ArticleEcology and evolution2026
Toward Consistent Canopy Characterization From Low-Cost UAV Imagery.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Monitoring tropical forest structure at landscape scale requires cost-effective methods capable of bridging the gap between field inventories and satellite remote sensing products. However, the diversity of available individual tree crown (ITC) segmentation algorithms raises questions about the consistency and reliability of derived structural metrics-a critical issue for any ecological application relying on these outputs. We evaluated three ITC segmentation algorithms-Detectree2, SAM, and the hybrid Detectree2SAM (D2S)-applied to very high-resolution RGB orthomosaics (5 cm resolution) acquired over ~200 ha of the Luki Biosphere Reserve (Democratic Republic of Congo) using a low-cost drone. Algorithms were validated at the individual scale against a photointerpretation reference of 1882 manually delineated crowns and at the plot scale against a field inventory of 360 trees across 18 plots. At the individual scale, IoU-based F1 scores ranged from 0.57 (D2S) to 0.67 (SAM), revealing clear precision-recall trade-offs. At the plot scale, D2S provided the most accurate crown area estimates (RMSD = 26%-29%), while SAM best reproduced canopy density (RMSD = 22%). All three algorithms systematically overestimated aggregated metrics; a linear correction substantially reduced prediction errors and improved cross-algorithm convergence, yielding consistent estimates-median crown area of the 20 largest trees (~148 m
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.