International Journal of Remote Sensing

ISSN: 0143-1161 (Print) 1366-5901 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tres20

A ground spectral model for estimating biomass

at the peak of the growing season in Hulunbeier
grassland, Inner Mongolia, China

Ji-Xi Gao , Yan-Mei Chen , Shi-Hai Lü , Chao-Yang Feng , Xue-Li Chang , Sheng-
Xing Ye & Ji-Dong Liu

To cite this article: Ji-Xi Gao , Yan-Mei Chen , Shi-Hai Lü , Chao-Yang Feng , Xue-Li Chang ,
Sheng-Xing Ye & Ji-Dong Liu (2012) A ground spectral model for estimating biomass at the peak
of the growing season in Hulunbeier grassland, Inner Mongolia, China, International Journal of
Remote Sensing, 33:13, 4029-4043, DOI: 10.1080/01431161.2011.639401

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2011.639401

Published online: 12 Dec 2011.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 473

View related articles

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tres20
International Journal of Remote Sensing
Vol. 33, No. 13, 10 July 2012, 4029–4043

A ground spectral model for estimating biomass at the peak

of the growing season in Hulunbeier grassland, Inner Mongolia, China

JI-XI GAO†, YAN-MEI CHEN*‡, SHI-HAI Lܧ, CHAO-YANG FENG§,

XUE-LI CHANG¶, SHENG-XING YE§ and JI-DONG LIU|
†Nanjing Institute of Environmental Science, Ministry of Environmental Protection,
Nanjing 210042, PR China
‡College of Resource and Environment Sciences, Hebei Key Laboratory of Environmental
Change and Ecological Construction, Hebei Normal University, Shijazhuang 050016,
PR China
§Institute of Ecology, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012,
PR China
¶College of Geography and Planning, Ludong University, Yantai 264025, PR China
|College of Ecology and Environmental Science, Inner Mongolia Agricultural
University, Hohhot 010018, PR China

(Received 3 November 2009; in final form 3 November 2011)

To investigate the application of hyperspectral remote sensing to estimate grassland

biomass at the peak of the growing season, hyperspectral data were measured with
an analytical spectral device (ASD) Fieldspec3 spectroradiometer, and harvested
aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) was recorded simultaneously in
Hulunbeier grassland, Inner Mongolia, China. Ground spectral models were
developed to estimate ANPP from the normalized difference vegetation index
(NDVI) measured in the field following the same method as that of the National
Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA) Moderate Resolution Imaging
Spectroradiometer (MODIS-NDVI). Regression analysis was used to assess the
relationship between ANPP and NDVI. Based on coefficients of determination
(R2 ) and error analysis, we determined that each vegetation type and the entire
study area had unique optimal regression models. A linear equation best fit the
arid steppe data, an exponential equation was best suited to wetland vegetation
and power equations were optimal for meadow steppe and sand vegetation. After
considering all factors, an exponential model between ANPP and NDVI (ANPP
= 20.1921e3.2154(NDVI) ; standard error (SE) = 62.50 g m–2 , R2 = 0.7445, p < 0.001)
was selected for the entire Hulunbeier grassland study area. Ground spectral mod-
els could become the foundation for yield estimation over large areas of Hulunbeier
grassland.

1. Introduction
Accurate estimates of aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) can provide
valuable information about the productivity and functioning of grassland or pas-
ture for scientific management of pasture and estimation of the ecosystem service
value. The study of ANPP is one of the core topics in ecological research. Ground
measurement of grassland vegetation reflectance spectra is an important technique
that enables grassland ANPP estimation over large areas using remotely sensed data.

*Corresponding author. Email: chenym1970@sohu.com

International Journal of Remote Sensing
ISSN 0143-1161 print/ISSN 1366-5901 online © 2012 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2011.639401
4030 J.-X. Gao et al.

Ground reflectance measurement has been used to estimate the biomass in grass-
lands and steppes since the 1970s (Tucker 1979). Subsequently, the technique has
become increasingly popular in remote-sensing research to establish the correlation
between spectral data and biophysical properties of grasslands. Early studies showed
that red and near-infrared (NIR) bands of video imagery are useful to assess phy-
tomass production or the fresh weight of herbaceous vegetation on rangelands when
grasses are actively growing (Everitt et al. 1986, Jin et al. 1986, Shi et al. 1994, Wang
and Yong 1996, Li and Jiang 1998, Huang and Wang 1999). In addition, spectral
reflectance from both visible and NIR wavelengths have been combined to produce
vegetation indices sensitive to biophysical and biochemical variation in vegetation (Jin
et al. 1986, Shi et al. 1994, Wang and Yong 1996, Numata et al. 2008). The most widely
used vegetation index is the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), which can
be obtained from spectral properties in the red and NIR regions of the electromagnetic
spectrum.
Recent developments in hyperspectral remote sensing provide additional bands for
vegetation analysis within the visible, NIR and shortwave-infrared bands (Mutanga
2004, Van Leeuwen et al. 2006). The results of several studies show that narrowband
indices have led to significant improvements in the predictive capability of models,
and hyperspectral data from aerial imagery or field spectrometry have the potential to
estimate the biophysical properties of rangeland or steppe vegetation with a greater
accuracy than broadband indices (Mutanga 2004, Beeri et al. 2007, Cho et al. 2007,
Numata et al. 2008, Fava et al. 2009).
In recent years, remotely sensed data have been widely used to estimate grassland
aboveground biomass by means of handheld and spaceborne sensors (Cho et al. 2007,
Numata et al. 2008). Many regression models have been established between vegeta-
tion indices and grassland biomass, and most of them are linear or non-linear, which
has greatly improved the accuracy of biomass estimates and determined grassland
productivity patterns in different regions (Zhao et al. 2004, Wang et al. 2005, Du et al.
2006, Zhang et al. 2008, Xu and Yang 2009). However, most researchers have extracted
vegetation indices directly from, for example, Landsat TM (Thematic Mapper),
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Advanced Very High Resolution
Radiometer (NOAA/AVHRR) or Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer
(MODIS) data sets, and measured aboveground biomass at fixed positions with the
aid of the Global Positioning System (GPS). There is a severe lack of vegetation spec-
trometric data measured in the field for grasslands with which to estimate grassland
biomass, particularly in China. In this study, we calculated a NDVI following the same
calculation method of MODIS-NDVI, which is a narrowband vegetation index in
contrast to the traditional NDVIs. We investigated the potential of the ground nar-
rowband NDVI for the estimation of grassland ANPP using the technique of ground
hyperspectral measurement.
The main objectives of this study are (1) to analyse the relationship between the
ground narrowband NDVI and ANPP for all vegetation types and appraise the influ-
ence of vegetation type on these relationships for the Hulunbeier grassland; (2) to
build a ground spectral model for grassland ANPP estimation over a large area of the
Hulunbeier steppe; and (3) to provide technical support for the scientific management
and sustainable utilization of grassland resources in the future. Our research will also
help us to understand production capability patterns and changes in grassland ecosys-
tems, assess responses of grassland vegetation to global warming and identify limits
 The ground spectral model for estimating biomass 4031

of grassland ecosystems’ resilience to the effects of global warming in Hulunbeier

grassland.

2. Methodology
2.1 Study area
The study area is located in the Hulunbeier grassland, Inner Mongolia, China
(figure 1). It contains high-quality grassland and is regarded as one of the most beau-
tiful areas in China. The native ecosystem in the study area is representative of that
of Inner Mongolia, northern China. The elevation is 500–900 m above sea level. The
study area has a continental climate of the mid-latitude zone in the Mongolian Plateau
region. The annual mean air temperature is −1.8◦ C to 2.1◦ C, and the long-term
annual mean precipitation is 180–372 mm. There are four main geomorphic features
in this region: plateaus, hills, river lowlands and sand. The zonal soil is classified as
chernozem and chestnut. Aeolian sandy soil and swamp soil are also present.
Vegetation in the study area mainly consists of arid steppe, meadow steppe, wetland
and sandy vegetation. The arid steppe is located on the open plateau in the western
part of the study area and includes the dominant species Stipa grandis, Stipa krylovii
and Leymus chinensis (Pan 1992). Temperate meadow steppe lies in the eastern sec-
tion of the study area, and important species in the region include Stipa baicalensis,
L. chinensis, Filifolium sibiricum and Cleistogenes squarrosa (Pan 1992). Deteriorated
grassland near a residential area contains species such as C. squarrosa and Artemisia
frigida. In addition, three sand-dune belts are present, and some accumulations of

115° 0′ 0″ E 116° 0′ 0″ E 117° 0′ 0″ E 118° 0′ 0″ E 119° 0′ 0″ E 120° 0′ 0″ E 121° 0′ 0″ E

50° 0′ 0″ N

50° 0′ 0″ N

49° 0′ 0″ N

49° 0′ 0″ N

48° 0′ 0″ N

48° 0′ 0″ N
Height (m)
447–625
625–730
47° 0′ 0″ N
730–865
865–1061 47° 0′ 0″ N

1061–1702
Plot
46° 0′ 0″ N Typical plot
National boundary line
116° 0′ 0″ E 117° 0′ 0″ E 118° 0′ 0″ E 119° 0′ 0″ E 120° 0′ 0″ E 121° 0′ 0″ E 122° 0′ 0″ E 123° 0′ 0″ E

Figure 1. Location of the study area and individual plots.

4032 J.-X. Gao et al.

dunes have developed sporadic sand-dune vegetation. Wetland vegetation is developed

on the margins of rivers and lakes.

2.2 Field data collection

2.2.1 Experimental setup. The experiment was designed to collect a data set rep-
resentative of the spatial and temporal variability of grassland properties under
natural conditions. Field work was conducted during 22–28 July, 5–8 August and
27–31 August 2009, which coincided with the most productive period of vegeta-
tion growth. Sampling plots covered different vegetation communities within the
Hulunbeier grassland from high- to low-yield areas (figure 1).
The Landsat TM remote-sensing images, land-use map and map of vegetation types
were examined, and 49 plots measuring approximately 250 m × 250 m were selected.
These plots included large, homogeneous patches of vegetation and representative veg-
etation communities that met pixel-matching requirements between the ground-based
spectral data and MODIS vegetation index. The large size of the plots and homoge-
neous vegetation within plots would also reduce confusion in one-to-one relationships
between the remote-sensing image and ground spectral data, which improves estima-
tion accuracy in the following steps. The ten most representative plots were selected as
typical plots and thirty 1 m × 1 m areas were sampled in each typical plot. In addition,
five 1 m × 1 m areas were sampled in a further 39 plots. Thus, a total of 495 samples
were obtained. The locations of the 49 plots are shown in figure 1.

2.2.2 Field spectral and biomass measurements and NDVI calculation. An analyti-
cal spectral device (ASD) – full range spectrometer (350–2500 nm) with a resolution
of 1.5 nm in the 350–1000 nm and 2 nm in the 1000–2500 nm ranges – was used
for field optical measurements for all samples. The ASD spectra were collected with
a 25◦ field of view and 0.5 m sensor height above the grass canopy. All spectral
measurements were collected between 10:00 and 15:00 Beijing time under clear-sky
conditions. Five measurements were taken for each grass canopy sample. These spec-
tra were standardized to spectra measured at approximately 10-minute intervals with
a white board. The average value of five replicates for each grass canopy sample was
used for the analysis. In total, 495 average reflectance values, which coincided with
grass biophysical samples, were used for comparison with field-collected grass biomass
data.
In grasslands and steppes, one of the best methods to measure ANPP is to harvest
aboveground biomass at the peak of the growing season (Flombaum and Sala 2007).
Our work was conducted at the peak of the growing season. After recording the spec-
tral data, standing biomass was collected in a 1 m × 1 m quadrat within every sample
location. The fresh weight of green herbaceous material in all samples was recorded
soon after clipping, and then the samples were dried at 80◦ C for 10–12 hours. The
dried weight was recorded and the ANPP (g m−2 ) of each sample was calculated.
NDVIs are commonly calculated from red and NIR reflectance data (Van Leeuwen
et al. 2006). We calculated the NDVI from ASD spectral reflectance using the same
method as that used for the MODIS-NDVI (equation (1)):

ρ(841∼876) − ρ(620∼670)
NDVI = , (1)
ρ(841∼876) + ρ(620∼670)
 The ground spectral model for estimating biomass 4033

where ρ (620∼670) and ρ (841∼876) correspond to the mean spectral reflectance of red
(620–670 nm) and NIR (841–876 nm) bands, respectively, from hyperspectral data
(350–2500 nm) measured in the field.
We used a lambda integration method to obtain the average spectral reflectance
of red (620–670 nm) and NIR (841–876 nm) regions in ViewSpec Pro Version 5.6
(Analytical Spectral Devices Inc., Boulder, CO, USA).

2.3 Regression analyses and empirical validation of regression models

Based on existing vegetation-type maps (1:1 000 000), the distribution of plots and
descriptions of vegetation characteristics from field experiments, all experimental data
were divided into four groups according to the vegetation type. Data for each group
were randomly divided into training/calibration and test sets. Regression analyses
were performed on the calibration set, and empirical validation of the regression
models for NDVI and ANPP regression models was conducted using the test set.
Approximately 75% of all samples were used for calibration, and 25% were used for
the test set. To obtain the regression model for the entire study area, we used 495
values of NDVI and ANPP corresponding to the 495 field samples. The 495 data
sets were randomly divided into two groups: 375 for training/calibration and 120
for test sets. Performance of the regression models was compared using the coeffi-
cient of determination (R2 ), adjusted R2 , standard error (SE) of the prediction based
on the independent test data (SE, equation (2)) and coefficient of mean error (MEC,
equation (3)):


 n
 (y − y )2
 i=1
SE = , (2)
n

n 
 
 y−y 
 y 
i=1
MEC = , (3)
n
where y is measured biomass, y is estimated biomass for the test data and n is number
of samples.

3. Results
3.1 Fitting and optimizing models
A comprehensive analysis was conducted to determine the relationships between
ANPP and NDVI computed from reflectance data measured with an ASD in the field.
Each calibration data set was used in the regression analysis (arid steppe n = 120,
meadow steppe n = 150, wetland vegetation n = 50, sand vegetation n = 55 and entire
study area n = 375). From the analysis and evaluation of relationships between NDVI
and ANPP, we chose linear, logarithmic, power and exponential functions to fit and
optimize the regression equation with the goal of selecting the best regression model
(table 1).
Relationships between NDVI and ANPP for all vegetation types were significant
(p < 0.001) and met assumptions for statistical analyses. The calibration R2 values
changed from 0.7002 to 0.7295 for the arid steppe, for which the linear (R2 = 0.7295)
 4034

Table 1. Comparison of the goodness of fit of the regression equations.

Linear Logarithmic Power Exponential

Arid Steppe n 120 120 120 120

Equation y = 406.08x − 101.64 y = 204.111lnx + 248.24 y = 371.83x1.9961 y = 12.631e3.8972x
R2 0.7295 0.7002 0.7179 0.7203
Adjusted R2 0.7271 0.6976 0.7156 0.7179
F (α = 0.01) 318.17 (p < 0.001) 275.56 (p < 0.001) 300.36 (p < 0.001) 303.90 (p < 0.001)
Meadow steppe n 150 150 150 150
Equation y = 541.73x − 166.49 y = 322.6lnx + 332.11 y = 393.23x1.862 y = 25.04e2.9453x
R2 0.6340 0.5718 0.6954 0.684
Adjusted R2 0.6315 0.5689 0.6934 0.6819
F (α = 0.01) 256.32 (p < 0.001) 197.64 (p < 0.001) 337.92 (p < 0.001) 320.41 (p < 0.001)
Wetland n 50 50 50 50
vegetation Equation y = 1489.6x − 870.75 y = 1033.7lnx + 552.98 y = 773.16x4.6281 y = 1.4213e6.5697x
R2 0.6655 0.6219 0.7612 0.7904
Adjusted R2 0.6587 0.6142 0.7563 0.7861
J.-X. Gao et al.

F (α = 0.01) 97.4886 (p < 0.001) 80.5862 (p < 0.001) 156.1654 (p < 0.001) 184.7302 (p < 0.001)
Sand n 55 55 55 55
vegetation Equation y = 331.72x − 13.792 y = 94.625lnx + 215.9 y = 339.52x1.2064 y = 20.455e3.8917x
R2 0.8066 0.7353 0.8281 0.7692
Adjusted R2 0.8030 0.7303 0.8248 0.7649
F (α = 0.01) 221.0726 (p < 0.001) 147.2166 (p < 0.001) 255.2982 (p < 0.001) 176.64 (p < 0.001)
Whole region n 375 375 375 375
Equation y = 456.18x − 104.39 y = 172.85lnx + 268.25 y = 303.83x1.3639 y = 20.1921e3.2154x
R2 0.5949 0.4349 0.6821 0.7445
Adjusted R2 0.5938 0.4334 0.6813 0.7438
F (α = 0.01) 549.1687 (p < 0.001) 287.7919 (p < 0.001) 802.5746 (p < 0.001) 1089.7635 (p < 0.001)

Note: n = number of samples; the equation representing the best regression model for each vegetation type is highlighted in bold.
 The ground spectral model for estimating biomass 4035

and exponential models (R2 = 0.7203) were superior. Results of fitting the power func-
tion and exponential function were relatively good for the meadow steppe, wetland
vegetation and sand vegetation (table 1). The exponential function and power func-
tion were better for calibration of the whole study area, with R2 values of 0.7445 and
0.6821, respectively.

3.2 Model accuracy tests and the optimal ground spectral models
To obtain the best regression models for the Hulunbeier vegetation, we further tested
the models’ accuracy. We used test sets of all field samples to analyse and evaluate
error in the regression models (table 2). Comparison of the predictive performances of
the regression equations in SE and MEC are presented in table 2.
For arid steppe, SE values ranged from 22.63 to 24.82 g m−2 and MEC values
ranged from 19.32% to 24.96%. The power and exponential equations showed higher
prediction accuracy, but the linear equation had the highest R2 value (table 1). Because
simplification is a fundamental principle of scientific research, we chose the linear
equation as the best model for the arid steppe.
Similarly, either exponential or power models yielded the lowest estimation errors
for meadow steppe, wetland vegetation and sand vegetation. The exponential model
showed the highest accuracy for the entire study area (MEC 25.20%, SE 62.50 g m−2 ).
Based on the R2 values and the independent validation results, we determined
the best models for the four vegetation types and entire study area. Fitted curves
of the best models were created for ANPP and NDVI calibration sets and indepen-
dent validation results for actual and predicted biomass of test samples (arid steppe
n = 40, meadow steppe n = 50, wetland vegetation n = 15, sand vegetation n = 15
and entire study area n = 120). The linear equation was the most suitable model for
the arid steppe (figure 2), the exponential equation was optimal for wetland vegeta-
tion (figure 3), and the power equation was the best model for meadow steppe and
sand vegetation (figures 4 and 5). The optimal ground spectral model for the entire

Table 2. Comparison of the errors of the regression equations.

Linear Logarithmic Power Exponential

Arid steppe n 40 40 40 40
SE (g m−2 ) 23.61 24.82 22.63 24.53
MEC (%) 22.09 24.96 19.43 19.32
Meadow steppe n 50 50 50 50
SE (g m−2 ) 41.54 47.06 39.42 38.84
MEC (%) 20.52 25.75 19.12 20.45
Wetland vegetation n 15 15 15 15
SE (g m−2 ) 119.42 126.76 114.42 102.33
MEC (%) 38.72 41.12 23.89 21.67
Sand vegetation n 15 15 15 15
SE (g m−2 ) 28.71 32.96 28.90 29.14
MEC (%) 22.55 29.90 20.13 20.91
Whole region n 120 120 120 120
SE (g m−2 ) 71.54 82.54 74.32 62.50
MEC (%) 43.94 53.55 42.11 25.20

Note: n = number of samples, SE = standard error of prediction, MEC = coefficient of

mean error; the SE and MEC values of the best regression model for each vegetation type are
highlighted in bold.
4036 J.-X. Gao et al.

(a)
300
y = 406.08x – 101.64
250 R2 = 0.7295

200
ANPP (g m–2)

150

100

50

0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
NDVI
(b)
250
SE = 23.61 g m–2, MEC = 22.09%
200
Predicted biomass (g m–2)

150

100

50

0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Actual biomass (g m–2)

Figure 2. (a) Fitted curve of the best model explaining the relationship between ANPP and
NDVI for calibration sets (n = 120, p < 0.001) for arid steppe. (b) Independent validation
results for predicting biomass (n = 40, p < 0.001) of arid steppe, Hulunbeier grassland, Inner
Mongolia. SE = standard error of predicting biomass, MEC = coefficient of mean error.

study area was the exponential equation (figure 6). These optimal equations effectively
express relationships between NDVI and ANPP measured in the field.
After considering all factors, the exponential model with the following equation
was selected and used as the optimal ground spectral model for the entire Hulunbeier
grassland:

ANPP = 20.1921e3.2154(NDVI) (R2 = 0.7445, SE = 62.50 g m−2 , p < 0.001). (4)

4. Discussion
4.1 Band range, vegetation types and regression models
The NDVI is widely used to characterize grass ecosystems and estimate grass biomass
(e.g. Mutanga 2004, Cho et al. 2007, Numata et al. 2008). In the previous studies, veg-
etation indexes, for example greenness (G = ρ Red /ρ NIR ) and NDVI, were calculated
 The ground spectral model for estimating biomass 4037

(a)
600
y = 393.23x1.862
500 R2 = 0.6954

400
ANPP (g m–2)

300

200

100

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
NDVI
(b)
500

SE = 39.42 g m–2, MEC = 19.12%

400
Predicted biomass (g m–2)

300

200

100

0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Actual biomass (g m–2)

Figure 3. (a) Fitted curve of the best model explaining the relationship between ANPP and
NDVI for calibration sets (n = 150, p < 0.001) for meadow steppe. (b) Independent validation
results for predicting biomass (n = 50, p < 0.001) of meadow steppe, Hulunbeier grassland,
Inner Mongolia. SE = standard error of predicting biomass, MEC = coefficient of mean error.

from spectral reflectance data acquired in the field based on data from the Landsat
TM Band 4 (TM4; 760–900 nm) and Band 3 (TM3; 630–690 nm) or NOAA-AVHRR
Channel 1 (580–680 nm) and Channel 2 (720–1100 nm) (Jin et al. 1986, Shi et al.
1994, Wang and Yong 1996). These researchers explored the relationship between
the fresh weight of herbaceous vegetation and vegetation indices, and concluded that
linear or non-linear equations represented the relationship between the fresh weight
and spectral vegetation indices in Inner Mongolian grassland. We calculated the
NDVI from ASD spectral reflectance of red (620–670 nm) and NIR (841–876 nm)
bands, which has a narrower band range than the NDVI calculated according to
TM or NOAA/AVHRR reflectance data. We calculated NDVI using average spectral
reflectance data and improved the precision of calculation with a resolution of 1.5 nm
in the selected band range. Because of the limitation of research conditions, previous
4038 J.-X. Gao et al.

(a)
800

700
y = 1.4213e6.5697x
600 R2 = 0.7904

ANPP (g m–2) 500

400

300

200

100

0
0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
NDVI
(b)
1000

SE = 102.33 g m–2, MEC = 21.67%

800
Predicted biomass (g m–2)

600

400

200

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Actual biomass (g m–2)

Figure 4. (a) Fitted curve of the best model explaining the relationship between ANPP and
NDVI for calibration sets (n = 50, p < 0.001) for wetlands. (b) Independent validation results
for predicting biomass (n = 15, p < 0.001) of wetlands, Hulunbeier grassland, Inner Mongolia.
SE = standard error of predicting biomass, MEC = coefficient of mean error.

researchers did not do this in China before 2000. Our results indicated that the NDVI
was more reliable for the estimation of ANPP of each ecosystem/habitat dominated
by grasses when the grasses are actively growing. We concluded that each vegetation
type has its own optimal regression model based on experimental data processing and
statistical analysis for the study area.
Arid steppe is widespread and homogeneous, with low ANPP (below 250 g m–2 )
in the study area. A simple linear regression equation between NDVI and ANPP
had high prediction accuracy for arid steppe (R2 = 0.7295, SE = 23.61 g m−2 ,
MEC = 22.09%, p < 0.001) and thus was the most useful model for arid steppe in
the study area. Meadow steppe has a more complex community composition, and the
ANPP of meadow steppe varies greatly from less than 50 g m−2 to above 550 g m−2 .
Consequently, the best regression model for meadow steppe had a lower coefficient
of determination (R2 = 0.6954, p < 0.001) than that for arid steppe in Hulunbeier
 The ground spectral model for estimating biomass 4039

(a)
300
y = 339.52x1.2064
250 R2 = 0.8281

200
ANPP (g m–2)

150

100

50

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
NDVI
(b)
250

SE = 28.90 g m–2, MEC = 20.13%

200
Predicted biomass (g m–2)

150

100

50

0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Actual biomass (g m–2)

Figure 5. (a) Fitted curve of the best model explaining the relationship between ANPP and
NDVI for calibration sets (n = 55, p < 0.001) for sand vegetation. (b) Independent validation
results for predicting biomass (n = 15, p < 0.001) of sand vegetation, Hulunbeier grassland,
Inner Mongolia. SE = standard error of predicting biomass, MEC = coefficient of mean error.

grassland. However, the power equation showed satisfactory prediction accuracy for
meadow steppe with a sufficient number and wide distribution of samples (calibration
n = 150, test n = 50), and thus was the optimal model to estimate ANPP of meadow
steppe in the study area.
Wetland vegetation and sand vegetation are intrazonal vegetation types in the
Hulunbeier meadow steppe. Wetland vegetation experiences comparatively high mois-
ture conditions, leading to high ANPP and NDVI values (figure 3), which have a
strongly exponential relationship (R2 = 0.7904, p < 0.001) but unsatisfactory pre-
diction accuracy (SE = 102.33 g m−2 , MEC = 21.67%). Sand vegetation has a simple
community composition, and a good correlation between ANPP and NDVI exists
(R2 = 0.8281, p < 0.001). However, regarding the two intrazonal vegetation types,
our field sampling had the limitation that there were fewer plots for wetland vegeta-
tion (five plots, of which two were typical plots) and sand vegetation (four plots, of
which two were typical plots) compared with the other vegetation types. Hence, our
4040 J.-X. Gao et al.

(a)
800

700 y = 20.192e3.2154x
R2 = 0.7445
600

ANPP (g m–2) 500

400

300

200

100

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
NDVI
(b)
900
800 SE = 62.50 g m–2, MEC = 2 5.20%

700
Predicted biomass (g m–2)

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Actual biomass (g m–2)

Figure 6. (a) Fitted curve of the best model explaining the relationship between ANPP and
NDVI for calibration sets (n = 375, p < 0.001) for the entire study area. (b) Independent val-
idation results for predicting biomass (n = 120, p < 0.001) on Hulunbeier grassland, Inner
Mongolia. SE = standard error of predicting biomass, MEC = coefficient of mean error.

regression models of the two intrazonal vegetation types may have higher estimation
errors when applied in the future.

4.2 Ground spectral model of the entire study area, its usable range and application
prospects
Most similar studies have focused on a single natural biotic community or a small
geographic area (Jin et al. 1986, Wang and Yong 1996). Our study area comprised
a large area (about 93 000 km2 ) with different vegetation communities and biomass
ranging from high to low. Our study demonstrated that it is feasible to establish a
ground spectral model to estimate biomass over large areas of Hulunbeier grassland.
However, the ground spectral model had its own usable range. We calculated the
NDVI from red (620–670 nm) and NIR (841–876 nm) bands, which represents a
 The ground spectral model for estimating biomass 4041

standard narrowband NDVI. It is evident that the relationship between the NDVI
and ANPP weakens when the NDVI exceeds 0.85 or above a biomass of 400 g m−2
for grassland (figure 6), and thus application of the standard narrowband NDVI is
limited to grassland with biomass below this level. Estimation of grass biomass using
only the standard NDVI when NDVI > 0.85 or ANPP > 400 g m−2 would yield
inaccurate or unreliable predicted values. If biomass exceeds this level, factors such
as grass height, leaf area index (LAI) and vegetation coverage must be considered,
or a modified narrowband NDVI should be derived (Mutanga 2004, Mutanga and
Skidmore 2004). In future field experiments, we will assess the collective influence of
these vegetation characteristics and NDVI on biomass prediction, and we will seek
to obtain a modified narrowband NDVI in order to estimate the biomass of dense
vegetation in natural conditions. It is also important to note that for the accuracy
of this technique, the relationship is dependent on live, green biomass and not on
senesced or dead biomass. Therefore, the timing of the acquisition of the NDVI data
is critical. Our field study was conducted during the most productive period of plant
growth.
Since 2000, NDVI data derived from the Terra/MODIS satellite sensors have
been used extensively because they provide higher spatial resolution, enhanced atmo-
spheric corrections and more precise georegistration than those data obtained from
NOAA-AVHRR (Van Leeuwen et al. 2006). Recently, we demonstrated that there is
an intrinsic link between measured spectral characteristics of plants on the ground
and those obtained from MODIS remote sensing (Chen et al. 2010). The ground
spectral model can be applied to MODIS/Terra or MODIS/Aqua images. We can
estimate grassland yield over large areas with the ground spectral model, which
will become the foundation of yield estimates for Hulunbeier grassland. This study
is of particular importance in that a single method was developed that can be
used to estimate biomass production for Hulunbeier grassland either from spectral
data measured in the field or downloaded from MODIS/Terra or MODIS/Aqua
images.

5. Conclusions
The novelty of our study resides in the development of relatively accurate and
single ground spectral models to estimate ANPP from the standard narrowband
NDVI measured in the field using a regression analysis method. Based on the coef-
ficients of determination and results of independent validation tests, we determined
that a linear equation best fits the arid steppe data, an exponential equation was
best suited to wetland vegetation, power equations were most suitable for meadow
steppe and sand vegetation, and the optimal ground spectral model for the entire
Hulunbeier grassland study area was an exponential equation. The study demon-
strated that each vegetation type and the entire study area had a unique optimal
regression model, which could be used to estimate grassland ANPP from the NDVI
with good predictive capabilities. Among these models, the optimal ground spec-
tral model for the entire Hulunbeier grassland, a linear equation for arid steppe
and a power equation for meadow steppe had particular practical and scientific
value for the estimation of grassland production and management of the study
area. This research developed a single method that can be used to simultaneously
estimate biomass production of Hulunbeier grassland or other similar kinds of
grassland.
4042 J.-X. Gao et al.

Acknowledgements
We thank those who participated in the field survey, including Associate Professor
Xiao-ming Zhang from Hulunbeier College, Associate Professors Yin-cui Hu, Chang-
hong Liu, Ya-lun Guo and Hong Du from Hebei Normal University, Zhao-yan
Diao from Jinan University and Jian-jun Ma from Langfang Normal College. This
research was supported by the Ministry of Environmental Protection of PR China
(No. 200809125), the National Public Welfare Project on Environmental Protection
(2009KYYW07) and Hebei Province Construction Project of Key Subject. We thank
Professor Ramesh Singh, Mrs Catherine Murray and two anonymous referees for their
invaluable comments and suggestions that resulted in a greatly improved manuscript.

References
BEERI, O., PHILLIPS, R., HENDRICKSON, J., FRANK, A.B. and KRONBERG, S., 2007, Estimating
forage quantity and quality using aerial hyperspectral imagery for northern mixed-grass
prairie. Remote Sensing of Environment, 110, pp. 216–225.
CHEN, Y.M., GAO, J.X., DIAO, Z.Y., LV, S.H., CHANG, X.L. and FENG, Z.Y., 2010, Spectral
models for estimating grassland vegetation coverage on Hulunbeier grassland, Inner
Mongolia, China. China Environmental Science, 30, pp. 1287–1292 [in Chinese].
CHO, M.A., SKIDMORE, A., CORSI, F., VAN WIEREN, S.E. and SOBHAN, I., 2007, Estimation
of green grass/herb biomass from airborne hyperspectral imagery using spectral indices
and partial least squares regression. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation
and Geoinformation, 9, pp. 414–424.
DU, Z.Q., WANG, J. and SHEN, Y.D., 2006, Estimating model of grassland above-ground
biomass based on Remote Sensed Data in Shandan County. Remote Sensing Technology
and Application, 21, pp. 338–343 [in Chinese].
EVERITT, J.H., HUSSE, M.A., ESCOBAR, D.E., NIXON, P.R. and PINKERTON, B., 1986,
Assessment of grassland Phytomass with airborne video imagery. Remote Sensing of
Environment, 20, pp. 299–306.
FAVA, F., COLOMBO, R., BOCCHI, S., MERONI, M., SITZIA, M., FOIS, N. and ZUCCA,
C., 2009, Identification of hyperspectral vegetation indices for Mediterranean
pasture Characterization. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and
Geoinformation, 11, pp. 233–243.
FLOMBAUM, P. and SALA, O.E., 2007, A non-destructive and rapid method to estimate
biomass and aboveground net primary production in arid environments. Journal of Arid
Environments, 69, pp. 352–358.
HUANG, J.F. and WANG, X.Z., 1999, The characteristics of natural grassland spectral vegeta-
tion indices in Eastern and Middle part of Northern Tianshan Mountain. Journal of
Mountain Science, 17, pp. 119–124 [in Chinese].
JIN, L.F., XU, X.R. and ZHANG, M., 1986, The spectral reflectance model for estimation
of green biomass of the typical grassland zone in inner Mongolia. Journal of Inner
Mongolia University (Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Neimongol), 17, pp.
735–740 [in Chinese].
LI, J.L. and JIANG, P., 1998, The study on the remote sensing technology in estimating and fore-
casting grassland field application. Journal of Wuhan Technical University of Surveying
and Mapping, 23, pp. 153–157 [in Chinese].
MUTANGA, O., 2004, Hyperspectral remote sensing of tropical grass quality and quantity.
PhD thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Available online at:
http://library.wur.nl/wda/abstracts/ab3565.html.
MUTANGA, O. and SKIDMORE, A.K., 2004, Narrow band vegetation indices overcome the satu-
ration problem in biomass estimation. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 25, pp.
3999–4014.
 The ground spectral model for estimating biomass 4043

NUMATA, I., ROBERTS, D.A., CHADWICK, O.A., SCHIMEL, J.P., GALVAO, L.S. and SOARES,
J.V., 2008, Evaluation of hyperspectral data for pasture estimate in the Brazilian
Amazon using field and imaging spectrometers. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112,
pp. 1569–1583.
PAN, X.Q. (Ed.), 1992, Hulunbeier Grassland in China, pp. 10–95 (Changchun: Science &
Technology Press).
SHI, P.J., LI, B., LI, Z.H. and HU, T., 1994, A research on the production estimation by remote
sensing for large area grassland. Acta Agrestia Sinca, 2, pp. 9–12 [in Chinese].
TUCKER, C.J., 1979, Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring
vegetation. Remote Sensing of Environment, 8, pp. 127–150.
VAN LEEUWEN, W.J.D., ORR, B.J., MARSH, S.E. and HERRMANN, S.M., 2006, Multi-sensor
NDVI data continuity: uncertainties and implications for vegetation monitoring appli-
cations. Remote Sensing of Environment, 100, pp. 67–81.
WANG, Y.R. and YONG, W.Y., 1996, A correlative analysis between near-ground spec-
tral reflectance and yield for Stipa gobica Desert-steppe. Journal of Inner Mongolia
University (Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Neimongol), 27, pp. 664–669 [in
Chinese].
WANG, Z.X., LIU, C., ZHAO, B.R. and LIU, A.J., 2005, ANPP estimate from Modis-EVI for the
grassland region of Xilingol, China. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences),
41, pp. 10–16 [in Chinese].
XU, B. and YANG, X.C., 2009, Calculation of grass production and balance of livestock car-
rying capacity in rangeland region of Northeast China. Geographical Research, 28,
pp. 402–408 [in Chinese].
ZHANG, L.Y., ZHANG, J.X., SAI, Y.J.Y., BAO, H.X., SHAN, J.G. and GUO, Z.Z., 2008, Remote
sensing monitoring model for grassland vegetation biomass monitoring in typical
steppe – a case study from Xilinguole. Pratacultural Science, 25, pp. 31–36 [in Chinese].
ZHAO, B.R., LIU, C., LIU, A.J. and WANG, Z.X., 2004, Estimate the yield of grassland using
MODIS–NDVI – a case study of the grassland in Xilinguole in Inner Mongolia.
Pratacultural Science, 21, pp. 12–14 [in Chinese].