamps to pair each above- and below-canopy measurement. Calculate τ with each pair, which can then be used as an input to Equation 3.
The second option is useful when it is not feasible to place a PAR sensor above the canopy or when a PAR sensor or data logger is not available. If this is the case, use the LP-80 to measure incident PAR in a location outside the canopy with an unobstructed view of the sky. In measurement mode, choose whether measuring incident or transmitted radiation. When using the LP-80 itself to take above- and below-canopy readings, take the variability of sky conditions into account.
On a clear sky day, it is easiest to acquire samples toward the middle of the day, since the light levels won’t change much over the span of 20 to 30 minutes. When sky conditions are uniformly overcast, PAR conditions can remain for longer periods of time, giving a longer measurement window before needing to reacquire an above-canopy measurement.
If sky conditions are highly variable, however, we do not recommend this method, unless it is possible to constantly update the incident PAR measurement. The LP-80 automatically calculates LAI with each below-canopy measurement using the stored incident PAR measurement. Reacquire an incident PAR measurement any time light conditions change (e.g., when cloud obstructs the solar disk or after ~ 20-30 minutes have passed) to prevent error in the LAI calculation.
Clumping and spatial sampling
In most canopies, leaf area index is variable across space. For example, in row crops, LAI can range from 0 to 2-3 within a distance of 1 meter. Even in forests and other natural canopies, variable tree spacing, branching characteristics, and leaf arrangement on stems cause clumping. This means that point-based measurements of LAI can be highly biased. Lang and Yueqin (1986) found that averaging several measurements along a horizontal transect helped alleviate biases associated with clumping at fine spatial scales.
The LP-80 uses a similar approach, averaging light measurements across eight groups of ten sensors situated along an 80 cm long probe. Although this approach reduces errors at the local scale, it may not account for variability in leaf area index at the canopy scale. Researchers must consider spatial variability in canopy LAI when developing a sampling scheme. In general, more heterogeneous canopies will require more LAI measurements across space in order to obtain an LAI value that is representative of the entire canopy.
The LP-80 is capable of accurately measuring leaf area index in both clear-sky and overcast conditions. This is because the LAI model used by the LP-80 accounts for changes in diffuse and beam radiation (ƒb), solar zenith angle (θ), and because incident and transmitted radiation are measured simultaneously when using an above-canopy PAR sensor. Errors associated with incorrectly specifying the leaf angle distribution (χ) are most pronounced when sampling under clear-sky conditions (Garrigues et al., 2008). This is because there is a larger proportion of radiation coming from a single angle (the beam radiation directly from the sun). Under these conditions, it is important to correctly model how leaf angle and beam penetration angle interact. So, when sampling under clear-sky conditions, make sure to use an appropriate χ value.
Influence of non-photosynthetic elements
In forests, shrublands, and other areas where woody species are present, LP-80 measurements will be influenced by elements other than leaves. For example, tree boles, branches, and stems will intercept some radiation and thus have an effect on estimates of LAI obtained with the PAR inversion technique. In fact, some researchers refer to the measurement obtained from the LP-80 and similar instruments as plant area index (PAI) rather than LAI, in order to acknowledge the contribution of non-leaf material to the measurement. It should come as no surprise that PAI will be higher than LAI in any given ecosystem. However, values of PAI and LAI are often not too different because leaf area is generally much larger than branch area, and the majority of branches are shaded by leaves (Kucharik et al., 1998). In deciduous ecosystems, the contribution of woody material can be accounted for by acquiring measurements during the leaf-off stage.
Using the SRS-NDVI sensor
The SRS-NDVI sensor measures canopy reflectance in red and NIR wavelengths, which allows for calculation of the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI). In turn, NDVI can be used to estimate LAI. We provide a brief overview of the SRS-NDVI operating theory here. The SRS-NDVI measures canopy reflectance in red and NIR wavelengths, and its measurements can be used to calculate or approximate LAI. Red and NIR reflectances are used in the following equation to calculate NDVI
where ρ denotes percent reflectance in NIR and red wavelengths. Mathematically, NDVI can range from -1 to 1. As LAI increases, red reflectance will typically decrease due to the increasing canopy chlorophyll content, whereas NIR reflectance increases due to expanding mesophyll cells and increasing canopy structural complexity. So, under typical field conditions, NDVI values range from around 0 to 1, representing low and high LAIs, respectively.
In cases like phenology and stay-green phenotyping where absolute values of LAI are not required, NDVI values can be used directly as proxies for LAI. For example, if the objective of a study is to track the temporal patterns of canopy growth and senescence (Figure 6), then it may be adequate to simply use NDVI as the metric. If research objectives require estimates of actual LAI, it is possible to establish a canopy-specific model that will allow NDVI to be converted to LAI. This method is described in the next section.
Developing field-based NDVI-LAI regression models
To directly estimate leaf area index using NDVI values, develop a site-specific or crop-specific correlative relationship. The best way is to take colocated measurements of NDVI and LAI (e.g., using a LP-80 ceptometer). For example, colocated measurements of LAI and NDVI were acquired during a period of rapid canopy growth. Least squares regression was used to fit a linear model to the data (Figure 7). With this model, it is possible to use NDVI to predict LAI without making independent measurements.
Developing a robust empirical model involves some effort, but once the model is complete, one can continuously monitor changes in LAI with an SRS-NDVI sensor deployed over a plot or canopy long term. This method saves significant effort and time in the long run.
SRS-NDVI sampling considerations
The SRS-NDVI is designed to be used as a dual-view sensor. This means that one sensor, having a hemispherical field of view, should be mounted facing toward the sky. The other sensor, having a 36° field of view (18° half angle), should be mounted facing downward at the canopy. Down- and up-looking measurements collected from each sensor are used to calculate percent reflectance in the red and NIR bands. Percent reflectances are used as inputs to the NDVI equation (Equation 4).
The up-looking sensor must be placed above any obstructions that will block the sensor’s view of the sky. The down-looking sensor should be directed at the region of the canopy to be measured. The size of the area measured by the down-looking sensor is dependent on the sensor’s height above the canopy. The spot diameter of the down-looking sensor is calculated as
where γ is the half angle of the field of view (18° for the SRS-NDVI), and h is the height of the sensor above the canopy. This is valid for measuring spot diameter when the down-looking sensor is pointed straight down (i.e., nadir view angle). In cases where the down-looking sensor is pointing off-nadir, the spot will be oblique and will be larger than that calculated by Equation 5.
To quantify spatial variability in LAI, several down-looking sensors can be set up to monitor different portions of the canopy. For example, several sensors were mounted above the canopy in a deciduous forest to monitor differences in spring phenology of several trees. Measurements of NDVI revealed differences in the timing and magnitude of leaf growth among the trees that were measured (Figure 8). A similar approach could be used to monitor the response of plants in individual plots subject to experimental manipulation or to monitor growth patterns across different agricultural units.
Influence of soil background NDVI measurements
Considerable error in NDVI measurements can occur when soil is in the field of view of the SRS-NDVI sensor or in situations where the amount of soil in the field of view changes due to canopy growth (e.g., from early- to late-growing season). Qi et al. (1994) showed that NDVI is sensitive to both soil texture and soil moisture. This soil sensitivity can make it difficult to compare NDVI values collected at different locations or at different times of the year. It can also make it difficult to establish a reliable NDVI-LAI regression model. The Modified Soil Adjusted Vegetation Index (MSAVI) was developed by Qi et al. (1994) as a vegetation index that has little to no soil sensitivity. MSAVI is calculated as
The advantages of MSAVI include: (1) no soil parameter adjustment required, and (2) it uses the exact same inputs as NDVI (red and NIR reflectances), meaning it can be calculated from the outputs of any NDVI sensor.
Dealing with NDVI saturation in high-LAI canopies
In addition to soil sensitivity, NDVI also suffers from a lack of sensitivity to changes in LAI when LAI is greater than approximately 3 to 4, depending on the canopy (Figure 9). Decreased NDVI sensitivity at high LAI is due to the fact that chlorophyll is a highly efficient absorber of red radiation. Thus, at some point, adding more chlorophyll to the canopy (e.g., through the addition of leaf material) will not appreciably change red reflectance (see Figure 3).
Several solutions to NDVI saturation have been developed. One of the simplest solutions uses a weighting factor that is applied to the near infrared reflectance in both the numerator and denominator of Equation 4. The resulting index is called the Wide Dynamic Range Vegetation Index (WDRVI; Gitelson, 2004). The weighting factor can be any number between 0 and 1. As the weighting factor approaches 0, the linearity of the WDRVI-LAI correlation tends to increase at the cost of reducing sensitivity to LAI changes in sparse canopies.
The Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) is another vegetation index that has higher sensitivity to high LAI compared to NDVI. EVI was originally designed to be measured from satellites and included a blue band as an input to alleviate problems associated with looking through the atmosphere to earth’s surface from orbit. Recently, a new formulation of EVI has been developed that does not require a blue band. This modified version of EVI is referred to as EVI2 (Jiang et al., 2008). Similar to the MSAVI index, EVI2 uses the exact same inputs as NDVI (red and NIR reflectances) and is calculated as
Another advantage of EVI2 also is that it has less soil sensitivity compared to NDVI. Thus, EVI2 is a good all-around vegetation index for estimating LAI since it has low sensitivity to soil and has a linear relationship with LAI.
Learn more about NDVI
In the following webinar, Dr. Steve Garrity discusses NDVI and PRI theory, methods, limitations, applications, and more. He also explains spectral reflectance sensors and their measurement considerations.
Quick LAI Method Comparison Chart
|Method||Relative Cost||Temporal Sampling||Suitability for Tall Canopies||Suitability for Short Canopies||Spacial Scaling||Ease of Collecting Samples||Vertical Profiling Samples|
|Litter traps||M*||Single||H||L||L - M||M||No|
|PAR inversion (LP-80)||M||Both*||H*||H||M||H||Yes|
|Vegetation index||L - VH||Continous||M**||VH||M -H||VH||No|
|*Labor intensive||**Single with LP-80|
Continuous with subcanopy PAR sensors
|*Requires access to top of canopy or large open area|
**Requires access to top of canopy
Accuracy: 10% or better for spectral irradiance and radiance values
Dimensions: 43 x 40 x 27 mm
Calibration: NIST traceable calibration to known spectral irradiance and radiance
Measurement type: < 300 ms
Connector type: 3.5 mm (stereo) plug or stripped and tinned wires
Communication: SDI-12 digital sensor
Data logger compatibility: (not exclusive) METER Em50/60 series, Campbell Scientific
NDVI bands: Centered at 630 nm and 800 nm with 50 nm and 40 nm Full Width Half Maximum (FWHM), respectively
Operating environment: 0 to 5°C, 0 to 100% relative humidity
Probe length: 86.5 cm
Number of sensors: 80
Overall length: 102 cm (40.25 in)
Microcontroller dimensions: 15.8 x 9.5 x 3.3 cm (6.2 x 3.75 x 1.3 in)
PAR range: 0 to >2,500 µmol m-2 s-1
Resolution: 1 µmol m-2 s-1
Minimum spatial resolution: 1cm
Data storage capacity: 1MB RAM, 9000 readings
Unattended logging interval: User selectable, between 1 and 60 minutes
Instrument weight: 1.22 kg (2.7 lbs)
Data retrieval: Direct via RS-232 cable
Power: 4 AA alkaline cells
External PAR sensor connector: Locking 3-pin circular connector (2 m cable)
Extension cable option: 7.6 m (25 ft)
More resources that answer the questions: What is leaf area index and how to measure leaf area index.
Campbell, Gaylon S., and John M. Norman. “The light environment of plant canopies.” In An Introduction to Environmental Biophysics, pp. 247-278. Springer New York, 1998.
Garrigues, Sébastien, N. V. Shabanov, K. Swanson, J. T. Morisette, F. Baret, and R. B. Myneni. “Intercomparison and sensitivity analysis of Leaf Area Index retrievals from LAI-2000, AccuPAR, and digital hemispherical photography over croplands.” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 148, no. 8 (2008): 1193-1209.
Gitelson, Anatoly A. “Wide dynamic range vegetation index for remote quantification of biophysical characteristics of vegetation.” Journal of Plant Physiology 161, no. 2 (2004): 165-173.
Hyer, Edward J., and Scott J. Goetz. “Comparison and sensitivity analysis of instruments and radiometric methods for LAI estimation: assessments from a boreal forest site.” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 122, no. 3 (2004): 157-174.
Jiang, Zhangyan, Alfredo R. Huete, Kamel Didan, and Tomoaki Miura. “Development of a two-band enhanced vegetation index without a blue band.” Remote Sensing of Environment 112, no. 10 (2008): 3833-3845.
Kucharik, Christopher J., John M. Norman, and Stith T. Gower. “Measurements of branch area and adjusting leaf area index indirect measurements.” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 91, no. 1 (1998): 69-88.
Lang, A. R. G., and Xiang Yueqin. “Estimation of leaf area index from transmission of direct sunlight in discontinuous canopies.” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 37, no. 3 (1986): 229-243.
Norman, J. M., and P. G. Jarvis. “Photosynthesis in Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.). III. Measurements of canopy structure and interception of radiation.” Journal of Applied Ecology (1974): 375-398.
Rouse Jr, J_W, R. H. Haas, J. A. Schell, and D. W. Deering. “Monitoring vegetation systems in the Great Plains with ERTS.” (1974).
Qi, Jiaguo, Abdelghani Chehbouni, A. R. Huete, Y. H. Kerr, and Soroosh Sorooshian. “A modified soil adjusted vegetation index.” Remote Sensing of Environment 48, no. 2 (1994): 119-126.
The LP-80: pain-free leaf area index
Dr. Gaylon S. Campbell
Leaf area index (LAI) is just a single number—a statistical snapshot of a canopy taken at one particular time. But that one number can lead to significant insight, because it can be used to model and understand key canopy processes, including radiation interception, energy conversion, momentum, gas exchange, precipitation interception, and evapotranspiration.
Older LAI methods are tedious
Leaf area index is defined as the one-sided green leaf area of a canopy or plant community per unit ground area. It can be found by harvesting and measuring the area of every leaf in a canopy covering one unit area of ground. In 1981, Anderson developed a less destructive method for finding LAI. Using hemispherical photographs looking upwards, she estimated the fraction of light that penetrated the canopy and applied a predictive mathematical model to approximate leaf area index.
Evaluating “fisheye” canopy pictures was tedious work. An assistant would usually lay a grid over each picture and count what fraction of the squares was light. One lab tech recalls, “After too many hours looking at those pictures, I used to dream in checkers.” The “checkers” evaluation allowed investigators to find the probability that a random beam of light would penetrate that particular section of canopy.
Getting a value for leaf area index is often just a point along the way. If you plan to use LAI to model environmental interactions of the canopy, measuring photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) may be a more direct route. That’s because many of these models are using LAI to predict PAR in the first place. It’s possible to go back the other way—to use PAR to estimate LAI. But why do that if PAR is the number you really want? You may want to evaluate whether LAI is the most useful parameter for your particular application. It is sometimes more straightforward, and usually more accurate, to simply measure intercepted PAR and use that data directly in an appropriate model.
The mathematical model that converts this fraction of light into an estimate of leaf area index is relatively simple. To understand how it works, picture holding a leaf with an area of ten square centimeters horizontally over a large white square. It would cast a shadow of ten square centimeters. Then, randomly place an identically sized leaf over the square. In all probability, the shadow cast would now be twenty square centimeters, although there is a small chance that the leaves might overlap. When a third leaf is added, the probability of overlap increases. As more and more leaves are randomly placed, eventually, the white square will be completely shaded. And though leaf area will increase as leaves are added, the shaded area will remain constant because all light has been intercepted.
The LP-80 solves the equation for you
The equation describing this phenomenon (see Solving the Equation below for its mathematical derivation) is
τ is the probability that a ray will penetrate the canopy, L is the leaf area index of the canopy, and K is the extinction coefficient of the canopy. If you measure photosynthetically active radiation both above and below a canopy on a bright sunny day, the ratio of the two (PAR below to PAR above) is approximately equal to τ. If you know K, you can find leaf area index (L), by inverting the equation:
The LP-80 basically solves this equation to find leaf area index. But there are a couple of complicating factors. In constructing the model, we assumed that the leaves in our artificial canopy were horizontal and black and that all radiation came directly from the sun. In reality, the angle of the sun changes over the course of the day, and real canopies have quite complex architecture. Also, some radiation is scattered both from leaves in the canopy and from the sky. A full model for finding the leaf area index from a measure of photosynthetically active radiation includes corrections for all of these factors.
This equation, which is the one actually used by the LP-80, adjusts for the amount of light absorbed (and not scattered) by the leaves in the term A and for the fraction light which enters the canopy as a beam (as opposed to diffuse light from the sky or clouds) in the term fb. K, the extinction coefficient of the canopy, includes variables for the zenith angle of the sun and for leaf distribution. If you specify your location and set the internal clock to local time, the LP-80 calculates the zenith angle of the sun at the time of each measurement. Leaf angle distribution is assumed to be spherical unless you indicate otherwise.
Solving the equation
If we divide a canopy of randomly distributed horizontal black leaves into so many layers that each layer contains an infinitesimally small fraction of leaf area (dL), the change in radiation from the top to the bottom of that layer is
In other words, the change in the average quantity of sunlight passing through this fraction of the canopy (dSb) is equal to negative (because the amount of light decreases as leaf area increases) the average amount of radiant power per unit area (Sb) times the change in leaf area index (dL). This is a variable separable differential equation. Dividing both sides by Sb and integrating from the top of the canopy downward, we obtain
Performing the integration gives
Taking the exponential of both sides gives
Sbo is the radiation on a horizontal surface above the canopy; τ is the probability that a ray will penetrate the canopy, which is the same as the ratio of the beam radiation at the bottom of the canopy to the beam radiation at the top (since we assume no scattering of radiation in the canopy). For canopies with non-horizontal leaves, the result is the same except L is replaced by KL, where K is the extinction coefficient of the canopy.
Anderson, Margaret C. “The geometry of leaf distribution in some south-eastern Australian forests.” Agricultural Meteorology 25 (1981): 195-206. Article link.
The LP-80: How accurate is it?
The LP-80 makes fast, direct measurements of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) in canopies. It gives instant PAR measurements when you turn it on, and it also provides a measurement of Leaf Area Index–LAI. But where does this LAI measurement come from, and how accurate is it?
Canopies are variable. The LP-80 accounts for it using χ.
Leaf area index is the one-sided, green leaf area of a canopy or plant community per unit ground area. To directly measure LAI, you would have to measure the area of each leaf in the canopy above a unit of ground area. Because this method is both destructive and incredibly time consuming, it is rarely used. All other measurements of Leaf area index, from hemispherical photos to optical sensors, attempt to approximate this value. The LP-80 finds LAI by measuring photosynthetically active radiation and converting that PAR value into leaf area index. The LP-80 uses several variables to compute leaf area index (see The LP-80–pain-free leaf area index). One of these variables, χ, describes the orientation of leaves in the canopy.
What is χ?
χ is the “canopy angle distribution parameter.” It describes the architecture of a canopy–how its leaves are oriented in space. Leaves that are distributed randomly in space are said to have a spherical distribution, meaning that if each leaf in the canopy were carefully moved without changing its orientation, the leaves could be used to cover the surface of a sphere. A canopy with spherically distributed leaves has a χ value of 1.
Many canopy architectures tend to be more horizontal (χ > 1) or vertical (χ < 1). Some canopy types have published χ values (see the LP-80 manual for a short list). But because this value can vary from species to species, it’s important to be able to approximate the value.