Grassland biomass is essential for maintaining grassland ecosystems. Moreover, biomass is an important characteristic of grassland. In this study, we combined field sampling with remote sensing data and calculated five vegetation indices (VIs). Using this combined information, we quantified a remote sensing estimation model and estimated biomass in a temperate grassland of northern China. We also explored the dynamic spatio-temporal variation of biomass from 2006 to 2012. Our results indicated that all VIs investigated in the study were strongly correlated with biomass (α < 0.01). The precision of the model for estimating biomass based on ground data and remote sensing was greater than 73%. Additionally, the results of our analysis indicated that the annual average biomass was 11.86 million tons and that the average yield was 604.5 kg/ha. The distribution of biomass exhibited substantial spatial heterogeneity, and the biomass decreased from the eastern portion of the study area to the western portion. The interannual biomass exhibited strong fluctuations during 2006–2012, with a coefficient of variation of 26.95%. The coefficient of variation of biomass differed among the grassland types. The highest coefficient of variation was found for the desert steppe, followed by the typical steppe and the meadow steppe.

The precise and rapid estimation of grassland biomass is an important scientific issue in grassland ecosystem research. In this study, based on a field survey of 1205 sites together with biomass data of the Xilingol grassland for the years 2005–2012 and the “accumulated” MODIS productivity starting from the beginning of growing season, we built regression models to estimate the aboveground biomass of the Xilingol grassland during the growing season, then further analyzed the overall condition of the grassland and the spatial and temporal distribution of the aboveground biomass. The results are summarized as follows: (1) The unitary linear model based on the field survey data and “accumulated” MODIS productivity data is the optimum model for estimating the aboveground biomass of the Xilingol grassland during the growing period, with the model accuracy reaching 69%; (2) The average aboveground biomass in the Xilingol grassland for the years 2005–2012 was estimated to be 14.35 Tg, and the average aboveground biomass density was estimated to be 71.32 g∙m⁻²; (3) The overall variation in the aboveground biomass showed a decreasing trend from the eastern meadow grassland to the western desert grassland; (4) There were obvious fluctuations in the aboveground biomass of the Xilingol grassland for the years 2005–2012, ranging from 10.56–17.54 Tg. Additionally, several differences in the interannual changes in aboveground biomass were observed among the various types of grassland. Large variations occurred in the temperate meadow-steppe and the typical grassland; whereas there was little change in the temperate desert-steppe and temperate steppe-desert.

It is critical to understanding grassland biomass and its dynamics to study regional carbon cycles and the sustainable use of grassland resources. In this study, we estimated aboveground biomass (AGB) and its spatio-temporal pattern for Inner Mongolia’s grassland between 2001 and 2011 using field samples, Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer normalized difference vegetation index (MODIS-NDVI) time series data, and statistical models based on the relationship between NDVI and AGB. We also explored possible relationships between the spatio-temporal pattern of AGB and climatic factors. The following results were obtained: (1) AGB averaged 19.1 Tg C (1 Tg = 10¹² g) over a total area of 66.01 × 10⁴ km² between 2001 and 2011 and experienced a general fluctuation (coefficient of variation = 9.43%), with no significant trend over time (R² = 0.05, p > 0.05). (2) The mean AGB density was 28.9 g C m⁻² over the whole study area during the 11 year period, and it decreased from the northeastern part of the grassland to the southwestern part, exhibiting large spatial heterogeneity. (3) The AGB variation over the 11 year period was closely coupled with the pattern of precipitation from January to July, but we did not find a significant relationship between AGB and the corresponding temperature changes. Precipitation was also an important factor in the spatial pattern of AGB over the study area (R² = 0.41, p < 0.001), while temperature seemed to be a minor factor (R² = 0.14, p < 0.001). A moisture index that combined the effects of precipitation and temperature explained more variation in AGB than did precipitation alone (R² = 0.45, p < 0.001). Our findings suggest that establishing separate statistical models for different vegetation conditions may reduce the uncertainty of AGB estimation on a large spatial scale. This study provides support for grassland administration for livestock production and the assessment of carbon storage in Inner Mongolia.

Identifying biodiversity hotspots has become a central issue in setting up priority protection areas, especially as financial resources for biological diversity conservation are limited. Taking China’s Higher Plants Red List (CHPRL), including Bryophytes, Ferns, Gymnosperms, Angiosperms, as the data source, we analyzed the geographic patterns of species richness, endemism and endangerment via data processing at a fine grid-scale with an average edge length of 30 km based on three aspects of richness information: species richness, endemic species richness and threatened species richness. We sought to test the accuracy of hotspots used in identifying conservation priorities with regard to higher plants. Next, we tested the congruence of the three aspects and made a comparison of the similarities and differences between the hotspots described in this paper and those in previous studies. We found that over 90% of threatened species in China are concentrated. While a high spatial congruence is observed among the three measures, there is a low congruence between two different sets of hotspots. Our results suggest that biodiversity information should be considered when identifying biological hotspots. Other factors, such as scales, should be included as well to develop biodiversity conservation plans in accordance with the region’s specific conditions.