Research selection method to determine canopy coverage in luot mountain, xuan mai, chuong my, ha noi

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT VIETNAM FORESTRY UNIVERSITY *** STUDENT THESIS RESEARCH SELECTION METHOD TO DETERMINE CANOPY COVERAGE IN LUOT MOUNTAIN, XUAN MAI, CHUONG MY, HA NOI Major: Natural Resources Management Code: D850101 Faculty: Forest Resources and Environmental Management Student: Hoang Thu Yen Student ID: 1253090040 Class: K57 Natural Resources Management Course: 2012 - 2016 Advanced Education Program Developed in collaboration with Colorado State University, USA Supervisor: Dr Le Xuan Truong Hanoi, Oct 2016 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study has been supported by VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF FORESTRY I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Dr Le Xuan Truong for the continuous support of my student thesis study and research, for his motivation, enthusiasm, and immense knowledge He was always able to answer any questions that I had If I didn‟t understand something the first time, he would explain it to me again so I would understand it With his guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis I wish to thank professor from Colorado State University, Prof Dr Lee Macdonald A special man that I was very impressed during the study here He always smiling, patience, and providing my class with an excellent atmosphere for my our lesson as well as for my research And for my friend, I would like to many thank Mr Tran Thanh Quang, he very nice and so kind He helped me a lot during assisting in the field work, it's very difficult work to collect data And most of all, thanks to my university, help me get these favorable conditions and suitable environment to complete my research ABSTRACT Estimation of forest canopy cover has recently been included in many forest inventory programmes In this study, after discussing how canopy cover is defined, different groundbased canopy cover estimation techniques are compared to determine which would be the most feasible for a large scale forest inventory to quantify canopy cover and the estimates they provide vary greatly In this here, to collect the data we use three main method for estimating canopy cover ratio (Differences in cover estimates among the ground-based methods were not related to stand-structure type p = 0.33) As expected, estimates of cover increased and stand-level variability decreased with increasing angle of view among techniques The results indicate that different techniques yield considerably different canopy cover estimates and through result of compare we can choose a suitable method and most accurate for measuring forest cover TABLE OF CONTENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT TABLE OF CONTENT LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER INTRODUCTION CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW CHAPTER STUDY GOAL, OBJECTIVES, SCOPE OF THE STUDY AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 STUDY GOAL, OBJECTIVES 3.1.1 Goals: 3.1.2 Specific Objectives: 3.2 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 3.2.1 Geographical location, Topography in Luot mountain 3.2.2 Terrain 3.2.3 Climate Conditions 3.2.4 Soil Conditions 3.2.5 Plot location, Maps 3.3 CONTENTS AND METHODOLOGY 3.3.1 Research Content 3.3.2 Methodology 10 CHAPTER RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 19 4.1 SURVEY RESULT AND DISCUSSION OF PLANTATIONS IN LUOT MOUNTAIN, XUAN MAI, CHUONG MY, HA NOI 19 4.1.1 Diameter and Height Frequency distributions 19 4.1.2 Comparison of tree growth between sample plot 1, plot and plot 21 4.2 THE RESULT AND DISCUSSION COMPARISON OF THREE METHODS TO DETERMINE CANOPY COVERAGE IN LUOT MOUNTAIN, XUAN MAI, CHUONG MY, HA NOI 23 4.2.1 The result and discussion comparison of three methods 23 4.2.2 Compare, selectection and explain why choose method to determine canopy coverage in Luot Mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My, Ha Noi 30 CHAPTER V GENERAL CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 33 5.1 Conclusion 33 5.2 Recommendation 34 REFERENCES LIST OF TABLES Table 3.2.4 List of the coordinates of three sample plot by GPS Table 4.1.1 List of the results of the plot data collection of three sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi Table 4.2.1 List of the results of the Canopy Coverage and standard error of three methods in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi LIST OF FIGURES Picture 3.2.1: 1st Intersection in Luot mountain, Vietnam national university of forestry Figure 3.2.5: Map of three sample plot location in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi Figure 3.3.2.3.1: Plot establishment Figure 3.3.2.3.2: Profile diagram pattern Picture 3.3.2.3.3: Sequence of steps during field image analysis Picture 4.2.1.3.1: Vertical and Cross profile in sample plot Picture 4.2.1.3.2: Vertical and Cross profile in sample plot Picture 4.2.1.3.3: Vertical and Cross profile in sample plot Appendix A: Table Appendix B: Figure CHAPTER INTRODUCTION Have you ever thought about of how forests have affected your life today: Have you had your breakfast? Read a newspaper? Switched on a light? Travelled to work in a bus or car? Signed a cheque? Made a shopping list? Got a parking ticket? Blown your nose into a tissue? Forest products are used in our daily lives and, all the activities listed above directly or indirectly involve forests The importance of forests cannot be underestimated We depend on forests for our survival, from the air we breathe to the wood we use Besides providing habitats for animals and livelihoods for humans, forests also offer watershed protection, prevent soil erosion and mitigate climate change So, how you know about the forest? First of all, we need to know the concept of forest According to the international definition of a forest is based on canopy cover: the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) has defined forest as land of at least 0.5 with potential canopy cover over 10% and potential tree height of at least five meters According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, forests covered an four billion hectares (16 million square miles) or approximately 30 percent of the world's land area in 2006 To control and protect the forest, firstly we must always understand data on forests that mean the canopy coverage of forest is large or small, to say that the current situation as well as the risk that forests are encountered So, what is the canopy cover ratio? Canopy coverage, defined here as the proportion of the forest floor covered by the vertical projection of the tree crowns, should be distinguished from canopy closure, which is defined as the proportion of sky hemisphere obscured by vegetation when viewed from a single point Estimation of forest canopy cover has recently become an important part of forest inventories Throughout history there have been very many methods from handmade to modern to measuring canopy cover ratio, depending on the environment, climate or topography around to provide the best measurement method For example handmade methods such as measuring 100 points, profile diagram or ocular estimation methods until modern methods such as estimates as used fisheye or satellite to determine canopy coverage Each method has advantages and disadvantages different, such as ocular estimation methods of canopy cover, ocular estimates are always subjective, and the results can vary even with changing weather Objectivity can be increased in the process by dividing the plot into smaller sections and counting the average of estimates made for each section Especially especially depends very much on the observer or the external factors (wind, clouds or the height of the observer ) or a method for high accuracy but high cost such as using Fisheye to determine canopy coverage This method is modern, but this tools is hard to find because very expensive so its very few in Vietnam Moreover, its very big, cumbersome to bring on forest to determine In this my research, I would like to introduce three methods to determine canopy coverage including handmade method and morden method, which is using GLAMA (Gap light analysis mobile app), 100 point, profile diagram methods The first method is a using 100 points to determine canopy coverage Based on the sample plots have been established earlier, we will measure exactly 100 points is divided equally on this sample plot Total points measured we will have the results of the canopy coverage and based on criteria about canopy cover ratio, we will assess the extent of closed canopy (or vice versa is the level of broken forest canopy) Through that we can be used as a basis to make decisions when choosing silvicultural practices This methods is handmade, relatively safe, with high accuracy, but waste time and effort to complete measurement process A simple method is applied extensively to determine and indicate second floor of forest is Cross sectional profile of David and Richards (1952) This is also handmade method and quite simple, based on trees data collection was gathered, we observe and simulation on grid paper, from which we get the canopy coverage The last method that I want to mention that is using sofware GLAMA ( Gap light analysis mobile app) on cell phone The first method was conducted measurement on a cellphone used android OS A program for calculation of the Canopy Cover Index estimating canopy cover from hemispherical photographs The program, which is freely accessible from the Google Play website, can be used for hemispherical, wideangle and standard photographs (with known lens angle of view) The program was primarily designed for use in the field, but can also analyse hemispherical photographs saved onexternal storage The Canopy Cover Index is a quick and robust method for precise canopy cover estimation comparable to visual canopy cover estimation but unaffected by observer bias Not only can it be used on alreadycaptured photographs, but the index can also be employed on smartphones by using the GAP LIGHT ANALYSIS MOBILE APP (glama) Android application to rapidly capture hemispherical photographs and immediately calculate their index values directly in the field In this paper, i will determine canopy coverage in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My, Hanoi In this study area, i will establish sample plot and measure all three methods on each sample plot From as a result of that approach, I will compare the data on the implementation process as well as to introduce to people from all their research will be to select the best method as well as handy to measure forest canopy cover From the result of three method that i mention, i will compare the data collection as well as the implementation process measurement to select the best method as well as most convenient to determine canopy coverage 21 Castanopsis boisii 14.10 16.00 15.05 22.00 18.00 2.00 1.10 1.55 B 22 Castanopsis boisii 17.00 20.00 18.50 23.00 20.00 1.88 2.00 1.94 A 23 SP 35.00 30.00 32.50 26.00 25.00 3.00 3.80 3.40 C 24 Pinus kesiya 19.00 23.00 21.00 25.00 23.00 2.00 1.80 1.90 B 25 Acacia mangium 80.00 77.00 78.50 24.50 24.00 3.00 3.40 3.20 A 26 SP 56.00 60.00 58.00 19.00 18.00 2.00 1.90 1.95 B 27 SP 77.00 80.00 78.50 19.50 17.00 1.80 0.95 1.38 A 28 SP 40.10 37.40 38.75 25.00 24.00 2.70 3.00 2.85 C 29 Knema corticosa Lour 14.00 16.00 15.00 17.00 15.00 1.10 0.95 1.03 C 30 SP 44.00 59.00 51.50 25.00 23.00 3.00 4.50 3.75 B 31 SP 57.00 60.00 58.50 26.00 22.00 4.00 4.70 4.35 A 32 Pinus kesiya 18.00 15.00 16.50 22.00 19.00 1.00 1.30 1.15 B 33 Pinus kesiya 15.00 13.00 14.00 19.00 17.00 0.85 0.90 0.88 A 34 SP 34.00 45.00 39.50 14.00 10.00 0.75 1.20 0.98 C 35 SP 27.00 30.00 28.50 14.50 12.00 1.00 0.75 0.88 B 36 SP 11.00 14.00 12.50 18.00 15.00 1.10 1.75 1.43 C 37 Knema corticosa Lour 12.00 15.00 13.50 10.00 8.00 0.55 0.80 0.68 A 38 Microcos paniculata 11.00 10.00 10.50 9.00 7.00 0.96 1.00 0.98 B 39 SP 33.00 45.00 39.00 17.00 13.00 1.00 1.20 1.10 A 40 SP 22.00 19.00 20.50 12.00 8.00 1.00 0.87 0.94 A 41 SP 9.00 12.00 10.50 8.00 7.00 0.77 0.92 0.85 B 42 Pinus kesiya 23.00 26.00 24.50 25.00 23.00 1.20 0.98 1.09 C 43 SP 34.00 40.00 37.00 24.00 22.00 1.30 3.20 2.25 45 A 44 Castanopsis boisii 34.50 43.00 38.75 25.50 23.00 2.00 2.80 2.40 B 45 Pinus kesiya 18.00 17.70 17.85 19.00 18.00 1.30 2.00 1.65 B 46 SP 34.00 30.00 32.00 24.00 19.00 2.00 1.40 1.70 A 47 SP 15.00 17.00 16.00 9.00 8.00 0.95 1.10 1.03 C 48 SP 50.00 45.00 47.50 24.00 23.00 2.00 2.20 2.10 C 49 SP 60.00 58.00 59.00 23.00 20.00 1.00 1.70 1.35 C 50 Castanopsis boisii 11.00 12.00 11.50 15.00 13.00 0.75 1.00 0.88 B 51 Knema corticosa Lour 15.00 17.00 16.00 10.00 8.00 1.80 2.00 1.90 A 52 SP 22.00 25.00 23.50 24.00 22.00 1.00 1.50 1.25 A 53 SP 9.00 12.00 10.50 12.00 10.00 0.85 1.00 0.93 C 54 SP 34.00 30.00 32.00 24.00 18.00 0.96 1.50 1.23 A 55 SP 60.00 65.00 62.50 19.50 17.00 1.00 2.50 1.75 B 56 SP 24.00 28.00 26.00 13.00 10.00 2.00 2.80 2.40 B 57 Pinus kesiya 23.00 25.00 24.00 23.00 19.00 2.00 1.77 1.89 A 58 Castanopsis boisii 33.00 28.00 30.50 19.50 16.00 2.30 3.80 3.05 B 59 SP 15.00 17.00 16.00 19.00 15.00 1.80 1.00 1.40 B 60 SP 40.00 43.00 41.50 26.50 23.00 4.00 2.80 3.40 A 61 SP 13.00 10.00 11.50 10.00 7.00 1.20 0.85 1.03 A 62 Acacia mangium 75.00 88.00 81.50 27.00 24.00 5.50 6.00 5.75 B 63 SP 34.00 38.00 36.00 23.00 18.00 3.00 4.60 3.80 A 64 Pinus kesiya 20.00 21.00 20.50 24.00 18.00 2.00 1.70 1.85 B 46 Table 02 List of tree data collection of sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi DBH(cm) Crown D.(cm) No Name E-W N-S Aver H(tota)(m) H(under)(m) E-W N-S Aver Quality Pinus kesiya 18.00 19.90 18.95 17.00 15.00 1.70 3.80 2.75 A SP 22.00 20.00 21.00 15.00 11.00 2.00 1.80 1.90 A SP 19.00 18.00 18.50 23.00 19.00 1.00 1.50 1.25 C SP 17.00 23.00 20.00 21.00 20.00 1.50 1.59 1.55 B Pinus kesiya 23.00 25.00 24.00 24.00 20.00 2.00 1.70 1.85 C SP 15.00 18.00 16.50 22.00 19.00 0.90 2.30 1.60 B Acacia mangium 79.00 82.00 80.50 25.00 22.00 2.60 4.00 3.30 A SP 15.00 17.00 16.00 22.00 17.00 1.80 2.00 1.90 B Pinus kesiya 19.00 22.00 20.50 24.00 19.00 1.30 1.80 1.55 A 10 SP 45.00 55.00 50.00 23.00 19.00 1.60 2.00 1.80 A 11 SP 70.00 65.00 67.50 20.00 18.00 1.50 1.90 1.70 A 12 Pinus kesiya 23.00 20.00 21.50 23.00 22.00 3.00 2.80 2.90 B 13 SP 23.00 20.00 21.50 23.00 22.00 1.90 2.00 1.95 A 14 SP 34.00 38.00 36.00 15.00 13.00 1.10 1.50 1.30 A 15 Erythrophleum fordii 15.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 10.00 1.00 0.88 0.94 B 16 SP 14.00 16.50 15.25 9.00 7.00 0.75 0.86 0.81 B 17 Microcos paniculata 14.00 16.00 15.00 18.00 16.00 2.00 1.90 1.95 A 18 SP 15.00 13.20 14.10 14.00 10.50 2.30 1.70 2.00 B 19 SP 34.00 38.00 36.00 24.00 23.00 3.20 3.90 3.55 C 20 SP 45.00 44.00 44.50 24.00 22.00 2.40 1.60 2.00 47 B 21 Castanopsis boisii 60.00 58.00 59.00 19.00 18.00 1.20 1.10 1.15 A 22 Erythrophleum fordii 19.00 20.00 19.50 19.00 18.00 0.98 1.40 1.19 B 23 SP 56.00 59.00 57.50 24.00 20.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 B 24 SP 22.00 23.00 22.50 15.00 10.00 1.00 1.70 1.35 B 25 SP 30.00 28.00 29.00 23.00 20.00 3.00 3.40 3.20 A 26 SP 56.00 60.00 58.00 22.50 18.00 2.00 1.90 1.95 A 27 SP 41.00 37.00 39.00 19.50 17.00 2.00 1.96 1.98 C 28 Acacia mangium 80.00 78.00 79.00 24.00 19.00 2.70 5.00 3.85 B 29 Knema corticosa Lour 14.00 16.00 15.00 17.00 15.00 1.10 0.95 1.03 B 30 SP 12.00 10.00 11.00 9.00 8.00 1.20 0.58 0.89 A 31 Knema corticosa Lour 18.00 13.00 15.50 15.00 10.00 3.00 3.40 3.20 A 32 SP 23.00 24.00 23.50 20.00 15.00 1.00 2.40 1.70 A 33 Erythrophleum fordii 16.00 14.00 15.00 20.00 19.00 0.68 1.10 0.89 A 34 SP 45.00 33.00 39.00 12.00 9.00 1.00 1.20 1.10 B 35 Pinus kesiya 22.00 25.00 23.50 21.00 20.00 0.85 1.80 1.33 B 36 SP 21.00 20.00 20.50 20.00 19.00 2.20 1.75 1.98 A 37 SP 34.00 35.00 34.50 16.00 12.00 1.90 2.80 2.35 B 38 Knema corticosa Lour 15.00 17.00 16.00 14.00 11.00 2.90 2.00 2.45 C 39 SP 23.00 25.00 24.00 21.00 19.00 2.00 0.80 1.40 B 40 SP 18.00 16.00 17.00 10.00 8.00 0.98 1.50 1.24 A 48 41 Microcos paniculata 12.00 12.30 12.15 13.00 7.00 1.70 0.92 1.31 A 42 SP 14.00 16.00 15.00 22.00 18.00 1.00 0.88 0.94 B 43 SP 78.00 89.00 83.50 24.00 20.00 3.00 4.00 3.50 A 44 Castanopsis boisii 20.00 18.00 19.00 18.00 15.00 2.00 2.80 2.40 B 45 Castanopsis boisii 28.00 30.00 29.00 23.00 18.00 2.40 4.00 3.20 B 46 SP 17.00 20.00 18.50 12.00 8.00 1.00 0.70 0.85 A 47 SP 23.00 24.00 23.50 19.00 14.00 0.70 2.00 1.35 B 48 SP 70.00 85.00 77.50 20.00 15.00 1.00 1.80 1.40 A 49 Pinus kesiya 18.00 15.00 16.50 20.00 16.00 1.50 1.30 1.40 B 50 Pinus kesiya 15.00 13.00 14.00 19.00 18.00 0.90 0.90 0.90 A 51 SP 30.00 33.00 31.50 24.00 19.00 3.80 4.20 4.00 A 52 Pinus kesiya 19.00 22.00 20.50 19.60 18.00 2.00 0.98 1.49 B 53 Erythrophleum fordii 14.00 15.00 14.50 17.00 14.00 0.99 1.40 1.20 B 54 SP 35.00 34.00 34.50 22.00 18.00 1.50 1.30 1.40 C 55 SP 20.00 22.00 21.00 12.00 7.00 1.00 1.33 1.17 B 56 Knema corticosa Lour 12.00 13.00 12.50 18.00 14.00 0.95 1.40 1.18 A 57 SP 40.00 43.00 41.50 21.00 19.00 3.00 3.98 3.49 C 58 Pinus kesiya 20.00 21.00 20.50 24.00 21.00 1.60 3.00 2.30 A 59 SP 12.00 14.00 13.00 12.00 11.00 0.80 1.00 0.90 A 60 SP 40.00 48.00 44.00 18.80 15.00 3.30 2.00 2.65 C 49 Table 03 List of tree data collection of sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi DBH(cm) Crown D.(m) No Name E-W N-S Aver H(total)(m) H(under)(m) E-W N-S Aver Quality Acacia mangium 80.00 89.00 84.50 24.50 18.00 5.00 5.65 5.33 A SP 20.00 22.00 21.00 19.00 14.00 2.40 3.00 2.70 B SP 12.00 10.00 11.00 14.00 8.00 2.30 1.70 2.00 A Knema corticosa Lour 13.00 14.00 13.50 13.00 7.00 1.60 1.00 1.30 C Castanopsis boisii 12.00 10.00 11.00 1.00 6.00 2.00 1.70 1.85 B SP 23.00 23.50 23.25 12.00 7.00 0.89 1.00 0.95 C SP 45.00 44.00 44.50 2.00 16.00 2.00 2.50 2.25 B Erythrophleum fordii 34.00 34.50 34.25 23.00 19.00 1.90 2.00 1.95 A SP 22.00 24.00 23.00 12.00 11.00 1.00 1.20 1.10 B 10 SP 60.00 70.00 65.00 24.00 19.00 4.00 4.70 4.35 A 11 Pinus kesiya 23.00 28.00 25.50 24.00 20.00 2.00 1.76 1.88 A 12 SP 33.00 35.00 34.00 19.00 17.00 3.20 3.00 3.10 B 13 SP 17.00 16.50 16.75 21.00 18.00 1.20 1.50 1.35 A 14 SP 34.00 35.00 34.50 12.00 10.00 2.10 2.90 2.50 A 15 Castanopsis boisii 24.00 25.00 24.50 23.00 18.00 3.00 2.88 2.94 A 16 Castanopsis boisii 34.00 38.00 36.00 18.70 15.00 1.80 2.77 2.29 B 17 Castanopsis boisii 24.00 27.00 25.50 15.00 10.00 3.20 3.20 3.20 C 18 SP 31.00 31.00 31.00 22.00 19.00 2.30 3.10 2.70 A 19 SP 23.00 24.00 23.50 12.00 8.00 0.85 1.40 1.13 B 20 Pinus kesiya 20.00 18.00 19.00 19.50 18.00 1.78 1.98 1.88 A 21 SP 50.00 56.00 53.00 14.00 12.00 1.20 1.00 1.10 A 50 22 Knema corticosa Lour 14.00 10.00 12.00 9.00 5.00 1.00 0.56 0.78 C 23 Castanopsis boisii 23.00 25.00 24.00 12.00 6.00 1.00 1.80 1.40 B 24 SP 50.00 60.00 55.00 11.00 8.00 1.23 0.89 1.06 C 25 Castanopsis boisii 14.00 15.00 14.50 24.00 20.00 2.00 2.20 2.10 B 26 Acacia mangium 80.00 86.00 83.00 25.50 20.00 1.10 1.89 1.50 A 27 SP 60.00 65.00 62.50 19.00 17.00 1.20 1.11 1.16 C 28 Castanopsis boisii 20.00 24.00 22.00 19.50 18.00 0.87 0.50 0.69 A 29 Castanopsis boisii 19.00 17.00 18.00 20.00 18.00 3.00 3.30 3.15 A 30 SP 12.00 14.00 13.00 9.00 5.00 1.00 1.20 1.10 B 31 SP 57.00 60.00 58.50 26.00 22.00 4.00 4.70 4.35 A 32 SP 30.00 34.00 32.00 21.00 19.00 0.87 1.00 0.94 C 33 Castanopsis boisii 16.00 18.00 17.00 7.00 18.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 C 34 Pinus kesiya 26.00 27.00 26.50 23.00 19.50 2.00 3.30 2.65 A 35 SP 23.00 24.00 23.50 12.00 10.00 1.00 0.75 0.88 B 36 Microcos paniculata 11.00 14.00 12.50 18.00 15.00 1.10 1.75 1.43 C 37 Castanopsis boisii 19.00 23.00 21.00 17.00 15.00 1.00 2.40 1.70 A 38 Pinus kesiya 18.00 15.00 16.50 17.00 14.00 1.35 1.00 1.18 B 39 SP 12.00 45.00 28.50 17.00 11.00 1.00 1.20 1.10 A 40 SP 11.00 8.00 9.50 12.00 7.00 1.00 2.00 1.50 A 41 SP 9.00 12.00 10.50 8.00 7.00 0.77 1.20 0.99 C 42 Knema corticosa Lour 14.00 15.00 14.50 15.00 10.00 1.20 1.00 1.10 B 43 SP 34.00 40.00 37.00 24.00 22.00 1.30 3.20 2.25 A 44 Castanopsis boisii 34.50 43.00 38.75 25.50 23.00 2.00 2.80 2.40 B 45 SP 20.00 22.00 21.00 17.00 15.50 0.88 1.23 1.06 B 46 SP 30.00 33.00 31.50 18.00 15.00 2.00 2.20 2.10 A 51 47 SP 34.00 40.00 37.00 16.00 14.00 1.10 1.12 1.11 B 48 Pinus kesiya 20.00 18.00 19.00 18.00 16.00 1.10 1.98 1.54 B 49 Castanopsis boisii 18.00 17.00 17.50 19.00 15.00 2.30 3.00 2.65 C 50 SP 15.00 17.00 16.00 15.00 10.00 0.50 1.00 0.75 B 51 Acacia mangium 80.00 78.00 79.00 26.00 23.00 4.00 6.00 5.00 A 52 Pinus kesiya 22.00 25.00 23.50 22.00 19.00 1.00 1.50 1.25 B 53 Castanopsis boisii 18.00 20.00 19.00 15.00 14.00 0.96 1.60 1.28 C 54 SP 12.00 13.00 12.50 15.50 14.00 1.75 2.00 1.88 A 55 SP 40.00 44.00 42.00 23.00 20.00 2.00 2.50 2.25 B 56 Pinus kesiya 22.00 23.00 22.50 19.00 16.00 1.90 2.30 2.10 C 57 Pinus kesiya 22.00 25.00 23.50 22.00 17.00 1.00 1.77 1.39 B 58 SP 50.00 56.00 53.00 20.50 19.00 3.40 4.00 3.70 B 59 Acacia mangium 15.00 17.00 16.00 19.00 15.00 1.80 1.00 1.40 A 60 SP 30.00 34.00 32.00 14.00 12.00 3.00 2.80 2.90 B 61 SP 22.00 23.00 22.50 17.00 15.00 0.95 0.55 0.75 C 62 Microcos paniculata 9.00 10.00 9.50 10.00 5.00 0.55 0.80 0.68 B 63 SP 22.00 25.00 23.50 23.00 20.00 3.00 2.80 2.90 A 64 Castanopsis boisii 34.00 33.00 33.50 24.00 19.00 1.10 1.70 1.40 A 65 Pinus kesiya 22.00 23.00 22.50 18.00 16.00 1.30 2.00 1.65 A 66 SP 30.00 28.00 29.00 23.00 20.00 3.00 3.40 3.20 A 67 SP 56.00 60.00 58.00 22.50 18.00 2.00 1.90 1.95 B 68 SP 41.00 37.00 39.00 19.50 17.00 2.00 1.96 1.98 A 69 SP 80.00 78.00 79.00 24.00 19.00 2.70 5.00 3.85 B 70 Pinus kesiya 14.00 16.00 15.00 20.00 16.00 2.30 2.00 2.15 A 71 Castanopsis boisii 17.00 18.00 17.50 14.00 10.00 1.40 1.10 1.25 B 72 SP 18.00 13.00 15.50 20.00 17.00 3.00 3.40 3.20 A 52 73 Erythrophleum fordii 23.00 24.00 23.50 18.00 15.00 2.00 2.40 2.20 C 74 Knema corticosa Lour 16.00 14.00 15.00 13.00 10.00 1.00 0.85 0.93 C 75 Pinus kesiya 23.00 22.00 22.50 17.50 15.00 2.00 1.50 1.75 B 76 SP 22.00 21.00 21.50 21.00 16.00 1.00 1.80 1.40 B 77 SP 43.00 44.00 43.50 24.00 20.00 4.00 5.50 4.75 A 78 Pinus kesiya 19.00 20.00 19.50 17.00 15.00 2.30 1.00 1.65 A 79 SP 15.00 16.00 15.50 17.00 15.00 1.00 2.00 1.50 C 80 Castanopsis boisii 19.00 22.00 20.50 15.00 8.00 2.30 1.40 1.85 C 53 Table 04 List of the results of Gap Light Analysis mobile app method of sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi Number Total No of light Gap fraction Part of Cut Canopy pixel (Dark) (Area) hemisph level 407150 38748 9.52 97.14 200 9.45 407150 19368 4.76 97.14 200 407150 18872 4.64 97.14 407150 73264 17.99 407150 26464 407150 Canopy Canopy Modif Cover Caco 90.55 62.68 75.62 4.86 95.14 67.6 79.12 200 4.07 95.93 56.92 74.26 97.14 200 17.59 82.41 53.79 67.91 6.31 97.14 200 6.31 93.69 67.23 81.2 28328 6.96 97.14 200 7.24 92.76 67.1 77.85 407150 19232 4.72 97.14 200 4.44 95.56 68.81 83.89 407150 64032 15.73 97.14 200 15.15 84.85 56.81 72.09 407150 37892 9.31 97.14 200 8.88 91.12 64.13 79.05 10 407150 78200 19.21 97.14 200 18.95 81.05 50.17 63.49 11 407150 66272 16.28 97.14 200 17.32 82.68 54.62 61.86 12 407150 45632 11.21 97.14 200 10.68 89.32 61.21 76.4 13 407150 20260 4.98 97.14 200 4.67 95.33 67.55 82.18 14 407150 46648 11.46 97.14 200 11.4 88.6 59.24 72.33 15 407150 53320 13.1 97.14 200 12.76 87.24 55.72 69.51 16 407150 28704 7.05 97.14 200 6.67 93.33 65.66 80.39 17 407150 210976 51.82 97.14 200 54.21 45.79 20.77 21.79 18 407150 12664 3.11 97.14 200 3.11 96.89 74.92 87.52 19 407150 44216 10.86 97.14 200 11.2 88.8 61.4 72.44 20 407150 47424 11.65 97.14 200 11.37 88.63 60.22 74.24 21 407150 42212 10.37 97.14 200 9.82 90.18 60.25 76.17 22 407150 42956 10.55 97.14 200 10.25 89.75 58.55 73.06 23 407150 26844 6.59 97.14 200 6.65 93.35 63.78 76.11 24 407150 40456 9.94 97.14 200 9.71 90.29 58.5 72.31 25 407150 66716 16.39 97.14 200 15.67 84.33 46.52 60.58 26 407150 38864 9.55 97.14 200 10.16 89.84 62.18 71.84 27 407150 59316 14.57 97.14 200 14.77 85.23 55.55 68.14 28 407150 83536 20.52 97.14 200 19.94 80.06 52.03 67.12 29 407150 44652 10.97 97.14 200 10.92 89.08 60.53 73.86 30 407150 69136 16.98 97.14 200 17.24 82.76 52.99 65.13 54 Openness Closure Table 05 List of the results of Gap Light Analysis mobile app method of sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi Number Total No of light Gap fraction Part of pixel (Dark) (Area) hemisph 407150 60272 14.8 407150 52592 407150 Cut Canopy Canopy Canopy Modif level Openness Closure Cover Caco 97.14 200 14.67 85.33 57.46 70.43 12.92 97.14 200 12.82 87.18 75.96 70.99 22208 5.45 97.14 200 5.56 94.44 68.25 80.24 407150 4288 1.05 97.14 200 0.98 99.02 77.08 90.51 407150 72220 17.74 97.14 200 19.55 80.45 51.74 55.86 407150 68196 16.75 97.14 200 16.31 83.69 79.96 62.73 407150 4308 1.06 97.14 200 1.05 98.95 79.92 90.9 407150 9800 2.41 97.14 200 2.12 97.88 67.69 85.55 407150 93728 23.02 97.14 200 24.95 75.05 66.56 49.41 10 407150 43060 10.58 97.14 200 10.77 89.23 80.04 72.96 11 407150 5024 1.23 97.14 200 1.17 98.83 72.75 85.96 12 407150 10588 2.6 97.14 200 2.37 97.63 79.89 74.05 13 407150 373082 8.37 97.14 200 7.88 92.12 65.23 73.8 14 407150 10560 2.59 97.14 200 2.46 97.54 69.18 84.25 15 407150 76552 18.8 97.14 200 18.8 81.2 70.09 64.31 16 407150 31904 7.84 97.14 200 7.08 92.92 75.83 82.25 17 407150 556 0.14 97.14 200 0.13 99.87 64.94 87.39 18 407150 51132 12.56 97.14 200 12.25 87.75 77.01 71.44 19 407150 5972 1.47 97.14 200 1.51 98.49 78.95 89.78 20 407150 31016 7.62 97.14 200 7.2 92.8 78.89 78.85 21 407150 13516 3.32 97.14 200 3.23 96.77 81.12 83.37 22 407150 95664 23.5 97.14 200 23.39 76.61 83.21 60.99 23 407150 79256 19.47 97.14 200 19.37 0.63 82.09 61.54 24 407150 97300 23.09 97.14 200 24.35 75.65 69.04 57.15 25 407150 67984 16.7 97.14 200 16.08 83.92 52.09 68.25 26 407150 30588 7.51 97.14 200 6.91 93.09 64.36 81.35 27 407150 62292 15.3 97.14 200 14.45 85.55 72.19 66.86 28 407150 17948 4.41 97.14 200 4.23 95.77 66.31 80.06 29 407150 35388 8.69 97.14 200 9.68 90.32 64.01 72 55 30 407150 13592 3.34 97.14 200 3.18 96.82 71.32 85.2 Table 06 List of the results of Gap Light Analysis mobile app method of sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi Number Total No of light Gap fraction Part of Cut Canopy Canopy Canopy Modif level Openness Closure Cover Caco pixel (Dark) (Area) hemisph 407150 12172 2.99 97.14 200 2.87 97.13 74.07 87.63 407150 61916 15.21 97.14 200 15.09 84.91 55.66 68.79 407150 31084 7.63 97.14 200 7.57 92.43 62.9 76.43 407150 84388 20.73 97.14 200 21 79 48.83 60.88 407150 53244 13.08 97.14 200 13.57 86.43 56.23 66.39 407150 59188 14.54 97.14 200 14.54 85.46 56.53 69.83 407150 43204 10.61 97.14 200 9.91 90.09 57.7 73.27 407150 71296 17.51 97.14 200 18.83 81.17 52.77 59.07 407150 13600 3.34 97.14 200 3.09 96.19 72.44 86.37 10 407150 29676 7.29 97.14 200 7.06 92.94 66.97 80.51 11 407150 68.996 16.95 97.14 200 16.53 83.47 55.32 70.46 12 407150 40216 9.88 97.14 200 9.96 90.04 60.96 73.46 13 407150 4576 1.12 97.14 200 1.11 98.89 75.56 89.02 14 407150 148972 36.59 97.14 200 36.66 63.34 37.41 47.96 15 407150 5308 1.3 97.14 200 1.22 98.78 70.7 84.41 16 407150 28048 6.89 97.14 200 6.58 93.42 66.94 81.01 17 407150 66472 16.33 97.14 200 15.95 84.05 51.75 65.65 18 407150 127264 31.26 97.14 200 33.54 66.46 36.72 39.01 19 407150 1246688 30.62 97.14 200 31.02 68.98 40.36 51.26 20 407150 51124 12.56 97.14 200 13.24 86.76 59.88 68.96 21 407150 27072 6.65 97.14 200 6.52 93.48 66.76 80.45 22 407150 19700 4.84 97.14 200 4.64 95.36 67.55 81.68 23 407150 15252 3.75 97.14 200 3.44 96.56 70.84 84.71 24 407150 21028 5.16 97.14 200 5.05 94.95 68.33 82.31 25 407150 88412 21.71 97.14 200 21.48 78.52 50.13 63.17 26 407150 10672 2.62 97.14 200 2.44 97.56 72.96 86.37 27 407150 51500 12.65 97.14 200 13 87 56.98 67.9 56 28 407150 90884 22.32 97.14 200 24 76 46.32 51.25 29 407150 27724 6.81 97.14 200 6.29 93.71 61.43 76.93 30 407150 75664 18.58 97.14 200 19.03 80.97 50.69 61.82 57 Table 07 List of the results of 100 point method of sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi Point Transect 10 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 10 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Table 08 List of the results of 100 point method of sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi Point Transect 10 0.5 0.5 1 1 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 10 0.5 1 1 1 58 Table 09 List of the results of 100 point method of sample plot in Luot mountain, Xuan Mai, Chuong My,Ha Noi Point Transect 10 1 0 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 10 0.5 1 0 0.5 59