Handheld Laser Scanning Detects Spatiotemporal Differences in the Development of Structural Traits among Species in Restoration Plantings

A major challenge in ecological restoration is assessing the success of restoration plantings in producing habitats that provide the desired ecosystem functions and services. Forest structural complexity and biomass accumulation are key measures used to monitor restoration success and are important factors determining animal habitat availability and carbon sequestration. Monitoring their development through time using traditional field measurements can be costly and impractical, particularly at the landscape-scale, which is a common requirement in ecological restoration. We explored the application of proximal sensing technology as an alternative to traditional field surveys to capture the development of key forest structural traits in a restoration planting in the Midlands of Tasmania, Australia. We report the use of a hand-held laser scanner (ZEB1) to measure annual changes in structural traits at the tree-level, in a mixed species common-garden experiment from sevento nine-years after planting. Using very dense point clouds, we derived estimates of multiple structural traits, including above ground biomass, tree height, stem diameter, crown dimensions, and crown properties. We detected annual increases in most LiDAR-derived traits, with individual crowns becoming increasingly interconnected. Time by species interaction were detected, and were associated with differences in productivity between species. We show the potential for remote sensing technology to monitor temporal changes in forest structural traits, as well as to provide base-line measures from which to assess the restoration trajectory towards a desired state.


Introduction
To counter the effects of climate change, multiple nations have pledged to restore hundreds of millions of hectares of degraded land by re-establishing biodiverse plantings for biomass and carbon sequestration, and conserving biodiversity. The monitoring of these plantings will be pivotal in reporting their effectiveness in reaching the desired restoration targets [1]. Recently, it has been argued that key response traits, also referred to as Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs), need to be identified in order for ecosystem monitoring to be effective [2]. One such EBV that could serve as a viable candidate to monitor the effectiveness of forest restoration plantings is forest structural complexity [3], which is considered a reliable indicator of ecosystem health and function [4]. Greater forest structural complexity is expected to provide a greater diversity of habitats for species. Tree species

Study Site
The study was carried out at the Dungrove restoration research site (592 m elevation, latitude −42.2733 • , longitude 146.8941 • ), located in the southern Midlands of Tasmania, Australia (Figure 1a). The Dungrove research experiment was established in 2010 on exagricultural land, embedded in broader restoration plantings aimed at the re-connection of remnant dry eucalypt woodlands, dominated by Eucalyptus pauciflora and E. tenuiramis [20]. As part of the experiment, eight replicates with twelve community treatments of 120 trees each, have been planted across the landscape. These treatments differed according to the species planted as immediate neighbor to the focal eucalypt (i.e., E. pauciflora and E. tenuiramis), and comprised of monocultures and mixed species plots [21].

Study Site
The study was carried out at the Dungrove restoration research site (592 m elevation, latitude −42.2733°, longitude 146.8941°), located in the southern Midlands of Tasmania, Australia (Figure 1a). The Dungrove research experiment was established in 2010 on exagricultural land, embedded in broader restoration plantings aimed at the re-connection of remnant dry eucalypt woodlands, dominated by Eucalyptus pauciflora and E. tenuiramis [20]. As part of the experiment, eight replicates with twelve community treatments of 120 trees each, have been planted across the landscape. These treatments differed according to the species planted as immediate neighbor to the focal eucalypt (i.e., E. pauciflora and E. tenuiramis), and comprised of monocultures and mixed species plots [21].

ZEB1 Data Acquisition and Co-Registration
ZEB1 (GeoSLAM TM , Nottingham, UK) data collection was carried out in three 50 × 20 m quadrats (0.1 ha) over a three-year time period: first-year measurements were conducted at the end of February 2017, while second-and third-year scans were carried out in early May 2018 and early April 2019, respectively, which was seven to nine years after planting. The ZEB1 system is provided with a Hokuyo UTM-30LX laser scanner, operating at a wavelength of 905 nm. It has a horizontal and vertical field of view of approximately 270° and 120°, respectively, and a maximum scanning range of 30 m (typical maximum range 15-20 m). It can scan up to 40 lines/s and 43,200 points/s [22]. The lack of a

ZEB1 Data Acquisition and Co-Registration
ZEB1 (GeoSLAM TM , Nottingham, UK) data collection was carried out in three 50 × 20 m quadrats (0.1 ha) over a three-year time period: first-year measurements were conducted at the end of February 2017, while second-and third-year scans were carried out in early May 2018 and early April 2019, respectively, which was seven to nine years after planting. The ZEB1 system is provided with a Hokuyo UTM-30LX laser scanner, operating at a wavelength of 905 nm. It has a horizontal and vertical field of view of approximately 270 • and 120 • , respectively, and a maximum scanning range of 30 m (typical maximum range 15-20 m). It can scan up to 40 lines/s and 43,200 points/s [22]. The lack of a built-in GNSS (or GPS) Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 1706 4 of 16 unit inside the ZEB1 system required the development of a standard sampling protocol to allow for the co-registration of each scan in real world coordinates. This sampling protocol needs a semi-fixed set-up for each sampling quadrat: eight permanent reference pickets (i.e., 0.9 m steel fencing posts) were driven halfway into the ground in each quadrat, one in each corner, while the remaining four were scattered throughout the plot. At the start of the study, the position of each reference picket was georeferenced using a GNSS receiver transmitting to a nearby base station.
Before each ZEB1 scan, a 1.8 m plastic coated steel pole was fixed to each reference picket. A 0.2 m diameter polystyrene reference target was placed on its top (Figure 2), then the height from the ground to the base of the reference target was recorded. Once the data was processed by the proprietary software and it was returned to the end user in a readable format (.las), this reference height, together with the ground coordinates of each reference point was used to co-register the point cloud to the GDA94-MGA zone 55 coordinate reference system (EPSG: 28355). Point cloud co-registration was carried out in the open-source software CloudCompare v2.9.1 (http://cloudcompare.org/, accessed on 17 September 2017) using the "align (point pairs picking)" function. The four corner references were used to register each point cloud, while the remaining reference points were used to assess the final root mean squared error (RMSE) for each scan (Table 1). Finally, each scan was clipped to its permanent bounding box of 50 × 20 m, with a 1 m external buffer to avoid cutting out parts of the bordering crowns. The external buffer was created in the opensource QGIS environment (QGIS Desktop version 2.18.0), while the clipping was carried out using the "lasclip" function from LasTools (https://rapidlasso.com/lastools/lasclip/, accessed on 17 September 2017).

Individual Tree and Plot-Level Structural Trait Extraction
Once registered, the point clouds were used to create nine (i.e., one per plot per year) Canopy Height Models (CHMs), using the "Lasgrid" function from LAStools (https://rapidlasso.com/lastools/lasgrid/, accessed on 17 September 2017). These nine CHMs were loaded into the open access QGIS environment (see above) and used (with the aid of the restoration planting layout) to manually digitize the crowns of approximately 270 trees (Figure 1b). Although the outline of most tree crowns was easily detectable, for a small subset of neighboring trees with overlapping crowns, further data manipulation proved necessary. In such cases, manual segmentation of overlapping crowns was achieved using the "segment" function from CloudCompare ( Figure 3). Once individual tree crowns were segmented, the extraction and calculation of structural traits at the individual tree-level ( Table 2) was carried out using the statistical language R [23]. These structural traits were

Individual Tree and Plot-Level Structural Trait Extraction
Once registered, the point clouds were used to create nine (i.e., one per plot per year) Canopy Height Models (CHMs), using the "Lasgrid" function from LAStools (https://rapidlasso.com/lastools/lasgrid/, accessed on 17 September 2017). These nine CHMs were loaded into the open access QGIS environment (see above) and used (with the aid of the restoration planting layout) to manually digitize the crowns of approximately 270 trees (Figure 1b). Although the outline of most tree crowns was easily detectable, for a small subset of neighboring trees with overlapping crowns, further data manipulation proved necessary. In such cases, manual segmentation of overlapping crowns was achieved using the "segment" function from CloudCompare ( Figure 3). Once individual tree crowns were segmented, the extraction and calculation of structural traits at the individual treelevel (Table 2) was carried out using the statistical language R [23]. These structural traits were chosen as they have been previously shown to significantly vary between and within species [11] and are presented as potential proxies for characterizing the return of structural complexity in ecological restoration plantings. To estimate above-ground biomass (AGB) and diameter at breast height (DBH) from the LiDAR point clouds, we applied the following allometric equations by Jucker et al [24]: where H represents tree height (in meters), CD stands for crown diameter (in meters), and AGB is dried biomass (in kg). These allometric equations were developed using >100,000 measurements from a diversity of tree species across many biomes, specifically for remote sensing [24]. In the case of tree height, we used the 99th percentile height estimated from each point cloud. This measure of tree height was chosen as preliminary analyses detected significant outlying points at the top of the point clouds, most likely due to the detection of objects other than the canopy, such as birds. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17

Structural Traits Description of LiDAR-Derived Traits
Height P99 (m) 99th percentile of height within point cloud.

Height of widest cross-section (m)
Height of the crown at its widest cross-section.

Max crown diameter (m)
The widest cross-section of the crown in any given direction.
Crown volume (convex hull-m 3 ) Crown volume of a 3D convex hull calculated from the point cloud defined above crown insertion. It is calculated using the "convhulln" function of the R geometry package.

Crown surface area (m 2 )
The surface area of a 3D convex hull calculated using the point cloud defined above the canopy insertion point.

Crown projected area (m 2 )
The area of the projected polygon describing the crown ground cover.
Height to area ratio (m/m 2 ) The ratio of tree height to crown surface area. It represents the total height of the tree per unit of area.

Height to volume ratio (m/m 3 )
The ratio of tree height to crown volume. It represents the total height of the tree per unit of volume.

Points to area ratio (points/m 2 )
The ratio of number of points in the crown to crown surface area, representing a proxy for crown density.

Points to volume ratio (points/m 3 )
The ratio of number of points in the crown to crown volume, representing a proxy for crown density.
Above Ground Biomass (AGB-kg) AGB estimated through the allometric Equation (1) developed by Jucker et al. [24], using Tree height and Max crown width. Measured as dry weight.
Diameter at breast height (cm) Diameter at 1.3m, derived from a general allometric Equation (2) using total tree height and maximum crown width [24].

Rumple index
Calculated as the ratio between crown surface area on ground surface area, this index reflects crown structural complexity. Calculated using the "rumple_index" function from the lidR package.
The ratio between crown volume calculated from the point cloud (i.e., convex hull) and the crown area obtained from the projected polygon.
To quantify the temporal gap dynamics at the plot-level, the number and total size of gaps were estimated for each plot across the three monitoring years using the ForestGapR R package [25]. Here, for each monitoring year, a pit-free CHM was calculated for each plot using the "grid_canopy function of lidR as input to the "getForestGap" function to detect gaps at 0.1 m cumulative threshold from ground to maximum height of the CHM. The total number of gaps and their combined area (m 2 ) were obtained for each cumulative threshold using the "GapStats" function.

Ground-Based Measurements
A subset of the LiDAR-derived structural traits was validated using equivalent groundbased measurements of all trees in the three plots. These included: diameter at breast height (DBH) of all stems >1 cm, tree height, crown insertion height, and crown dimensions (two diagonal measurements of the crown). Here, crown insertion height is defined as the vertical distance from the ground to the lowest branch of the main tree crown. These measures were carried out at approximately the same time as the ZEB1 data acquisition. The measurements of crown dimensions and crown insertion height were taken only during the second and third year of the study.

Statistical Analysis
All statistical analysis and data visualization were undertaken in R [23]. Trait validation was carried out by fitting a linear regression model associating the field measured traits for each tree with the point cloud derived estimates of the same trait, and R 2 values for each trait calculated. The model assumption of normality and homoscedasticity as well as overdispersion were statistically and visually assessed using simulated residuals from the fitted model using the "simulateResiduals" function of the DHARMa package). The only trait that required transformation was DBH, which was transformed using the natural logarithm and back transformed for visualizing the results. Root-mean squared errors were additionally calculated with the Metrics package using the field observations and model predictions.
To test the effects of time, species (i.e., Acacia dealbata, E. nitens, E. pauciflora, and E. tenuiramis) and their interaction on the ZEB1-derived structural traits, a two-way mixedeffects model including plot as a random term was fitted to the individual tree data using the function "lme" of the package nlme. To account for the heterogeneity in the residual variances with time and the autocorrelation among observations inherent with repeat measure time series, an unstructured covariance matrix was used to model the dependencies among observations in the residual variance [26,27]. In each case, traits were transformed as required to optimize homogeneity of variances and normality based on the inspection of diagnostic plots following Zuur and Ieno [28]. Fixed effects were tested with the Walds F-test using the "anova.lme" function of nlme package, based on the marginal sum of squares. Least-squares means for fixed effects were calculated using the emmeans package.

Results
LiDAR-derived tree height, measured using the 99th height percentile, was highly correlated with the field measurements of tree height (R 2 2019)). This composite value derived from LiDAR was obtained after running a random forest model following Camarretta et al. [11], fitting the 99th height percentile, diameter, rumple index, and height to the widest cross-section as predictors of the field measured insertion height.
Irrespective of plot or monitoring year, the greatest number of gaps were observed below 1 m, with the total area of gaps ranging from 188 m 2 to 453 m 2 ( Figure 5). This lower layer of vegetation comprised a mosaic of variable sized gaps (data not shown), with the number of gaps increasing with age as the canopy of the trees grew taller ( Figure 5). The total number of gaps generally decreased with increasing height of the vegetation within a plot. However, as the gaps reduced in number, the size of the gaps increased in area, suggesting a separation of the tree canopies from the lower vegetation layer and one another ( Figure 5).  Irrespective of plot or monitoring year, the greatest number of gaps were observed below 1 m, with the total area of gaps ranging from 188 m 2 to 453 m 2 ( Figure 5). This lower layer of vegetation comprised a mosaic of variable sized gaps (data not shown), with the number of gaps increasing with age as the canopy of the trees grew taller ( Figure 5). The total number of gaps generally decreased with increasing height of the vegetation within a plot. However, as the gaps reduced in number, the size of the gaps increased in area, suggesting a separation of the tree canopies from the lower vegetation layer and one another ( Figure 5).  By 2019 there was a three-fold variation in AGB between plot 2 (1672 kg/ha) and the other two plots (4711-5523 kg/ha), which is consistent with the differences in canopy occupancy as shown in Figure 1b. However, these plot-level trends do not account for biomass embedded in unresolved trees, which would downwardly bias the 2017 estimate. By 2019 there was a three-fold variation in AGB between plot 2 (1672 kg/ha) and the other two plots (4711-5523 kg/ha), which is consistent with the differences in canopy occupancy as shown in Figure 1b. However, these plot-level trends do not account for biomass embedded in unresolved trees, which would downwardly bias the 2017 estimate.
The two-way fixed effect model indicated 13 of the 15 ZEB1 traits exhibited highly significant (p < 0.001) changes through time, all traits showed significant species difference (p < 0.01), and 9 traits exhibited significant time by species interaction at the 0.01 level ( Table 3). Growth traits exhibited highly significant (p < 0.001) main and interaction effects, indicating a change in species performance through time. Eucalyptus nitens and E. tenuiramis had greater growth than E. pauciflora and Acacia dealbata in all years (Figure 6a,b). The time by species interaction for height was mainly due to E. tenuiramis surpassing E. nitens with time (particularly by 2018), and the growth difference between E. pauciflora and A. dealbata reducing with age ( Figure 6a). In the case of above-ground biomass, the significant interaction was mainly due to an increasing difference between the better and poorer growing species (Figure 6b). The distribution of points within the crown exhibited no significant time or interaction effects, but highly significant (p < 0.001) species differences. This suggests that crown distribution is a stable attribute of the species, with species developing denser upper crowns decreasing from A. dealbata > E. pauciflora > E. tenuiramis > E. nitens (1.20 SE (±0.11), 1.03 (±0.06), 0.84 (±0.06), and 0.72 (±0.06), respectively). Crown roughness, as measured by the rumple index, varied significantly for all effects tested (p < 0.001). Crown roughness tended to increase with time and differed markedly between species, with E. tenuiramis having the most complex crowns and A. dealbata the least complex crowns (Figure 6c). Crown density was another notable trait, which differed markedly between species (Figure 6d). The faster growing E. tenuiramis and E. nitens had sparser crowns (low points to volume ratio) than E. pauciflora and A. dealbata. However, there was a significant time by species interaction due to the crown of the faster growing species (E. tenuiramis but mainly E. nitens) becoming sparser over the 2018 and 2019 period, whereas the crowns of the slower growing species became denser (E. pauciflora but mainly A. dealbata- Figure 6d). Table 3. Analysis of variance results for all trees within the study, showing the trait transformation and F-statistic and its probability (Pr) for Time, Species, and their interactions terms. The numerator degrees of freedom (df) for each factor fitted is shown in the heading in parenthesis, and denominator degrees of freedom ranged between 719 and 759 according to the structural trait analysed. 1 The trait descriptions are given in Table 2.  (Figure 6c). Crown density was another notable trait, which differed markedly between species (Figure 6d). The faster growing E. tenuiramis and E. nitens had sparser crowns (low points to volume ratio) than E. pauciflora and A. dealbata. However, there was a significant time by species interaction due to the crown of the faster growing species (E. tenuiramis but mainly E. nitens) becoming sparser over the 2018 and 2019 period, whereas the crowns of the slower growing species became denser (E. pauciflora but mainly A. dealbata- Figure 6d). Figure 6. Species least-square mean plots across the three sampling years at the tree-levels estimated from the fitted model for tree height (a), above ground biomass (b), rumple index (c), and points to volume ratio (d). Figure 6. Species least-square mean plots across the three sampling years at the tree-levels estimated from the fitted model for tree height (a), above ground biomass (b), rumple index (c), and points to volume ratio (d).

Discussion
The validation results achieved for the four structural traits measured in the field were in strong agreement with the results previously obtained on a larger subset of the same restoration experiment using LiDAR mounted on a unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) [11] and, more generally, with the broader ZEB1 literature [17,18,29]. Consistent with previous observations [11], crown insertion height was difficult to validate. This was largely attributed to the nature of these restoration species, with crowns extending to the bottom of the stem in many cases, making the separation from the underlying grassy layer particularly difficult. Nevertheless, the validation results for most traits tended to get better with time [30], which likely reflects tree crowns becoming wider and taller as the years passed. In addition, the canopy height models and gap analyses jointly indicated that vegetation layering is developing, with a mix of tall trees, medium sized trees/shrubs, as well as the formation of gaps and low vegetation. Due to the nature of the trees studied here (i.e., young age and mostly multi-stemmed), the application of 3D object modelling, such as cylinder fitting to the lower part of the tree stem [31,32], was not possible in this study. This method, which is mainly used in TLS studies, or more recently in below-canopy UAV flights [31,33] is very promising, but we anticipate it would have provided extremely poor results under our present circumstances. Nonetheless, we imagine that as the trees grow taller and stems become more pronounced, a 3D object modelling approach could provide better results than those estimated from allometric equations.
One emerging challenge from the present study was the detectability of individual tree crowns. The extraction of individual tree crowns from point clouds is a common problem with remotely sensed data [34,35]. In some cases (e.g., even-aged conifer forest), the development of automated crown extraction algorithms has proven very successful [35,36], but when trying to delineate crowns in uneven-aged mixed forest, results are still far from ideal [37,38], with a recent study suggesting a bottom-up approach may provide segmentation accuracies greater than 85% in mixed species eucalypt forests [39]. In the present case, crowns were manually extracted from the point clouds and linked to the field planting grid and associated pedigree information. The vast majority of crowns in the three plots could be resolved in this study, allowing the full suite of structural traits to be assessed. However, a few problematic cases were identified and likely due to two major causes: (i) the crown of larger trees overlapping and shadowing neighboring smaller trees [40]; and (ii) problems related to the separation of crowns of small trees from the understory layer. Over time, neighboring trees started to exhibit canopy closure, which made individual tree crown extraction rather difficult [37], and in turn required additional manual pre-processing of the point clouds to obtain correctly segmented crowns. As noted above, in some cases the extracted individual point clouds could not allow computation of all structural traits including biomass, as it was not possible to detect where the understory layer ended, and the tree crown began. This is likely a confounding issue for the large increase in the estimated plot-level biomass from 2017 to 2018.
The 15 structural traits tested in the present study exhibited significant differences according to species, with a majority exhibiting significant differences across years and a time by species interaction. The species differences were mainly associated with differences in productivity among species. While survival of E. pauciflora was three-fold that of the other three species across the whole restoration area [21], the surviving trees of E. tenuiramis and E. nitens in the studied plots far exceeded E. pauciflora and A. dealbata in productivity at the individual tree-level. This height and biomass difference, however, was somewhat countered by the more productive species having sparser crowns. E. tenuiramis is a local species endemic to Tasmania and was represented in the plantings by provenances predominantly from lower altitude sources, which had been translocated up slope to compare with the local provenance and multiple provenances of E. pauciflora from higher and lower altitude than the planting site [21]. E. nitens is an Australian mainland species introduced onto the island for use in industrial plantations for pulpwood and solid wood production [41]. It is also often planted in smaller lots on Tasmanian farms, and in the present case, was tested as a nurse crop for E. pauciflora in the restoration plantings [21]. While E. nitens has previously shown reduced survival compared to E. pauciflora in coplantings in the dry Midlands environment [42], the superior height growth of survivors was only evident on one of the two sites tested [43]. Here, the introduced E. nitens have already greatly surpassed the co-planted, slower growing, E. pauciflora. This will likely trigger the next planned management action-a selective thinning of E. nitens individualsto add coarse woody debris to the restoration planting, opening new niches for dependent organisms to take advantage of, and increase the overall structural complexity.
As expected, tree height and biomass showed an increasing trend with time at the individual tree-level. However, a notable feature of our spatiotemporal data was the marked reduction in the growth increment over the 2018-2019 period compared with the 2017-2018 period in all species except E. nitens. This reduced growth corresponded with a below average rainfall in the 2018-2019 period, with the summer rainfall in January (10.2 mL) and February (19.6 mL) of 2019, being one of the lowest since the experiment was established (mean January and February precipitations for the 2011-2019 period are 30.4 mL and 26.2 mL, respectively-www.bom.gov.au, accessed on 17 September 2017 (nearby Hermitage-Shannon River climate station)). One possible explanation is the reduced availability of water in the soil profile resulting in suppressed growth of E. tenuiramis, E. pauciflora, and A. dealbata over the monitoring period [44]. Indeed, water availability has been reported as one of the major factors explaining variation in the growth rate of E. globulus [45]. In contrast to these species, the height growth and predicted biomass of E. nitens remained more-or-less linear throughout the study period. This was unexpected, as the faster growing E. nitens is adapted to cooler moister environments [46] and would be expected to be more drought susceptible than the two native eucalypts. This contradiction could reflect reduced tree density in the E. nitens plots, due to previously higher mortality reducing the depletion of the soil-water store over this period (spacing effect on drought susceptibility [45]). Alternatively, it is possible that the faster growing E. nitens has established a larger and deeper root system at this age providing better access to stored soil water than the other species [47]. Nevertheless, it is possible that E. nitens is adjusting to water stress through the loss of canopy leaf area, which is a common response of eucalypts [44], which is supported by the observed decrease in canopy density observed over the 2018-2019 monitoring period.
The recent detection of different tree crown architectural properties deriving from different species and genetic provenances [11], raises the question on how these differences may affect dependent animal communities through changes in their use of available resources and feeding/nesting behavior. Previous studies have linked metrics of crown complexity (i.e., crown openness, vegetation layering, and cover) to arthropod [48,49], bird [50][51][52], mammal [8], and bat species richness [53]. Indeed, this is a particularly relevant topic in the fields of nature conservation and ecological restoration, as non-local plant material (i.e. non-local provenances) is increasingly been translocated though assisted migration strategies [54], such as climate-adjusted provenancing [55]. This introduction of non-local provenances (and in extreme cases, species replacement) with different crown properties compared to the local provenance (and species), could result in unexpected outcomes, such as loss of habitat-specialist species [56], which is opposite to the intended restoration goal. Additional research is therefore needed to begin to untangle the intricacies between species-and provenance-specific crown architectures and dependent species resource utilization and behavior. Finally, the ability to track the development of different structural attributes through time, as suggested in the present study, will enable land managers to make informed decisions to guide adaptive management of restoration plantings.

Conclusions
In this study, a hand-held laser scanning unit (ZEB1) was successfully used to capture 3D data from permanent forest restoration plots over a three-year period. The very high trait validation with ground-truth measurements suggest that this technology can successfully be employed as a faster alternative to traditional field surveys. Particularly, this technology allows the acquisition of ultra-dense 3D point clouds that can be used to derive a suite of structural traits rather than the few traits traditionally measured in field inventories. Indeed, the traditional field measurements carried out for the validation of the LiDARderived structural traits took several hours per plot, while the proximal scanning with ZEB1 took roughly 10 to 15 min per plot. While potentially reducing errors in traits measurement by reducing the human factor from traditional data collection (particularly difficult to measure traits), the use of such technology requires longer data processing and analysis when compared to traditional field techniques. Nevertheless, in this case, with the exception of crown segmentation, data processing and analysis were extremely fast, as the analysis pipeline developed in R was easily and automatically applicable. While significant spatiotemporal changes in forest structural traits (both validated and not) important for habitat provision and biodiversity were detected, a potential drawback was identified during this study. Permanent plot identification and establishment needs to be carefully planned to ensure that data co-registration is possible through time. On the one hand, this can reduce the potential application of the ZEB1 system for forest restoration monitoring, as it may require access to specialized equipment and personnel necessary for the establishment of a GNSS base station. However, if data geolocation is not considered necessary, permanent plot establishment, like the one defined in Section 2.2 will still allow scan co-registration over time. Although this technology has been shown to provide rapid inventory of forest plots [29,57,58], its uptake by forest restoration ecologists for the monitoring of restoration plantings is still lagging. The present study demonstrates the potential of remote sensing technology, and particularly the ZEB1 system, to monitor the development of structural traits over time to guide adaptive management and report on restoration effectiveness.  Data Availability Statement: Tree data relating to this study are available upon request at: https: //rdp.utas.edu.au/metadata/f9041839-cd71-4648-9b64-7cefc61f1576 (accessed on 19 April 2021).