LAI Estimation of net primary productionusing the NetPro 1.0 model Case study: Cidanau watershed, Serang

9 Table 3. Class of NDVI of the Cidanau watershed, 2002 and 2004 2002 2004 Class NDVI Classification NDVI Area ha NDVI Area ha 1 0 0 8115 0 8115 2 0-0.1 0.052 2234 0.051 2278 3 0.1-0.2 0.151 2758 0.155 3316 4 0.2-0.3 0.254 4303 0.249 5866 5 0.3-0.4 0.339 3746 0.326 1798 6 0.4-0.5 0.427 289 0.437 48 7 0.5-0.6 0.506 1 0.543 15 8 0.6-0.7 0.650 10 Average 0.141 0.126 The highest NDVI class in 2004 was 0.650, which resulted in the highest NPP class. The NDVI classification can be seen at the Table 3. NDVI was classified according to the range values. Average of an NDVI class was obtained to give an input for NetPro model. The average of NDVI for overall watershed were only 0.141 2002 and 0.126 2004 or only in Class 3 range. In 2002, the site was dominated by Class 4 and Class 5. Meanwhile, in 2004 it was dominated by Class 3 and Class 4. The obvious difference was the area of Class 5 was high in 2002 but then dropped in 2004. This fact would affect the result of NPP estimation explained later. The position of lower and higher NDVI can be analyzed visually by comparing its distribution with the land use of Cidanau. Because the main interest in Cidanau is about the maintenance of private garden, the NDVI of private garden is important. This NDVI value is used to estimate NPP of the research site. The position of lower NDVI, the Class 1 and Class 2, in 2002 and in 2004 was mainly in paddy field and forest in higher land figure 8- 12. The lower NDVI classes occurred in forested area were caused by cloudiness in the satellite image see figure 4 and 5. Higher NDVI in both research years occurred in forest and Rawa Danau preserve as well as in private garden land. Higher NDVI classes are Class 4 and higher. The LAI of higher NDVI classes were in forest LAI range.

4.2. LAI

LAI is correlated to NDVI based on Equation 11. Class 2, Class 4 and Class 5 NDVI were higher in 2002 than in 2004 caused the LAI of Class 2, Class 4 and Class 5 were higher in 2002 than in 2004. Based on Turner’s LAI classification in Djumhaer 2003, see Table 5, Cidanau LAI was in garden and primary forest LAI range. Class 2 and 3 NDVI were in garden’s LAI range whereas Class 4 to Class 8 NDVI were in primary forest’s LAI range. Cidanau is a mixed land-use and in some parts are forested, especially in Rawa Danau preserve. Rawa Danau was dominated by Class 3 and Class 4, meant the preserve’s LAI still had garden LAI range. Meanwhile two upper stream compensated villages were dominated by Class 4 and Class 5 NDVI see figure 15-18, meant eventhough they are only private garden but their LAI were in primary forest’s LAI range. More explanation about the NDVI and NPP condition about these villages are in NPP result section. 10 Figure 4. Satellite image of Cidanau watershed 2002 Figure 5. Satellite image of Cidanau watershed 2004 11 Figure 6. NDVI of Cidanau 2002 Figure 7. NDVI of Cidanau 2004 12 Fi gu re 8. Lan d Use o f C ida na u wat ers hed 13 Figure 9. Class 1 and 2 NDVI of Cidanau watershed 2002 Figure 10. Class 4-7 NDVI of Cidanau watershed 2002 14 Figure 11. Class 1 and 2 NDVI of Cidanau watershed 2004 Figure 12. Class 3-7 NDVI of Cidanau watershed 2004 15 Figure 13. NDVI of Rawa Danau Preserve 2002 Figure 14. NDVI of Rawa Danau Preserve 2004 16 Figure 15. NDVI of Cibojong garden 2002 Figure 16. NDVI of Cibojong garden 2004 17 Figure 17. NDVI of Citaman garden 2002 Figure 18. NDVI of Citaman garden 2004 18 Table 4 LAI of Cidanau watershed NDVI Class 2002 LAI 2004 LAI 2 2.0 2.0 3 3.3 3.3 4 4.6 4.5 5 5.7 5.5 6 6.8 6.9 7 7.8 8.3 8 - 9.6 Average 4.3 5.0 Table 5. LAI of some vegetation types Vegetation Type LAI Low-vegetated burnt forest 2.5-6.3 Low-vegetated forest 2.5-3.2 Primary forest 4.4-8.4 Conifer forest 1.4-3.9 Garden 1.0-3.3 Young conifer forest 5.3-9.6 Mature conifer forest 7.9-13.0 Source: Turner, et al. 1999 in Djumhaer 2003

4.3. NPP