ArticleFrontiers in plant science2026
Estimation of individual tree aboveground biomass of genetically diverse
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Accurate estimation of individual tree aboveground biomass (AGB) is essential for tree species selection, carbon accounting, and precision forestry. Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) LiDAR provides rapid access to detailed tree structural information, offering a promising tool for high-frequency biomass assessment. Methods: In this study, a nonlinear mixed-effects (NLME) model integrating UAV LiDAR and field measurements was developed to quantify the influence of genetic heterogeneity and environmental factors on AGB estimation of Results: Genotype effects explained significant AGB variation, achieving high accuracy (R²=0.7916, RMSE = 3.7095) and reducing TRE by 23.29% compared to the basic power function model. Leave-one-genotype-out cross-validation confirmed robustness. Calibration with the four largest trees yielded the best performance (TRE = 13.09%), while a simplified scheme using only two trees per genotype maintained high accuracy (TRE = 13.24%), markedly reducing field effort. Discussion: These results highlight the superiority of NLME AGB models over linear approaches and demonstrate that accounting for genotype effects is critical for reliable biomass estimation. The proposed framework provides an efficient and cost-effective solution for biomass monitoring, tree breeding, carbon sink assessment, and precision forestry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.