Three-dimensional models that represent the top-of-canopy forest height structure were developed to simulate airborne laser profiling responses along forested transects. The simulator which produced these 3-D models constructed individual tree crowns according to a tree's total height, height to first branch, crown diameter, and crown shape (cone, parabola, ellipse, sphere, or a random assortment of these shapes), and then inserted these crowns into a fixed-area plot using mapped stand (x,y) coordinates. This two-dimensional array of forest canopy heights was randomly transected to simulate measurements made by an airborne ranging laser. These simulated laser measurements were regressed with ground reference measures to develop predictive linear relationships. The assumed crown shape had a significant impact on 1) simulated laser measurements of height and 2) estimates of basal area, woody volume, and above-ground dry biomass derived via simulation. As canopy shape progressed from a conic form to a more spheric structure, average canopy height, canopy profile area, and canopy volume increased, canopy height variation decreased, and coefficients of variability were stable or decreased. In Costa Rican tropical forests, simulated laser measurements of average height, canopy profile area, and canopy volume increased 8-10% when a parabolic rather than a conic shape was assumed. An elliptic canopy was 16-18% taller, on average, than a conic canopy, and a spheric canopy was 23-25% taller. The effect of these height increases and height variability changes can profoundly affect basal area, volume, and biomass estimates, but the degree to which these estimates are affected is study-area-dependent. Since canopy shape may significantly affect such estimates, canopy shapes should be noted when field data are collected for purposes of height simulation. If canopy shapes are not noted and are unknown, an assumption of an elliptical shape is suggested in order to mitigate potentially large errors which may be incurred using a generic assumption of a cone or sphere. (C) Elsevier Science Inc., 1997.
