Next Article in Journal
Incentive Mechanism Design in Collaborative Management of Public Health Emergencies
Previous Article in Journal
The Functional Zoning of the Syr Darya River’s Delta
Previous Article in Special Issue
Modeling the Underlying Drivers of Natural Vegetation Occurrence in West Africa with Binary Logistic Regression Method
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Potential for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) Applications in Biodiversity Conservation, Managing Forests, and Related Services in India

by
Kadukothanahally Nagaraju Shivaprakash
1,*,
Niraj Swami
2,
Sagar Mysorekar
1,
Roshni Arora
1,
Aditya Gangadharan
1,
Karishma Vohra
1,
Madegowda Jadeyegowda
3 and
Joseph M. Kiesecker
4
1
The Nature Conservancy Center, 37 Link Road, Lajpatnagar-3, New Delhi 110024, India
2
The Nature Conservancy, Arington, VA 22201, USA
3
College of Forestry, Keladi Shivappa Nayaka University of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Ponnampet 571216, India
4
Global Lands Program, The Nature Conservancy, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(12), 7154; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127154
Submission received: 31 March 2022 / Revised: 3 June 2022 / Accepted: 6 June 2022 / Published: 10 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Use of Natural Resources in a Changing Climate)

Abstract

:
The recent advancement in data science coupled with the revolution in digital and satellite technology has improved the potential for artificial intelligence (AI) applications in the forestry and wildlife sectors. India shares 7% of global forest cover and is the 8th most biodiverse region in the world. However, rapid expansion of developmental projects, agriculture, and urban areas threaten the country’s rich biodiversity. Therefore, the adoption of new technologies like AI in Indian forests and biodiversity sectors can help in effective monitoring, management, and conservation of biodiversity and forest resources. We conducted a systematic search of literature related to the application of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning algorithms (ML) in the forestry sector and biodiversity conservation across globe and in India (using ISI Web of Science and Google Scholar). Additionally, we also collected data on AI-based startups and non-profits in forest and wildlife sectors to understand the growth and adoption of AI technology in biodiversity conservation, forest management, and related services. Here, we first provide a global overview of AI research and application in forestry and biodiversity conservation. Next, we discuss adoption challenges of AI technologies in the Indian forestry and biodiversity sectors. Overall, we find that adoption of AI technology in Indian forestry and biodiversity sectors has been slow compared to developed, and to other developing countries. However, improving access to big data related to forest and biodiversity, cloud computing, and digital and satellite technology can help improve adoption of AI technology in India. We hope that this synthesis will motivate forest officials, scientists, and conservationists in India to explore AI technology for biodiversity conservation and forest management.

1. Introduction

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a wide-ranging branch of computer technologies concerned with building smart machines capable of augmenting, automating, and accelerating key day-to-day tasks that typically require human intelligence. It involves extracting patterns, predicting “future states”, and detecting anomalies. The computational, technological and research breakthroughs in the field of AI have promoted a rise of their application in every field (e-commerce, social network, agriculture, education, environmental sustainability, healthcare, combating information manipulation, social care and urban planning, public safety, transportation, environment conservation, and many more) including forest and wildlife sectors [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8]. The advancements have been driven by the following factors: (1) the pace with which information is available has increased—creating the opportunity to drive impactful insights and decision-making; (2) the costs of data storage and computing have dropped due to availability of cloud technologies—allowing us to build complex solutions at scale to accelerate experimentation and research; and (3) availability of holistic data sources due to availability of (a) high-resolution satellite imagery, (b) drone and camera technologies, (c) sensors and telemetry technologies (IoT), and (d) people-centric data sources (social networks, citizen science, and other open data sources). However, the impact of AI technology has been uneven, mostly benefiting high economic return sectors, with fewer applications for forestry [9,10] and biodiversity conservation [11,12,13,14]. Though, application of artificial intelligence (AI) in forest and natural resources management started three decades before [15], the research and adoption of AI technology in the forestry sector lagged behind other fields such as health, transportation, and agriculture [3].
Forests cover approximately 30% of global land area and are dominant terrestrial ecosystems harboring 90% of terrestrial biodiversity [16,17]. Forests are vital for proper functioning of our planet as they provide several critical functions for sustaining life, such as protective functions and environmental services. For instance, they provide clean, breathable air by stabilizing greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, and they absorb as much as 30% (2 billion tons/year) of annual global atmospheric CO2 emissions [18]. They play a major role in global food security by supporting pollinators, natural predators of agricultural pests, and the hydrological cycle. They are an important source of medicinal plants and supply about 40% of global renewable energy (biofuels) [19]. They are critical for hydrological integrity of various ecosystems and contribute to people’s and the ecosystem’s resilience to extreme events such as floods and droughts. To add to that, about 1.6 billion people depend on forests for their livelihood [20].
Unfortunately, forests also face many challenges. Globally, forests are undergoing rapid degradation due to exploitation for timber, agriculture expansion, and urbanization. Impacts of climate change, such as wildfires, are further contributing to global forest degradation [21]. In the last 25 years, 129 million hectares of forest area were lost globally, resulting in a reduction of global carbon stock by 17.4 Gt [22]. It is predicted that the current global trend of forest decline and carbon loss will continue in the near future [19]. Despite the benefits the forest provides and the kind of threats it is experiencing, the forest sector is still using traditional techniques to manage them. In fact, it is one of the few sectors where adoption of new technology is slow [23]. For example, in many countries including India, forest officials still use pen and paper to conduct forest inventories. Such traditional methods pose many drawbacks, like the introduction of personal bias, slowing data collection and analysis, and lack of scalability of the approach [24]. In comparison to the forestry sector, other sectors like agriculture—one of the prominent drivers of deforestation—have embraced technological solutions at a rapid pace [25]. Precision agriculture is a result of companies like sagarobotics.com, and farm.bot which use robots for precise de-weeding, precise fertilization, or pesticide applications, as they contribute to higher yields per acres.
Unlike agricultural systems, forests are dynamic in nature, and so they need to be managed accordingly, especially when many governments are currently identifying ways to achieve transformational change to meet their nationally determined contributions—NDCs [19]. This is where technology can play a significant role by filling the gaps/drawbacks of traditional approaches of data collection and analytics, which is crucial for effective forest management and conservation. The forest sector will benefit significantly by technology’s inherent ability to support innovation and adopt innovation to various geographies and at various scales, and at a much faster pace.
This synthesis article discusses the scope of artificial intelligence and its applications to the Indian forest sector and biodiversity conservation with following objectives: (1) provide a global overview of AI application in the forest sector and biodiversity conservation, and (2) discuss challenges in the Indian forest sector, biodiversity conservation, and relevance of innovative AI technology to solve those challenges.

2. Materials and Methods

We identified published literature and reports that addressed the application of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning algorithms (ML) for biodiversity conservation, forest management, and related services across the globe and in India using a systematic literature search. To establish a database, we searched the ISI Web of Science (http://webofknowledge.com, accessed on 3 August 2021) and Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com/, accessed on 18 June 2021) for peer reviewed journal articles published since 1980. Literature/reports published by the industry, nonprofit organizations, and government organizations were also considered. We used a different combination of keywords such as AI and ML application in: biodiversity conservation, wildlife conservation, forestry, illegal logging, plant inventory and identification, forest classification and mapping, wildlife identification and monitoring, forest restoration and conservation, above-ground carbon stock, forest health and phenology monitoring, detecting, and predicting anthropogenic threat to forest, etc. (Table S1). The initial search yielded 900 peer-reviewed studies after removing duplicates (300 studies), of which we excluded 628 studies by reading title and abstract, as they did not qualify the objective of our study. We reviewed full texts of the remaining 272 publications to find studies that reported application of AI and ML in forest management and their related services across the globe and in India.
We only included studies that reported application of AI and ML at least in one of the areas related to forestry, biodiversity research, and conservation as mentioned in Table S1. We gave priority to primary studies to avoid the duplication. Following the mentioned search and criteria for literature selection, we finally selected 172 studies to include in the review. Additionally, we also collected data on AI-based startups and non-profits in forestry, and biodiversity conservation from published reports, literature, blogs, and from google search.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Global Overview of AI Research and Application in Biodiversity Conservation and the Forest Sector

One of the main pre-requisites for developing and applying AI in any field is access to high-volume and high-quality datasets, network infrastructure of the Internet-of-Things (IoT), advanced technology (high resolution camera, satellite technology, sensors, drones, and unnamed aerial vehicles (UAVs)), and computational space and storage. Access to a combination of these requirements has motivated AI application research in many domains of biodiversity conservation and forestry, ranging from forest inventory and detecting illegal wildlife and timber trafficking and felling [6,26,27] (Figure 1 and Table S1). Further, these research efforts have revolutionized real-time application of AI technology in biodiversity conservation [28,29,30] and forestry sectors [9,10,31], as indicated by an increasing number of related AI-technology-based start-ups (Table S2).

3.2. The Growth of AI-Based Start-Ups and Non-Profits in Biodiversity Conservation and the Forest Sector

Balancing preservation with sustainable utilization of forest resources is a daunting task, particularly given the lack of transparency and the persistent corruption in the forestry sector. Unlawful practices such as illegal logging, deforestation and illegal timber trade have increased over time. While technology cannot solve all the problems, it can certainly contribute to prevention of such unlawful practices, ultimately improving transparency in the forestry sector and even helping tackle climate change through sustainable practices. In the following section, we describe economic markets for AI applications in the forestry sector and how such economic growth has led to a number of promising AI technology start-ups and non-profits all over the globe, that aim to digitize forests, improve forest management [7,32,33,34], combat rising levels of CO2 [35,36,37,38], protect endangered animal species [39,40], prevent wildlife trafficking and illegal trading [41,42,43,44], help in wildlife census and monitoring [27,45,46,47], and automate taxonomic identification and classification of animals and plants, ect. [48,49,50,51,52,53] by embracing digital advancements (Table S2).
AI applications in the forestry sector are expected to significantly contribute to the global economy primarily through the precision forestry market which was worth USD 3.9 billion in 2019 and is projected to reach USD 6.1 billion by 2024. The major drivers of the precision forestry market are increasing mechanization in emerging countries of Europe, Asia Pacific, and Africa for logging operations, rising construction activities, growing demand for timber from sawmills, decreasing cost of forestry mapping technologies, and advanced monitoring and surveillance technologies, as well as the push to drive prevention of illegal logging and deforestation, and increase government support towards digitalization of forest resources.
Additionally, the AI technology market in inventory and logistics management, fire detection, digital mapping of forest for biomass, and carbon and timber resources is also expected to grow in the coming years. Such promising AI technology market growth relevant to the forestry sector has encouraged multiple start-up companies and non-profits to use AI-powered technology to tackle a wide range of problems such as detecting anthropogenic threats to the forest (deforestation, illegal felling), hazard assessment and prediction (fire, pest, and disease prediction and detection; predicting storm and flood damage to forest), restoration and reforestation, forest resource quantification and mapping (forest classification, estimating forest cover in real time, estimating carbon stock, and biomass and timber resource), tracking illegal wood trafficking, and monitoring forest health and phenology (Table S2). Most of these starts-ups and non-profits are located in developed countries such as the USA, Europe, Canada, Australia, and South Africa. Except Brazil, most developing countries which hold biodiversity-rich tropical forests are very slow in adoption of AI technology (Table S2).

3.3. AI and ML Application in Managing Forests and Their Resources, and Biodiversity Conservation

3.3.1. Addressing Challenges of Deforestation and Illegal Felling

AI and machine learning algorithms coupled with spatial analysis have been used to predict and monitor deforestation rates across the globe [54,55,56,57,58,59]. For instance, Rainforest Connection (https://rfcx.org/, accessed on 26 June 2021) is working to address the challenge of deforestation. The company is using old, discarded cellphones, powering them with solar power, and installing them on the treetops to record chainsaw sounds from the forest. These recordings/data are sent to cellphone towers and then to the base station where Google’s AI and machine learning library called TensorFlow is used to identify and detect chainsaw noise over others. Once identified, this information along with location information of installed sensors is then shared with forest managers so that further due diligence can be carried out to identify and stop illegal tree felling. Similarly, other startup companies and non-profits such as Outland Analytics, Terramonitor, Global Forest Watch, and Future Forest Map project also make use of open-source satellite data and AI technology to map and monitor deforestation in real time. For example, Outland analytics makes use of audio recognition AI algorithms to detect chainsaw sounds or unauthorized vehicles and sends real-time alerts via email to officials to efficiently manage environmental crime. Terramonitor and Satelligence use a database of satellite images collected every day by multiple satellites and AI to create low-cost satellite data for natural area management and to monitor deforestation and forest health in real time (Table S2).
The World Resources Institute in collaboration with Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE) used spatial modeling and AI to understand what factors influence deforestation in the Democratic Republic of Congo and to map where future forest loss is most likely to occur. Their analysis suggests that human presence factors such as shifting cultivation, and the presence of roads, had highest influence on forest loss followed by climatic variable precipitation. Further, analysis suggested that forests near to farmland are most vulnerable to deforestation. Their study can help DRC authorities to proactively make land use decisions that shift development pressure away from high-value forests.

3.3.2. Forest Inventory, Mapping, Carbon, and Biomass Estimation

Various startups are also making use of openly available and proprietary high-resolution satellite imageries and combining them with various other datasets to produce highly detailed maps of forests and landcover [60,61,62,63]. For example, SilviaTerra combines openly available high-resolution satellite imagery with field survey data from the US forest department to develop a predictive model that estimates forest conditions at a 15 m × 15 m resolution. The data contains information about tree height, type, and diameter, for example, which is being used by various timber and conservation organizations for guiding their plans (https://silviaterra.com/bark/index.html, accessed on 26 June 2021). Chesapeake Bay Conservancy teamed with Esri, and the Microsoft Azure team used machine learning libraries, to develop a highly detailed (one square meter resolution) landcover map of the region (https://chesapeakeconservancy.org/, accessed on 26 June 2021). Now, that the algorithm and mechanics are available, with some modification, to develop a detailed landcover map either for the entire US or other parts of the globe. 20tree.AI, a start-up in Portugal, made use of remote sensing, big data, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence for real-time forest inventory and monitoring. The Finnish forest center makes use of GIS data, imagery sources, climate and weather data, and AI for accurate measurements of forest stands and to better predict forest inventory. Similarly, CollectiveCrunch a for-profit company based in Germany and Finland has developed an AI platform dubbed as “Linda Forest”, that predicts wood mass, wood species, and wood quality of target areas far more accurate than any existing conventional methods. Linda Forest uses multiple sources of data, such as VHR2 image of Europe from the Copernicus Land Monitoring Service, Sentinel-2 images for growth modeling, and Copernicus Climate Change Reanalysis data for microclimate modeling and growth predictions, to accurately estimate wood mass and wood quality in standing forest of the target area. Using this information, companies can then estimate resource-efficient production and consumption of wood products.
Deforestation and forest degradation account for approximately 11% of carbon emissions, more than the entire global transportation sector and second only to the energy sector. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) is a mechanism developed by Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It creates a financial value for the carbon stored in forests by offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from forested lands and invest in low-carbon paths to sustainable development. However, designing effective REDD+ policies, assessing their GHG impact, and linking them with the corresponding payments, is a resource-intensive and complex task. AI and machine learning techniques have shown a high potential in mapping and monitoring CO2 stock and other ecosystem services in forests [35,36,37,38]. Start-ups such as GainForest and Panchama make use of AI technology to solve such complex tasks. GainForest uses large amounts of unlabeled satellite imagery, a video prediction model, game theory, and machine-learning-based Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) processes to monitor and forecast deforestation and design carbon payment schemes. Similarly, Panchama uses machine learning on a combination of satellite, drone, and lidar images to precisely estimate individual tree size, volume, and carbon density. Non-profit collaboration such as for Erol Foundation, the Center for Global Discovery, and Conservation Science (GDCS) at ASU and non-profit Planet.Inc use computer vision models, LiDAR, and satellite imagery at 3–5 m resolution for automatic and cost-effective direct measurement and mapping of carbon stock and emission at high resolution and high frequency in the Peruvian forest.

3.3.3. Automated Reforestation and Afforestation

Another example of AI application is reforestation of recently deforested areas that can promote the planting of 1.2 trillion more trees on the planet [64]. This has the potential to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere in the order of hundreds of gigatons [64]. Three start-ups, Droneseed, Dendra, and Land Life, are creating products to address this challenge. Droneseed is a company which has developed an innovative product called the seed vessel that carries seeds of desired species, helping to protect and germinate faster once planted. The company deploys drone swarms and FAA heavy lift certified a group of four or five drones that carry weight of about 57 lbs, scan the study area to be planted to identify suitable conditions for planting-like moisture availability, and drop seed vessels. This technology provides numerous advantages over manual reforestation method because it enables faster dispersal of seeds, and it can cover a larger area than planting by hand; most importantly, it also provides the ability to quickly monitor and measure the status of reforestation using drones. As it provides a bird eye view, it also helps to identify exact locations of problematic areas where appropriate interventions could be done to achieve better results (https://www.droneseed.com/, accessed on 26 June 2021).
The Nature Conservancy’s Oregon chapter has teamed up with Droneseed to restore rangeland that was disturbed by invasive species in Oregon (https://uavcoach.com/droneseed-oregon/, accessed on 26 June 2021). A similar start-up in UK called Dendra uses AI-based automation and digital intelligence to identify suitable planting areas to disperse seedpods filled with seeds of desired species and nutrients to support germination. Land Life, a start-up in Amsterdam, uses multiple technologies such as GPS, satellite imagery, an automated driller, Cocoon (a seedling support technology), and AI technology for mass-scale reforestation and monitoring reforestation success.

3.3.4. Hazard Assessment and Prediction

Another area where technological advances are bringing transformational changes to the forestry sector is through the collection of inventory data. Such advances have led to novel ways of collecting and preparing highly accurate, high-resolution data that will significantly improve the way we are managing forests and conservation activities. For example, a lot of data exists in paper format from past forest monitoring, which technologies like Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) can digitize. Once the data is available in digital format, they can be fed into several analytical algorithms for conducting analyses. Internet-enabled sensors (Internet of Things devices), that can measure temperature, moisture, etc., when installed in forests, provide near-real-time information about forest activities and conditions. Such data are being used to develop predictive models for identifying and getting insights into forest health and threats like deforestation [55,56,57,58,59], drought [65,66], wildfires [67,68,69], pests, diseases outbreak [70,71,72], soil health, storm damage, and other forest disturbances [71]. Terrafuse, a start-up in Canada, uses physics-enabled AI models to understand climate-related risk at the hyperlocal level. Terrafuse leverages historical wildfire data, numerical simulations, and satellite imagery on Microsoft Azure to model wildfire risk for any location. It also estimates temporal change in carbon density because of fire, deforestation, and other calamities.
Further, researchers in Columbia University are using AI technology to understand the effect of Hurricane Maria on Puerto Rico forests. Researchers want to understand how tropical storms, which may worsen with climate change, affect the distribution of tree species in Puerto Rico. In 2017, a NASA flyover of Puerto Rico yielded very high-resolution photographs of the tree canopies, using this images and AI technology, scientists hope to analyze which tree species were destroyed and which withstood the hurricane to predict patterns associated with future hurricanes.

3.3.5. Tracking Illegal Wood Trafficking

The illegal timber trade is considered as lucrative as the illegal wildlife trade. According to Interpol, the illegal timber trade is worth USD 50 billion to 150 billion annually. The supply of illegal timber not only contributes to deforestation (leading to significant loss of carbon) but also threatens many rare tree species such as rosewood, dipterocarps and mahogany. Illegal timber trade lowers global timber prices by 7 to 16%, costing source nations up to USD 5 billion as losses in annual revenue and providing a significant incentive for governments to act. Thus, to protect forests from illegal felling and to guide legal timber use globally, there is a need for a system which can track illegal timber [73]. Timbeter is a start-up in Estonia, which uses the world’s largest database of photometric measurements of roundwood and AI for online tracking of roundwood to individual shipments and piles to fight illegal logging and timber trafficking. Xylene, a start-up in Germany, uses a combination of space technology, blockchain and supply chain mapping, automatic data gathered by IoT devices, and Earth Observation and AI technology to track the wood supply chain in real-time.

3.3.6. Monitoring Ecosystem Health and Biodiversity Conservation

The conservation community often seeks to promote forest characteristics that influence richness and diversity of fauna in the forest, making it critical to understand what interventions are successful, and AI technology is helping in such interventions [11,12,13,14]. Scientists from The Nature Conservancy and its partner organizations have developed a novel way of automated soundscape monitoring to evaluate the impact of conservation actions on biodiversity. To understand how species respond to disturbances like recent deforestation or poaching, they developed tiny sound recorders and installed them across various locations in the forest. They recorded sounds of the forest, referred to as a soundscape, which was then analyzed to identify various species sounds, and activity across various times of the day and various periods of the year. They are developing a global platform to store such data from various efforts across the globe and provide analytical services to analyze these datasets to understand benefits of conservation interventions. Such technology has various implications for understanding how species react to disturbance or benefit from interventions [13]. Classification of vibration patterns from oncoming trains using machine learning has also been used in providing early warning to wildlife in Banff National Park, Canada, where train strikes have been a major source of mortality for grizzly bears Ursus arctos horribilis [74]. By using such classifications to trigger sound and light-based alarms before trains reached the location, animals were found to leave the track 29–62% earlier than they would have otherwise done [74].
Apart from sound recognition, the widespread use of imagery in wildlife monitoring has led to a strong use-case for AI-based automation for identification of species [48,49,50,51,52,53] (Tables S1 and S2). Imagery may be obtained, for example, through automated camera traps, which are triggered by heat and motion. Millions of photographs or video clips may result from the widespread deployment of such devices. Given the massive amount of data, this may make it challenging to analyze and extract data on species of conservation importance. The application of AI to this problem can result in accurate species classification. For example, in the Serengeti ecosystem, a community of 48 species was classified using such an approach [27]. Similar methods have also been applied in the identification of individual animals. For example, the strip patterns of tigers, (Panthera tigris) have been used to identify individuals [75]. Based on this, Shi et al. [76] developed a convolutional neural network (CNN) to identify individual tigers. The ability to identify both species and individuals has important implications for monitoring biodiversity, but also in conservation applications such as mitigating human-wildlife conflict. For example, farmers could be provided with early warning on the entry of elephants (Elephas maximus) into crop fields and villages by combining automated cameras with image analysis software. Similarly, individual tigers that become habituated to humans, increasing risk of conflicts, can be identified using such systems. A key requirement in implementing such systems in the field is rapid classification and information transfer, for this computation on the device itself is ideal but can be expensive to set up. Further, the lack of mobile towers in remote forested areas can hamper information transfer.

3.3.7. Solving Supply and Demand Problem

With rising global population, there is high demand for timber and non-timber forest products. Therefore, the forestry sector, globally, is facing demand uncertainty, higher supply risk, and increasing competitive intensity. Thus, there is a need for smart supply chain management to solve supply and demand problems in the forestry sector [77,78]. One area of AI’s potential application is the emerging management philosophy of supply chain management (SCM). The aiTree Ltd. in Canada, for over 20 years, has been focusing on systematic technologies to solve demand and supply problems in the forestry sector with AI algorithms. The aiTree has applied its typical application Forest Simulation Optimization System (FSOS) in British Columbia, Canada to solve demand and supply problems in the forestry sector. The demands from a forest include wildlife habitat, biodiversity, water quality, visual quality, carbon storage, timber production, and economic contributions. FSOS focuses on both “what we can take from the forest” and “what we can create in the forest”. Forest design is a complicated problem because the trees are growing and dying, and all the values must be considered every year for over 400 years. FSOS is a good example that uses AI, big data, and cloud computing technologies to solve the complicated demand and supply problems.

3.3.8. Forest Hydrology

One of the most critical aspects of forest management is understanding its linkages with watershed/forest hydrology, as it drives nutrient cycling, precipitation inputs, and surface and subsurface flow networks that support forest growth and downstream water quality [79]. With improvements in technologies such as high-performance sensors, smart phones, autonomous vehicles, remote sensing, and GIS, increasing volume and complexity of data on ecohydrological parameters are being collected. Tools such as AI and ML are being applied in the field of ecohydrology, including forest hydrology, to fully realize the potential of these data and obtain new insights into ecohydrological processes [80]. For instance, AI/ML methods have been used to estimate and model precipitation interception by forest canopies [81,82], canopy water content [83], spatiotemporal behavior of soil moisture in vegetated areas [84,85,86], global [87] and regional [88] terrestrial evapotranspiration, water-use efficiency in terrestrial ecosystems [89], vegetation water storage [90], terrestrial/groundwater storage [91] using vegetation cover as an indicator [92], and plant water stress [93]. The recent growth of big hydrologic data through remote sensing and data compilation has also fostered the adoption of ML in land surface modeling which simulates land surface processes including partitioning of water between land and atmosphere, such as in groundwater dynamics [94]. Big data and AI/ML have been increasingly used to predict extreme geoclimatic events such as droughts, floods, and landslides [95], which have direct implications for forest management. More recently, efforts are being made to improve prediction of terrestrial ecohydrological extremes (TEE) (e.g., the extremes of evapotranspiration, soil moisture, streamflow, and terrestrial water storage) at seasonal to decadal scales using AI-based integrated modeling [96]. Taken altogether, these advances in technology, data interpretation, and modeling are slowly transforming our ability to understand forest and watershed hydrology [97] and have important policy and management implications [80]. Use of AI/ML methods for forest hydrology, however, seem to be limited to scientific research and are yet to be applied for conservation and management at a large scale. These methods have a tremendous potential for better decision support in forest hydrology management.

3.3.9. Aquatic and Marine Biodiversity and Water Resource Conservation

Artificial intelligence (AI) applications in aquatic and marine biodiversity and water resource optimize the conservation of aquatic and marine flora and fauna and water resources and attracted significant reserch attention since last decade. For instance, AI and ML models have been used to predict stream flow [98,99,100,101,102,103], water quality [104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125], water pollution and toxicology [126,127,128,129,130,131,132], aquatic and marine biodiversity diversity prediction and extinction [133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149], predicting species distribution and habitat mapping [150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161,162,163,164], and marine and aquatic species recognition and classification [165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172,173,174,175,176,177,178,179,180,181,182,183]. Above mentioned AI research in aquatic and marine biodiversity and water resource conservation highlight that AI will be key to developing new technology to uncover new aspects of conservation and potential threats to aquatic and marine ecosystems’ structures and functions, thereby informing effective monitoring and conservation of aquatic and marine biodiversity and managing water resources. This new knowledge will directly address several of the key challenges identified for the aquatic and marine ecosystems, from effective water resource management and biodiversity conservation, to creating a digital representation of the freshwater and ocean ecosystems and delivering data, knowledge, and technology to all.

3.4. Status of Indian Forests and Need of AI Technology

Indian forests are an important defining feature of the country’s landscape that hold both cultural and biological importance [184]. India’s wide range of climate, geography, and culture is unique among biodiversity-rich nations and is known for its diverse forest ecosystems and megabiodiversity. It ranks as the 10th most forested nation in the world [19] with 24.56% (81Mha) of its geographical area under forest and tree cover [185]. Out of 34 global biodiversity “hot spots,” four are located in India, namely, the eastern and north-eastern Himalayas, Indo-Burma (North-east India), Sundaland, and Western Ghats [186]. Being one of the 17 megadiverse countries, with only 2.4% of global land area, India accounts for 7 to 8% of recorded species in the world [98]. In addition, Indian forests provide many ecosystem services and livelihoods to people. Approximately 275 million people of India live in the fringes of forest and earn the bulk of their livelihood from forests [187]. It is estimated that Indian forests sequester 5.84–7.39 Gt of carbon every year [188].
Despite their cultural, economic, and ecological importance, Indian forests face many adverse challenges.
  • About 85% of forest area is publicly owned and 15% privately owned [19]. Most of the public forests are administered by the government, and some of them by communities and indigenous groups, and only around 27% of publicly owned forest is protected in 2019, compared to 31.63% in 2003. Further, 14% of tree cover assumes unclassified status (Table 1), indicating that Indian forests suffer from low protection status.
  • Of the approximately 81 Mha of forest, 9928 Mha are dense primary forests, 30.847 Mha are moderately dense forests, 40,775 Mha are open forests, and 9503 Mha consists of agroforestry, social forestry, and plantations [185]. The forest cover data from 2003 to 2019 suggests that there is a consistent increasing trend in open forest and a decrease of dense forest cover with the gain of 1,917 Mha of open forest and loss of 2599 Mha of moderately dense forest (Table 1), indicating a continuous degradation of dense forest in India.
  • Further, Indian forests suffer from low growing stock. The data from 2003 to 2019 suggest that there is an loss of 507,944 million cubic meters of growing stock in forests, whereas trees outside forests show a gain of 0.61 million cubic meter, suggesting that Indian forests are poorly managed (Table 1).
  • Illegal logging and trade of high-value timber is a major problem in many parts of the country. In 2009, the Ministry of Environment and Forests estimated that 2 million m3 of logs were illegally felled per year. Underlying this logging are several uncertainties relating to legal rights to harvest, tax, perform timber harvesting activities, third parties’ rights, and trade and transport.
  • As India is one of the world’s largest importers of wood-based products, it is also a major consumer of illegal timber. The volume of illegal imports has increased, and in 2012, almost 20% of timber imports were estimated to be illegal [189].
  • India’s population and economic growth in the last several years has raised several concerns in terms of its present and future resource demands for timber and non-timber material and energy needs from the forest. With 18% of global livestock and 17% of the human population on 2.4% of the world’s land area, the Indian forest faces immense biotic pressure. Around 30% of fodder needs for cattle and 40% of domestic fuel wood needs directly come from these forests. Despite protection status, 87% of national parks experience grazing. Further, in eastern and northeastern India, around 1.2 Mha of forest land is under shifting cultivation. Therefore, there is high anthropogenic and other biotic pressure on Indian forests.
  • Moreover, the Indian forest sector still depends on resource-intensive and time-consuming traditional forestry practices to manage and protect forests. Compared to the wildlife sector, the forestry sector in India has been slow in adapting innovative technology, which can bring transformative change in conservation and management of forests and their resources.
While these challenges persist in the Indian forest sector, they coincide with an era in which there is unprecedented innovation and technological change. The rapid advancement in AI technology supported by the Internet of Things (IoT), open-source big data, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), high-resolution satellite images, sensors, and cheaper computing, is a boon to the Indian forestry sector for solving many of its challenges. Given the similar nature of problems plaguing tropical forests globally and in India (such as deforestation, encroachment for farming, forest degradation to extract timber and non-timber resources, illegal logging, illegal timber import and export, and inefficient supply chain management), AI technologies being developed for the forestry sectors in other countries and related learnings can also be applied for improving forest management in India (Table S2).

3.5. Barriers to Adoption of AI-Based Systems for India’s Forests and Biodiversity Conservation

3.5.1. Inadequate Awareness

There is often a lack of awareness among stakeholders (such as forest managers, policymakers, and civil society) on the availability and applicability of technologies. This is partly due to the inherent complexity of these new technologies, which may lead to disinterest. On the other hand, the use of terms such as artificial intelligence may also create unrealistic expectations for solutions. Therefore, building the capacity of stakeholders on the appropriate use of these technologies is an important step in applying them in the field. Strong case studies and pilot demonstrations are important in building both understanding and realistic expectations.

3.5.2. Lack of Ethical Standards and Safeguards

The use of technologies such as AI brings with it several possibilities for misuse. When using such technologies in areas with particularly vulnerable communities, such as indigenous groups or forest-dependent communities, safeguards need to be especially strong. Concepts such as free, prior, and informed consent, data security, and permitted applications need to be defined and followed. Such standards also need to be accompanied by capacity development of communities in areas where such technologies are deployed, to ensure equity in outcomes.

3.5.3. Limited Suitability to Harsh Field Conditions

Technologies that are implemented under the harsh conditions of the field need to be robust enough to function over meaningful timeframes. Climatic and weather conditions, animal damage, and vandalism are key challenges for such technologies. Inadequate planning for such conditions may lead to equipment failures, thereby also undermining trust in the concept itself. Such planning is particularly important given the high capital and running costs of such technologies. Further, inadequate supporting infrastructure in the field, such as unstable connectivity, may limit the reliability of equipment.

3.5.4. Limited Commercial Scalability

Applications of AI in the forest sector in India are currently driven by enthusiasts and small startup companies. The lack of a strong market limits the investments that can be made in the sector, in turn leading to inadequate scaling. Further, the fragmentation of efforts among small competitors working on similar applications may hinder the large-scale economic development of AI technology. Such limitations may also prevent the development of user-friendly interfaces, leading to AI models being deposited in repositories such as GitHub but not being used by practitioners.

3.6. Uncertainties Associated with AI

Though, AI technology has potential applications in forestry and biodiversity conservation, it is increasingly important to evaluate the reliability and efficacy of AI and ML systems before they could be applied in practice. Because the predictions made by AI and ML models may not be always reliable due to uncertainty associated with data and expert knowledge. For example, the AI and ML algorithms will not be able to differentiate plantations from reforestation areas and natural forest, especially in a species-rich tropical forest, if there is no good number of labeled images of natural forest, plantations, and reforestation areas. Thus, the reliability of output produced by AI and ML models depends on large amount of training and test data and expert knowledge.

4. Conclusions

Globally, there is a need for forestry practices to contribute to sustainable development goals that attempt to conserve forests as carbon sinks and biodiversity habitats, and to sustain and cultivate forests as green infrastructure. The emerging technological innovation to manage, monitor, and conserve the forest and its resources is helping the sector achieve sustainable development goals. Globally, there is an increasing number of countries adapting smart forest and precision forestry techniques which make use of technological innovation in digital, satellite, sensors, and AI technology to manage, protect, and sustainably utilize forest resources. However, adoption of these innovations is mostly limited to developed countries and a few developing countries where forest is managed for commercial purposes. On the other hand, for countries like India, where forests are mostly managed for non-commercial purpose of biodiversity conservation, storing carbon, and benefiting rural livelihood, the adaption of innovative technologies in the forest sector has been slow.
Challenges or limitations, such as (1) the unavailability of better data or limited access to available big data, and (2) technical and computation challenges of using technologies like AI (e.g., accessibility to the wider community), have resulted in a limited application of these technologies in the Indian forest sector. Therefore, to make technologies like AI more beneficial and accessible to the Indian forest sector, we suggest the following actions:
  • Interdisciplinary collaborations between forestry practitioners, forest ecologists, conservation practitioners, forestry officials, academicians working in the forestry sector, and technologists will be important in facilitating long-term adoption of AI technology for forestry sector applications (for example, corporations like Microsoft and Google initiative’s “AI for earth innovation” bringing together researchers and conservationists to incorporate AI solutions into nature conservation by providing technical support, infrastructure, and training [190]),
  • Cheap and cost-effective computational resources for both data analysis and storage (e.g., cheaper cloud-based options for online data analysis and storage) will have an advantage of minimal investment and hardware maintenance [191].
  • Continued expansion of data collection capabilities (for example, emerging technologies such as the wireless sensor networks, digital recording devices, drones and camera technology, and crowd-sourced data approaches like citizen science, development of algorithms to extract data from social media, and other online sources), and
  • Development of computationally less intensive, fast processing algorithms to analyze big data.
Further, these developments will have tremendous potential to drive transformational changes in the way we manage our forests, biodiversity, and design appropriate conservation measures.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su14127154/s1. Table S1: Summary of AI and machine learning application research in biodiversity conservation and forest sector; Table S2: AI start-up companies and non-profits in biodiversity conservation and forest sector.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.N.S., S.M. and N.S.; methodology, K.N.S.; software, writing—original draft preparation, K.N.S., S.M., R.A., A.G. and N.S.; writing—review and editing, K.V., M.J. and J.M.K.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing was not applicable to this study.

Acknowledgments

We greatly acknowledge the initial review of the manuscript by colleagues from Lands team—The Nature Conservancy Center, India.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

AIArtificial intelligence
MLMachine learning
CNNConvolutional Neural Network
FSIForest Survey of India
FAOFood and Agriculture Organization
IoTInternet of Things
UAVsUnmanned Aerial Vehicles
GISGeographic Information System
SCMSupply Chain Management
FSOSForest Simulation Optimization System
UNFCCCUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
REDD+Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
CARPECentral Africa Regional Program for the Environment
NDCsNationally Determined Contributions
DRCDemocratic Republic of Congo
LiDARLight Detection and Ranging
OCROptical Character Recognition
NLPNatural Language Processing

References

  1. Kim, K.S.; Park, J.H. A survey of applications of artificial intelligence algorithms in eco-environmental modelling. Environ. Eng. Res. 2009, 14, 102–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Gomes, C.; Dietterich, T.; Barrett, C.; Conrad, J.; Dilkina, B.; Ermon, S.; Fang, F.; Farnsworth, A.; Fern, A.; Fern, X.; et al. Computational sustainability: Computing for a better world and a sustainable future. Commun. ACM 2019, 62, 56–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Shi, Z.R.; Wang, C.; Fang, F. Artificial Intelligence for Social Good: A Survey. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2001.01818. [Google Scholar]
  4. Christin, S.; Hervet, E.; Lecomte, N. Applications for deep learning in ecology. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2019, 10, 1632–1644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jha, K.; Doshi, A.; Patel, P.; Shah, M. A comprehensive review on automation in agriculture using artificial intelligence. Artif. Intell. Agric. 2019, 2, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Lamba, A.; Cassey, P.; Segaran, R.R.; Koh, L.P. Deep learning for environmental conservation. Curr. Biol. 2019, 29, R977–R982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Imada, A. A literature review: Forest management with neural network and artificial intelligence. In International Conference on Neural Networks and Artificial Intelligence; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 9–21. [Google Scholar]
  8. Liu, Z.; Peng, C.; Xiang, W.; Tian, D.; Deng, X.; Zhao, M. Application of artificial neural networks in global climate change and ecological research: An overview. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2010, 55, 3853–3863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Khan, S.; Gupta, P.K. Comparative study of tree counting algorithms in dense and sparse vegetative regions. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2018, 5, 801–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fromm, M.; Schubert, M.; Castilla, G.; Linke, J.; McDermid, G. Automated Detection of Conifer Seedlings in Drone Imagery Using Convolutional Neural Networks. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 2585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Metcalf, O.C.; Ewen, J.G.; McCready, M.; Williams, E.M.; Rowcliffe, J.M. A novel method for using ecoacoustics to monitor post-translocation behaviour in an endangered passerine. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2019, 10, 626–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Nay, J.; Burchfield, E.; Gilligan, J. A machine-learning approach to forecasting remotely sensed vegetation health. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2018, 39, 1800–1816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Burivalova, Z.; Game, E.T.; Butler, R.A. The sound of a tropical forest. Science 2019, 363, 28–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Wood, C.M.; Gutierrez, R.J.L.; Peery, M.Z. Acoustic monitoring reveals a diverse forest owl community, illustrating its potential for basic and applied ecology. Ecology 2019, 100, e02764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Coulson, R.N.; Folse, L.J.; Loh, D.K. Artificial intelligence and natural resource management. Science 1987, 237, 262–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Novotny, V.; Drozd, P.; Miller, S.E.; Kulfan, M.; Janda, M.; Basset, Y.; Weiblen, G.D. Why Are There So Many Species of Herbivorous Insects in Tropical Rainforests? Science 2006, 313, 1115–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Schmitt, C.B.; Burgess, N.D.; Coad, L.; Belokurov, A.; Besançon, C.; Boisrobert, L.; Campbell, A.; Fish, L.; Gliddon, D.; Humphries, K.; et al. Global analysis of the protection status of the world’s forests. Biol. Conserv. 2009, 142, 2122–2130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bellassen, V.; Luyssaert, S. Carbon sequestration: Managing forests in uncertain times. Nature 2014, 506, 153–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. FAO. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020. Synthesis Report. Available online: https://www.fao.org/forest-resources-assessment/2020/en/ (accessed on 15 June 2021).
  20. Pachauri, R.K.; Allen, M.R.; Barros, V.R.; Broome, J.; Cramer, W.; Christ, R.; Church, J.A.; Dahe, Q.; Dasgupta, P.; Dubash, N.K.; et al. Synthesis Report: Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Pachauri, R.K., Meyer, L.A., Eds.; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 151–165. [Google Scholar]
  21. Curtis, P.G.; Slay, C.M.; Harris, N.L.; Tyukavina, A.; Hansen, M.C. Classifying drivers of global forest loss. Science 2018, 361, 1108–1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Sharma, J.V. Forestry sector in India is Net Source of Green House Gases (GHGS). J. Environ. Eng. Sci. 2017, 5, 2–7. [Google Scholar]
  23. Innes, J.L. The promotion of ‘innovation’ in forestry: A role for government or others? Environ. Sci. 2009, 6, 201–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Näyhä, A.; Pelli, P.; Hetemäki, L. Services in the forest-based sector—Unexplored futures. Foresight 2015, 17, 378–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Garske, B.; Bau, A.; Ekardt, F. Digitalization and AI in European Agriculture: A Strategy for Achieving Climate and Biodiversity Targets? Sustainability 2021, 13, 4652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Peng, C.; Wen, X. Recent applications of artificial neural networks in forest resource management: An overview. Transfer 1999, 1, W1. [Google Scholar]
  27. Norouzzadeh, M.S.; Nguyen, A.; Kosmala, M.; Swanson, A.; Palmer, M.S.; Packer, C.; Clune, J. Automatically identifying, counting, and describing wild animals in camera-trap images with deep learning. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, E5716–E5725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Isabelle, D.A.; Westerlund, M.A. Review and Categorization of Artificial Intelligence-Based Opportunities in Wildlife, Ocean and Land Conservation. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Silvestro, D.; Goria, S.; Sterner, T.; Antonelli, A. Improving biodiversity protection through artificial intelligence. Nat. Sustain. 2022, 24, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tuia, D.; Kellenberger, B.; Beery, S.; Costelloe, B.R.; Zuffi, S.; Risse, B.; Mathis, A.; Mathis, M.W.; van Langevelde, F.; Burghardt, T.; et al. Perspectives in machine learning for wildlife conservation. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ampatzidis, Y.; De Bellis, L.; Luvisi, A. iPathology: Robotic applications and management of plants and plant diseases. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kourtz, P. Artificial intelligence: A new tool for forest management. Can. J. For. Res. 1990, 20, 428–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Rana, P.; Miller, D.C. Machine learning to analyze the social-ecological impacts of natural resource policy: Insights from community forest management in the Indian Himalaya. Environ. Res. Lett. 2019, 14, 024008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Liu, Z.; Peng, C.; Work, T.; Candau, J.N.; DesRochers, A.; Kneeshaw, D. Application of machine-learning methods in forest ecology: Recent progress and future challenges. Environ. Rev. 2018, 26, 339–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Were, K.; Bui, D.T.; Dick, Ø.B.; Singh, B.R. A comparative assessment of support vector regression, artificial neural networks, and random forests for predicting and mapping soil organic carbon stocks across an Afromontane landscape. Ecol. Indic. 2015, 52, 394–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Deb, D.; Singh, J.P.; Deb, S.; Datta, D.; Ghosh, A.; Chaurasia, R.S. An alternative approach for estimating above ground biomass using Resourcesat-2 satellite data and artificial neural network in Bundelkhand region of India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2017, 189, 576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Dao, D.; Cang, C.; Fung, C.; Zhang, M.; Pawlowski, N.; Gonzales, R.; Beglinger, N.; Zhang, C. GainForest: Scaling Climate Finance for Forest Conservation using Interpretable Machine Learning on Satellite Imagery. In Proceedings of the ICML Climate Change AI Workshop, Long Beach, CA, USA, 14 June 2019. [Google Scholar]
  38. Dou, X.; Yang, Y.; Luo, J. Estimating Forest carbon fluxes using machine learning techniques based on eddy covariance measurements. Sustainability 2018, 10, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. He, T. Image Monitoring and Artificial Intelligence Recognition Technology for Rare Animal Protection. Rev. Cient. Fac. Cienc. Vet. Univ. Zulia 2020, 30, 2390–2399. [Google Scholar]
  40. Padovese, B.T.; Padovese, L.R. Machine Learning for Identifying an Endangered Brazilian Psittacidae Species. J. Environ. Inform. Lett. 2019, 2, 19–27. [Google Scholar]
  41. Harrison, J.R.; Roberts, D.L.; Hernandez-Castro, J. Assessing the extent and nature of wildlife trade on the dark web. Conserv. Biol. 2016, 30, 900–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Lavorgna, A.; Middleton, S.E.; Pickering, B.; Neumann, G. FloraGuard: Tackling the online illegal trade in endangered plants through a cross-disciplinary ICT-enabled methodology. J. Contemp. Crim. Justice 2020, 36, 428–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Di Minin, E.; Fink, C.; Hiippala, T.; Tenkanen, H. A framework for investigating illegal wildlife trade on social media with machine learning. Conserv. Biol. 2019, 33, 210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Di Minin, E.; Fink, C.; Tenkanen, H.; Hiippala, T. Machine learning for tracking illegal wildlife trade on social media. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 2, 406–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Brust, C.A.; Burghardt, T.; Groenenberg, M.; Kading, C.; Kuhl, H.S.; Manguette, M.L.; Denzler, J. Towards automated visual monitoring of individual gorillas in the wild. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops, Venice, Italy, 22–29 October 2017; pp. 2820–2830. [Google Scholar]
  46. Guirado, E.; Tabik, S.; Rivas, M.L.; Alcaraz-Segura, D.; Herrera, F. Automatic whale counting in satellite images with deep learning. bioRxiv 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Borowicz, A.; Le, H.; Humphries, G.; Nehls, G.; Höschle, C.; Kosarev, V.; Lynch, H.J. Aerial-trained deep learning networks for surveying cetaceans from satellite imagery. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0212532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Atanbori, J.; Duan, W.; Murray, J.; Appiah, K.; Dickinson, P. Automatic classification of flying bird species using computer vision techniques. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 2016, 81, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sun, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, G.; Zhang, H. Deep learning for plant identification in natural environment. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wäldchen, J.; Rzanny, M.; Seeland, M.; Mäder, P. Automated plant species identification—Trends and future directions. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2018, 14, e1005993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Willi, M.; Pitman, R.T.; Cardoso, A.W.; Locke, C.; Swanson, A.; Boyer, A.; Veldthuis, M.; Fortson, L. Identifying animal species in camera trap images using deep learning and citizen science. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2019, 10, 80–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Nuñez, G.B.; Lemus, G.; Wolf, M.M.; Rodales, A.L.; González, E.M.; Crisci, C. The first artificial intelligence algorithm for identification of bat species in Uruguay. Ecol. Inform. 2018, 46, 97–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Azlah, M.A.F.; Chua, L.S.; Rahmad, F.R.; Abdullah, F.I.; Wan Alwi, S.R. Review on Techniques for Plant Leaf Classification and Recognition. Computers 2019, 8, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Ahmadi, V. Using GIS and Artificial Neural Network for Deforestation Prediction. Preprints 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Arekhi, S.; Jafarzadeh, A.A. Forecasting areas vulnerable to forest conversion using artificial neural network and GIS (case study: Northern Ilam forests, Ilam province, Iran). Arab. J. Geosci. 2014, 7, 1073–1085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Larrea-Gallegos, G.; Vázquez-Rowe, I. Exploring machine learning techniques to predict deforestation to enhance the decision-making of road construction projects. J. Ind. Ecol. 2022, 26, 225–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Mayfield, H.; Smith, C.; Gallagher, M.; Hockings, M. Use of freely available datasets and machine learning methods in predicting deforestation. Environ. Model. Softw. 2017, 187, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Mayfield, H.J.; Smith, C.; Gallagher, M.; Hockings, M. Considerations for selecting a machine learning technique for predicting deforestation. Environ. Model. Softw. 2020, 131, 104741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Dominguez, D.; del Villar, L.D.; Pantoja, O.; González-Rodríguez, M. Forecasting Amazon Rain-Forest Deforestation Using a Hybrid Machine Learning Model. Sustainability 2022, 14, 691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Carreiras, J.; Pereira, J.; Shimabukuro, Y.E. Land-cover mapping in the Brazilian Amazon using SPOT-4 vegetation data and machine learning classification methods. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 2006, 72, 897–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Giannetti, F.; Barbati, A.; Mancini, L.D.; Travaglini, D.; Bastrup-Birk, A.; Canullo, R.; Nocentini, S.; Chirici, G. European forest types: Toward an automated classification. Ann. For. Sci. 2018, 75, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Lin, P.; Lu, Q.; Li, D.; Chen, Y.; Zou, Z.; Jiang, S. Artificial intelligence classification of wetland vegetation morphology based on deep convolutional neural network. Nat. Resour. Model. 2020, 33, e12248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Watanabe, S.; Sumi, K.; Ise, T. Automatic vegetation identification in Google Earth images using a convolutional neural network: A case study for Japanese bamboo forests. bioRxiv 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Bastin, J.F.; Finegold, Y.; Garcia, C.; Mollicone, D.; Rezende, M.; Routh, D.; Zohner, C.M.; Crowther, T.W. The global tree restoration potential. Science 2019, 365, 76–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. da Rocha, S.J.; Torres, C.M.; Jacovine, L.A.; Leite, H.G.; Gelcer, E.M.; Neves, K.M.; Schettini, B.L.; Villanova, P.H.; da Silva, L.F.; Reis, L.P.; et al. Artificial neural networks: Modeling tree survival and mortality in the Atlantic Forest biome in Brazil. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 645, 655–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Adikari, K.E.; Shrestha, S.; Ratnayake, D.T.; Budhathoki, A.; Mohanasundaram, S.; Dailey, M.N. Evaluation of artificial intelligence models for flood and drought forecasting in arid and tropical regions. Environ. Model. Softw. 2021, 144, 105136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Jaafari, A.; Zenner, E.K.; Panahi, M.; Shahabi, H. Hybrid artificial intelligence models based on a neuro-fuzzy system and metaheuristic optimization algorithms for spatial prediction of wildfire probability. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2019, 266, 198–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Satir, O.; Berberoglu, S.; Donmez, C. Mapping regional forest fire probability using artificial neural network model in a Mediterranean forest ecosystem. Geomat. Nat. Hazards Risk 2016, 7, 1645–1658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Zhang, G.; Wang, M.; Liu, K. Forest Fire Susceptibility Modeling Using a Convolutional Neural Network for Yunnan Province of China. Int. J. Disaster Risk Sci. 2019, 10, 386–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Golhani, K.; Balasundram, S.K.; Vadamalai, G.; Pradhan, B. A review of neural networks in plant disease detection using hyperspectral data. Inf. Process. Agric. 2018, 5, 354–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Rammer, W.; Seidl, R. Harnessing deep learning in ecology: An example predicting bark beetle outbreaks. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Wiesner-Hanks, T.; Wu, H.; Stewart, E.; DeChant, C.; Kaczmar, N.; Lipson, H.; Gore, M.A.; Nelson, R.J. Millimeter-level plant disease detection from aerial photographs via deep learning and crowdsourced data. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 155010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Liu, Y.; Cheng, Z.; Liu, J.; Yassin, B.; Nan, Z.; Luo, J. AI for earth: Rainforest conservation by acoustic surveillance. arXiv 2019, arXiv:1908.07517. [Google Scholar]
  74. Backs, J.A.J.; Nychka, J.; St. Clair, C.C. Warning systems triggered by trains increase flight-initiation times of wildlife. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2020, 87, 102502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Karanth, K.U.; Nichols, J.D. Estimation of tiger densities in India using photographic captures and recaptures. Ecology 1998, 79, 2852–2862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Shi, C.; Liu, D.; Cui, Y.; Xie, J.; Roberts, N.J.; Jiang, G. Amur tiger stripes: Individual identification based on deep convolutional neural network. Integr. Zool. 2020, 15, 461–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Milovanović, M.B.; Antić, D.S.; Rajić, M.N.; Milosavljević, P.M.; Pavlović, A.; Fragassa, C. Wood resource management using an endocrine NARX neural network. Eur. J. Wood Wood Prod. 2018, 76, 687–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Anandhi, V.; Chezian, R.M.; Parthiban, K.T. Forecast of demand and supply of pulpwood using artificial neural network. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Telecommun. 2012, 3, 35–38. [Google Scholar]
  79. Amatya, D.M.; Douglas-Mankin, K.R.; Williams, T.M.; Skaggs, R.W.; Nettles, J.E. Advances in forest hydrology: Challenges and opportunities. Trans. ASABE 2011, 54, 2049–2056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Guswa, A.J.; Tetzlaff, D.; Selker, J.S.; Carlyle-Moses, D.E.; Boyer, E.W.; Bruen, M.; Cayuela, C.; Creed, I.F.; van de Giesen, N.; Grasso, D.; et al. Advancing ecohydrology in the 21st century: A convergence of opportunities. Ecohydrology 2020, 13, e2208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Dube, T.; Mutanga, O.; Sibanda, M.; Shoko, C.; Chemura, A. Evaluating the influence of the Red Edge band from RapidEye sensor in quantifying leaf area index for hydrological applications specifically focussing on plant canopy interception. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts A/B/C 2017, 100, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Stravs, L.; Brilly, M.; Sraj, M. Precipitation interception modelling using machine learning methods—The Dragonja River basin case study. In Practical Hydroinformatics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009; pp. 347–358. [Google Scholar]
  83. Trombetti, M.; Riaño, D.; Rubio, M.A.; Cheng, Y.B.; Ustin, S.L. Multi-temporal vegetation canopy water content retrieval and interpretation using artificial neural networks for the continental USA. Remote Sens. Environ. 2008, 112, 203–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Zhang, F.; Wu, S.; Liu, J.; Wang, C.; Guo, Z.; Xu, A.; Pan, K.; Pan, X. Predicting soil moisture content over partially vegetation covered surfaces from hyperspectral data with deep learning. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2021, 85, 989–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Lee, C.S.; Sohn, E.; Park, J.D.; Jang, J.D. Estimation of soil moisture using deep learning based on satellite data: A case study of South Korea. GISci. Remote Sens. 2019, 56, 43–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. de Oliveira, V.A.; Rodrigues, A.F.; Morais, M.A.V.; Terra, M.D.C.N.S.; Guo, L.; de Mello, C.R. Spatiotemporal modelling of soil moisture in an Atlantic forest through machine learning algorithms. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2021, 72, 1969–1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Pan, S.; Pan, N.; Tian, H.; Friedlingstein, P.; Sitch, S.; Shi, H.; Arora, V.K.; Haverd, V.; Jain, A.K.; Kato, E.; et al. Evaluation of global terrestrial evapotranspiration using state-of-the-art approaches in remote sensing, machine learning and land surface modeling. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2020, 24, 1485–1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Panda, S.; Amatya, D.M.; Jackson, R.; Sun, G.; Noormets, A. Automated geospatial models of varying complexities for pine forest evapotranspiration estimation with advanced data mining. Water 2018, 10, 1687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Lu, X.; Zhuang, Q. Evaluating evapotranspiration and water-use efficiency of terrestrial ecosystems in the conterminous United States using MODIS and AmeriFlux data. Remote Sens. Environ. 2010, 114, 1924–1939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Luo, X.R.; Li, S.D.; Liu, L.; Yang, W.N.; Zhang, Y.H.; Chen, G.; Qiu, S.Y.; Tang, Q.L.; Tang, X.L. Quantifying aboveground vegetation water storage combining Landsat 8 OLI and Sentinel-1 imageries. Geocarto Int. 2020, 12, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Irrgang, C.; Saynisch-Wagner, J.; Dill, R.; Boergens, E.; Thomas, M. Self-Validating Deep Learning for Recovering Terrestrial Water Storage From Gravity and Altimetry Measurements. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2020, 47, e2020GL089258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Bhanja, S.N.; Malakar, P.; Mukherjee, A.; Rodell, M.; Mitra, P.; Sarkar, S. Using satellitebased vegetation cover as indicator of groundwater storage in natural vegetation areas. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2019, 46, 8082–8092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Kamarudin, M.H.; Ismail, Z.H.; Saidi, N.B. Deep learning sensor fusion in plant water stress assessment: A comprehensive review. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Pal, S.; Sharma, P. A review of machine learning applications in land surface modeling. Earth 2021, 2, 174–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Dikshit, A.; Pradhan, B.; Alamri, A.M. Pathways and challenges of the application of artificial intelligence to geohazards modelling. Gondwana Res. 2020, 100, 290–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Levia, D.F.; Carlyle-Moses, D.E.; Iida, S.; Michalzik, B.; Nanko, K.; Tischer, A. Forest-Water Interactions; Ecological Studies Series, No. 240; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; p. 628. [Google Scholar]
  97. Mao, J.; Wang, Y.; Ricciuto, D.; Mahajan, S.; Hoffman, F.; Shi, X.; Prakash, G. AI-Based Integrated Modeling and Observational Framework for Improving Seasonal to Decadal Prediction of Terrestrial Ecohydrological Extremes (No. AI4ESP-1089); Artificial Intelligence for Earth System Predictability (AI4ESP) Collaboration (United States): Washington, DC, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Chang, N.B.; Mohiuddin, G.; Crawford, A.J.; Bai, K.; Jin, K.R. Diagnosis of the artificial intelligence-based predictions of flow regime in a constructed wetland for stormwater pollution control. Ecol. Inform. 2018, 28, 42–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Fathian, F.; Mehdizadeh, S.; Sales, A.K.; Safari, M.J.S. Hybrid models to improve the monthly river flow prediction. Integrating artificial intelligence and non-linear time series models. J. Hydrol. 2019, 575, 1200–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Mohiuddin, G. Remote Sensing with Computational Intelligence Modelling for Monitoring the Ecosystem State and Hydraulic Pattern in a Constructed Wetland. Master’s Thesis, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  101. Pereira, G.C.; Ebecken, N.F. Combining in situ flow cytometry and artificial neural networks for aquatic systems monitoring. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38, 9626–9632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Yaseen, Z.M.; Kisi, O.; Demir, V. Enhancing long-term streamflow forecasting and predicting using periodicity data component: Application of artificial intelligence. Water Resour. Manag. 2016, 30, 4125–4151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Toro, C.H.F.; Meire, S.G.; Gálvez, J.F.; Fdez-Riverola, F. A hybrid artificial intelligence model for river flow forecasting. Appl. Soft. Comput. 2013, 13, 3449–3458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Barzegar, R.; Adamowski, J.; Moghaddam, A.A. Application of wavelet-artificial intelligence hybrid models for water quality prediction: A case study in Aji-Chay River, Iran. Stoch. Env. Res. Risk A 2016, 30, 1797–1819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Ceccaroni, L.; Velickovski, F.; Blaas, M.; Wernand, M.R.; Blauw, A.; Subirats, L. Artificial intelligence and earth observation to explore water quality in the Wadden Sea. Earth Obs. Open Sci. Innov. 2018, 15, 311–320. [Google Scholar]
  106. Chau, K.W. A review on integration of artificial intelligence into water quality modelling. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2006, 52, 726–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Elkiran, G.; Nourani, V.; Abba, S.I. Multi-step ahead modelling of river water quality parameters using ensemble artificial intelligence-based approach. J. Hydrol. 2019, 577, 123962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Fijani, E.; Barzegar, R.; Deo, R.; Tziritis, E.; Skordas, K. Design and implementation of a hybrid model based on two-layer decomposition method coupled with extreme learning machines to support real-time environmental monitoring of water quality parameters. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 648, 839–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Gharibi, H.; Mahvi, A.H.; Nabizadeh, R.; Arabalibeik, H.; Yunesian, M.; Sowlat, M.H. A novel approach in water quality assessment based on fuzzy logic. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 112, 87–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Gunda, N.S.K.; Gautam, S.H.; Mitra, S.K. Artificial intelligence based mobile application for water quality monitoring. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2019, 166, B3031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Hameed, M.; Sharqi, S.S.; Yaseen, Z.M.; Afan, H.A.; Hussain, A.; Elshafie, A. Application of artificial intelligence (AI) techniques in water quality index prediction: A case study in tropical region, Malaysia. Neural Comput. Appl. 2017, 28, 893–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Hatzikos, E.V.; Bassiliades, N.; Asmanis, L.; Vlahavas, I. Monitoring water quality through a telematic sensor network and a fuzzy expert system. Expert Syst. 2007, 24, 143–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Hatzikos, E.V.; Tsoumakas, G.; Tzanis, G.; Bassiliades, N.; Vlahavas, I. An empirical study on sea water quality prediction. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2008, 21, 471–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Khaki, M.; Yusoff, I.; Islami, N. Application of the Artificial Neural Network and Neuro-fuzzy System for Assessment of Groundwater Quality. CLEAN–Soil Air Water 2015, 43, 551–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Li, R.; Zou, Z.; An, Y. Water quality assessment in Qu River based on fuzzy water pollution index method. J. Environ. Sci. 2016, 50, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Najah, A.; Elshafie, A.; Karim, O.A.; Jaffar, O. Prediction of Johor River water quality parameters using artificial neural networks. Eur. J. Sci. Res. 2009, 28, 422–435. [Google Scholar]
  117. Najah, A.; El-Shafie, A.; Karim, O.A.; Jaafar, O.; El-Shafie, A.H. An application of different artificial intelligences techniques for water quality prediction. Int. J. Phys. Sci. 2011, 6, 5298–5308. [Google Scholar]
  118. Rajaee, T.; Khani, S.; Ravansalar, M. Artificial intelligence-based single and hybrid models for prediction of water quality in rivers: A review. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. 2020, 200, 103978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Sakizadeh, M. Artificial intelligence for the prediction of water quality index in groundwater systems. Modeling Earth Syst. Environ. 2016, 2, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Sengorur, B.; Koklu, R.; Ates, A. Water quality assessment using artificial intelligence techniques: SOM and ANN—A case study of Melen River Turkey. Water Qual. Expos. Health 2015, 7, 469–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Sharaf El Din, E.; Zhang, Y.; Suliman, A. Mapping concentrations of surface water quality parameters using a novel remote sensing and artificial intelligence framework. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2017, 38, 1023–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Strobl, R.O.; Robillard, P.D. Artificial intelligence technologies in surface water quality monitoring. Water Int. 2006, 31, 198–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Tsai, W.P.; Huang, S.P.; Cheng, S.T.; Shao, K.T.; Chang, F.J. A data-mining framework for exploring the multi-relation between fish species and water quality through self-organizing map. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 579, 474–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Tung, T.M.; Yaseen, Z.M. A survey on river water quality modelling using artificial intelligence models: 2000–2020. J. Hydrol. 2020, 585, 124670. [Google Scholar]
  125. Zhu, X.; Li, D.; He, D.; Wang, J.; Ma, D.; Li, F. A remote wireless system for water quality online monitoring in intensive fish culture. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2010, 71, S3–S9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Awad, M. Sea water chlorophyll-a estimation using hyperspectral images and supervised artificial neural network. Ecol. Inform. 2014, 24, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Coad, P.; Cathers, B.; Ball, J.E.; Kadluczka, R. Proactive management of estuarine algal blooms using an automated monitoring buoy coupled with an artificial neural network. Environ. Model. Softw. 2014, 61, 393–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Franceschini, S.; Mattei, F.; D’Andrea, L.; Di Nardi, A.; Fiorentino, F.; Garofalo, G.; Scardi, M.; Cataudella, S.; Russo, T. Rummaging through the bin: Modelling marine litter distribution using Artificial Neural Networks. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 149, 110580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Sengar, N.; Dutta, M.K.; Sarkar, B. Computer vision based technique for identification of fish quality after pesticide exposure. Int. J. Food Prop. 2017, 20, 2192–2206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Singh, K.P.; Gupta, S.; Rai, P. Predicting acute aquatic toxicity of structurally diverse chemicals in fish using artificial intelligence approaches. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2013, 95, 221–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Wang, P.; Yao, J.; Wang, G.; Hao, F.; Shrestha, S.; Xue, B.; Xie, G.; Peng, Y. Exploring the application of artificial intelligence technology for identification of water pollution characteristics and tracing the source of water quality pollutants. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 693, 133440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Xia, C.; Fu, L.; Liu, Z.; Liu, H.; Chen, L.; Liu, Y. Aquatic toxic analysis by monitoring fish behavior using computer vision: A recent progress. J. Toxicol. 2018, 2018, 2591924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Brey, T. A multi-parameter artificial neural network model to estimate macrobenthic invertebrate productivity and production. Limnol. Oceanogr.-Methods 2012, 10, 581–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Brosse, S.; Lek, S.; Townsend, C.R. Abundance, diversity, and structure of freshwater invertebrates and fish communities: An artificial neural network approach. N. Zeal. J. Mar. Freshw. 2001, 35, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Cheng, L.; Lek, S.; Lek-Ang, S.; Li, Z. Predicting fish assemblages and diversity in shallow lakes in the Yangtze River basin. Limnologica 2012, 42, 127–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Cheung, W.W.; Pitcher, T.J.; Pauly, D. A fuzzy logic expert system to estimate intrinsic extinction vulnerabilities of marine fishes to fishing. Biol. Conserv. 2005, 124, 97–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Kroodsma, D.A.; Mayorga, J.; Hochberg, T.; Miller, N.A.; Boerder, K.; Ferretti, F.; Wilson, A.; Bergman, B.; White, T.D.; Block, B.A.; et al. Tracking the global footprint of fisheries. Science 2018, 359, 904–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Lachkar, Z.; Gruber, N. A comparative study of biological production in eastern boundary upwelling systems using an artificial neural network. Biogeosciences 2012, 9, 293–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Yoo, J.W.; Lee, Y.W.; Lee, C.G.; Kim, C.S. Effective prediction of biodiversity in tidal flat habitats using an artificial neural network. Mar. Environ. Res. 2013, 83, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Schletterer, M.; Füreder, L.; Kuzovlev, V.V.; Beketov, M.A. Testing the coherence of several macroinvertebrate indices and environmental factors in a large lowland river system (Volga River, Russia). Ecol. Indic. 2010, 10, 1083–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Feio, M.J.; Poquet, J.M. Predictive models for freshwater biological assessment: Statistical approaches, biological elements and the Iberian Peninsula experience: A review. Int. Rev. Hydrobiol. 2011, 96, 321–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Hu, J.H.; Tsai, W.P.; Cheng, S.T.; Chang, F.J. Explore the relationship between fish community and environmental factors by machine learning techniques. Environ. Res. 2020, 184, 109262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Goethals, P.L.; Dedecker, A.P.; Gabriels, W.; Lek, S.; De Pauw, N. Applications of artificial neural networks predicting macroinvertebrates in freshwaters. Aquat. Ecol. 2007, 41, 491–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Olaya-Marín, E.J.; Martínez-Capel, F.; Vezza, P. A comparison of artificial neural networks and random forests to predict native fish species richness in Mediterranean rivers. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst. 2013, 409, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Park, Y.S.; Céréghino, R.; Compin, A.; Lek, S. Applications of artificial neural networks for patterning and predicting aquatic insect species richness in running waters. Ecol. Modelling 2003, 160, 265–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Penczak, T.; Kruk, A.; Galicka, W. Implementation of a self-organizing map for investigation of impoundment impact on fish assemblages in a large, lowland river: Long-term study. Ecol. Modelling 2012, 227, 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Recknagel, F. ANNA–Artificial Neural Network model for predicting species abundance and succession of blue-green algae. Hydrobiologia 1997, 349, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Russo, T.; Franceschini, S.; D’Andrea, L.; Scardi, M.; Parisi, A.; Cataudella, S. Predicting fishing footprint of trawlers from environmental and fleet data: An application of artificial neural networks. Front. Mar. Sci. 2019, 6, 670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Volf, G.; Atanasova, N.; Kompare, B.; Precali, R.; Oani, N. Descriptive and prediction models of phytoplankton in the northern adriatic. Ecol. Modelling 2011, 222, 2502–2511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Zarkami, R.; Sadeghi, R.; Goethals, P. Use of fish distribution modelling for river management. Ecol. Modelling 2012, 230, 44–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Berberoglu, S.; Yilmaz, K.T.; Özkan, C. Mapping and monitoring of coastal wetlands of Cukurova Delta in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Biodivers. Conserv. 2004, 13, 615–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Flombaum, P.; Gallegos, J.L.; Gordillo, R.A.; Rincón, J.; Zabala, L.L.; Jiao, N.; Karl, D.M.; Li, W.K.; Lomas, M.W.; Veneziano, D.; et al. Present and future global distributions of the marine Cyanobacteria Prochlorococcus and Synechococcus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 9824–9829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Gillard, M.; Thiébaut, G.; Deleu, C.; Leroy, B. Present and future distribution of three aquatic plants taxa across the world: Decrease in native and increase in invasive ranges. Biol. Invasions 2017, 19, 2159–2170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Guénard, G.; Morin, J.; Matte, P.; Secretan, Y.; Valiquette, E.; Mingelbier, M. Deep learning habitat modeling for moving organisms in rapidly changing estuarine environments: A case of two fishes. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2020, 238, 106713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Knudby, A.; Brenning, A.; LeDrew, E. New approaches to modelling fish–habitat relationships. Ecol. Modelling 2010, 221, 503–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Kocev, D.; Naumoski, A.; Mitreski, K.; Krstic, S.; Dzeroski, S. Learning habitat models for the diatom community in lake Prespa. Ecol. Modelling 2010, 221, 330–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Muñoz-Mas, R.; Martinez-Capel, F.; Alcaraz-Hernández, J.D.; Mouton, A.M. Can multilayer perceptron ensembles model the ecological niche of freshwater fish species? Ecol. Modelling 2015, 309, 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Nunes, J.A.C.; Cruz, I.C.; Nunes, A.; Pinheiro, H.T. Speeding up coral reef conservation with AI-aided automated image analysis. Nat. Mach. Intell. 2020, 2, 292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Olden, J.D.; Jackson, D.A. Fish–habitat relationships in lakes: Gaining predictive and explanatory insight by using artificial neural networks. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 2001, 130, 878–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Palaniswami, M.; Rao, A.S.; Bainbridge, S. Real-time monitoring of the great barrier reef using internet of things with big data analytics. ITU J. ICT Discov. 2017, 1, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  161. Palialexis, A.; Georgakarakos, S.; Karakassis, I.; Lika, K.; Valavanis, V.D. Prediction of marine species distribution from presence–absence acoustic data: Comparing the fitting efficiency and the predictive capacity of conventional and novel distribution models. Hydrobiologia 2011, 670, 241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Park, Y.S.; Tison, J.; Lek, S.; Giraudel, J.L.; Coste, M.; Delmas, F. Application of a self-organizing map to select representative species in multivariate analysis: A case study determining diatom distribution patterns across France. Ecol. Inform. 2006, 1, 247–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Pittman, S.J.; Brown, K.A. Multi-scale approach for predicting fish species distributions across coral reef seascapes. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e20583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Watts, M.J.; Li, Y.; Russell, B.D.; Mellin, C.; Connell, S.D.; Fordham, D.A. A novel method for mapping reefs and subtidal rocky habitats using artificial neural networks. Ecol. Modelling 2011, 222, 2606–2614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Allken, V.; Handegard, N.O.; Rosen, S.; Schreyeck, T.; Mahiout, T.; Malde, K. Fish species identification using a convolutional neural network trained on synthetic data. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2019, 76, 342–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Álvarez-Ellacuría, A.; Palmer, M.; Catalán, I.A.; Lisani, J.L. Image-based, unsupervised estimation of fish size from commercial landings using deep learning. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2020, 77, 1330–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Bedoya, C.; Isaza, C.; Daza, J.M.; López, J.D. Automatic recognition of anuran species based on syllable identification. Ecol. Inform. 2014, 24, 200–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Bevan, E.; Wibbels, T.; Najera, B.M.; Martinez, M.A.; Martinez, L.A.; Martinez, F.I.; Cuevas, J.M.; Anderson, T.; Bonka, A.; Hernandez, M.H.; et al. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for monitoring sea turtles in near-shore waters. Mar. Turt. Newsl. 2015, 145, 19–22. [Google Scholar]
  169. dos Santos, A.A.; Gonçalves, W.N. Improving Pantanal fish species recognition through taxonomic ranks in convolutional neural networks. Ecol. Inform. 2019, 53, 100977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Gray, P.C.; Fleishman, A.B.; Klein, D.J.; McKown, M.W.; Bézy, V.S.; Lohmann, K.J.; Johnston, D.W. A convolutional neural network for detecting sea turtles in drone imagery. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2019, 10, 345–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Hodgson, A.; Kelly, N.; Peel, D. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for surveying marine fauna: A dugong case study. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e79556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Labao, A.B.; Naval, P.C., Jr. Cascaded deep network systems with linked ensemble components for underwater fish detection in the wild. Ecol. Inform. 2019, 52, 103–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Mandal, R.; Connolly, R.M.; Schlacher, T.A.; Stantic, B. Assessing fish abundance from underwater video using deep neural networks. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 8–13 July 2018; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  174. Marini, S.; Corgnati, L.; Mantovani, C.; Bastianini, M.; Ottaviani, E.; Fanelli, E.; Aguzzi, J.; Griffa, A.; Poulain, P.M. Automated estimate of fish abundance through the autonomous imaging device GUARD1. Measurement 2018, 126, 72–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Mastrorillo, S.; Lek, S.; Dauba, F.; Belaud, A. The use of artificial neural networks to predict the presence of small-bodied fish in a river. Freshw. Biol. 1997, 38, 237–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Moitinho-Silva, L.; Steinert, G.; Nielsen, S.; Hardoim, C.C.; Wu, Y.C.; McCormack, G.P.; López-Legentil, S.; Marchant, R.; Webster, N.; Thomas, T.; et al. Predicting the HMA-LMA status in marine sponges by machine learning. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Mosleh, M.A.; Manssor, H.; Malek, S.; Milow, P.; Salleh, A. A preliminary study on automated freshwater algae recognition and classification system. BMC Bioinform. 2012, 13, S17–S25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  178. Salman, A.; Siddiqui, S.A.; Shafait, F.; Mian, A.; Shortis, M.R.; Khurshid, K.; Ulges, A.; Schwanecke, U. Automatic fish detection in underwater videos by a deep neural network-based hybrid motion learning system. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2020, 77, 1295–1307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Siddiqui, S.A.; Salman, A.; Malik, M.I.; Shafait, F.; Mian, A.; Shortis, M.R.; Harvey, E.S. Automatic fish species classification in underwater videos: Exploiting pre-trained deep neural network models to compensate for limited labelled data. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2018, 75, 374–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Song, H.; Xu, F.; Zheng, B.; Xiang, Y.; Yang, J.; An, X. An artificial intelligence recognition algorithm for Yangtze finless porpoise. In Proceedings of the OCEANS 2015—MTS/IEEE Washington, Washington, DC, USA, 19–22 October 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  181. Tang, M.; Jiao, Y.; Jones, J.W. A hierarchical Bayesian approach for estimating freshwater mussel growth based on tag-recapture data. Fish. Res. 2014, 149, 24–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Villon, S.; Mouillot, D.; Chaumont, M.; Darling, E.S.; Subsol, G.; Claverie, T.; Villéger, S. A deep learning method for accurate and fast identification of coral reef fishes in underwater images. Ecol. Inform. 2018, 48, 238–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Xu, L.; Bennamoun, M.; An, S.; Sohel, F.; Boussaid, F. Deep learning for marine species recognition. In Handbook of Deep Learning Applications; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Sharma, V.; Chaudhry, S. An overview of Indian forestry sector with REDD. Int. Sch. Res. Not. 2013, 2013, 298735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. India State of Forest Report 2019. Available online: https://fsi.nic.in/forest-report (accessed on 15 June 2021).
  186. Pisupati, B. Safeguarding India’s Biological Diversity: The Biological Diversity Act; Farmer’s Forum; India’s Agriculture Magazine: Mumbai, India, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  187. Sinha, B.; Kala, C.P.; Katiyar, A.S. Enhancing Livelihoods of Forest Dependent Communities through Synergizing FDA Activities with Other Development Programs; RCNAEB Sponsored Project; Indian Institute of Forest Management (IIFM): Bhopal, India, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  188. Ravindranath, N.H.; Somshekhar, B.S.; Gadgil, M. Carbon flows in Indian forests. Clim. Change 1997, 35, 297–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Gan, J.; Cerutti, P.O.; Masiero, M.; Pettenella, D.; Andrighetto, N.; Dawson, T. Quantifying illegal logging and related timber trade. IUFRO World Ser. 2016, 35, 37–59. [Google Scholar]
  190. Joppa, L.N. The case for technology investments in the environment. Nature 2017, 552, 325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Kehoe, B.; Patil, S.; Abbeel, P.; Goldberg, K. A survey of research on cloud robotics and automation. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2015, 12, 398–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. The overview of artificial intelligence application in forest and wildlife sector. Refer to Table S1 for details and reference related to respective sector 3.3. The economic market for AI-based forestry start-ups.
Figure 1. The overview of artificial intelligence application in forest and wildlife sector. Refer to Table S1 for details and reference related to respective sector 3.3. The economic market for AI-based forestry start-ups.
Sustainability 14 07154 g001
Table 1. Status of forest in India from 2003 to 2019.
Table 1. Status of forest in India from 2003 to 2019.
Forest Resource Variable20032005200920112013201520172019Net Change between 2003 to 2019 (In Million ha)% Change between 2003 to 2019
Very dense forest (in million ha)5.4525.4578.3518.3478.358.599.8169.9284.47645.08
Moderately dense forest (in million ha)33.40633.26531.90132.07431.87531.53730.83230.847−2.599−8.43
Open forest (in million ha)38.85838.72240.25240.42140.22531.5455940.64840.7751.9174.7
Tree cover (in million ha)9.999.1669.2779.0849.1279.2579.3829.5030.4874.87
Growing stock in forest (million cubic meter)4781.4144602.044498.664498.7314173.3624195.0574218.384273.47−507.944−10.62
Growing stock in trees outside forest (million cubic meter)1632.3381616.241599.571548.4271484.6841573.341603.9971642.299.9520.61
Reserve forest (in million ha)39.9941.90343.0542.2542.942.543.4743.493.58.60%
Protected forest (in million ha)23.8421.66120.6221.3922.6620.9421.9421.9−1.948.80%
Unclassified forest (in million ha)13.6313.413.2713.313.413.0111.3911.37−2.2619.80%
Note: Data for the table was assembled from India State of Forest Report, 2003–2019 (https://fsi.nic.in/forest-report, accessed on 15 August 2021).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shivaprakash, K.N.; Swami, N.; Mysorekar, S.; Arora, R.; Gangadharan, A.; Vohra, K.; Jadeyegowda, M.; Kiesecker, J.M. Potential for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) Applications in Biodiversity Conservation, Managing Forests, and Related Services in India. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7154. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127154

AMA Style

Shivaprakash KN, Swami N, Mysorekar S, Arora R, Gangadharan A, Vohra K, Jadeyegowda M, Kiesecker JM. Potential for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) Applications in Biodiversity Conservation, Managing Forests, and Related Services in India. Sustainability. 2022; 14(12):7154. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127154

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shivaprakash, Kadukothanahally Nagaraju, Niraj Swami, Sagar Mysorekar, Roshni Arora, Aditya Gangadharan, Karishma Vohra, Madegowda Jadeyegowda, and Joseph M. Kiesecker. 2022. "Potential for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) Applications in Biodiversity Conservation, Managing Forests, and Related Services in India" Sustainability 14, no. 12: 7154. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127154

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop