A theory to link relationships of stand volume, density, mean diameter and height in forestry data

Abstract

In this study, a geometric model of a growing forest stand has been explored. The basic relationships considered link stand volume and stand density, diameter at breast height (DBH), mean DBH and mean height. The model provides simple formulas connecting the exponents of all the relationships. Application of the formulas to real forestry data provided a high level of predictions of an exponent from two others measured through regressions from empirical data. The Pinus sylvestris L. data were of a static nature, a collection of individual stands, while the Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco data were dynamic, representing forest stand development over time. The ability of the model to predict exponents in the empirical data implies, on the one hand, a substantial level of similarity between the model and the forestry data. And, on the other hand, the model gives an example in which parameters of one relationship may be linked to parameters of another. Supposedly this kind of ‘relationship between relationships’ may be observed in forest stands undergoing active growth and competition-induced self-thinning.

Keywords

Relationship between relationships / Self-thinning / Forestry data / Allometry / Scots pine / Douglas-fir

References

[1] Curtis RO, Marshall DD (2009a) Levels-of-growing-stock Cooperative Study in Douglas-fir: Report No. 19–the Iron Creek Study, 1966–2006. Research paper PNW-RP-580. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR

[2] Curtis RO, Marshall DD (2009b) Levels-of-growing-stock Cooperative Study in Douglas-fir: Report No. 18-Rocky Brook, 1963–2006. Research report PNW-RP-578. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR

[3] Frothingham EH. White pine under forest management. Bull US Dep Agric, 1914, 13: 1-70.

[4] Gavrikov VL. A simple theory to link bole surface area, stem density and average tree dimensions in a forest stand. Eur J For Res, 2014, 133: 1087-1094.

[5] Gavrikov VL. Stem surface area in modeling of forest stands, 2017, Cham: Springer

[6] Gavrikov VL. ‘Relationships between relationships’ in forest stands: intercepts and exponents analyses. J For Res, 2018, 29: 575-582.

[7] Henry HAL, Aarssen LW. The interpretation of stem diameter–height allometry in trees: biomechanical constraints, neighbour effects, or biased regressions?. Ecol Lett, 1999, 2(2): 89-97.

[8] Hilmi GF. Bogeophysical theory and prognosis of forest self-thinning, 1955, Moscow: Izd. AN SSSR (in Russian)

[9] Inoue A. Relationships of stem surface area to other stem dimensions for Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica D. Don) and Japanese cypress (Chamaecyparis obtusa Endl.) trees. J For Res, 2004, 9(1): 45-50.

[10] Inoue A. Allometric model of the maximum size–density relationship between stem surface area and stand density. J For Res, 2009, 14(5): 268-275.

[11] King JE, Marshall DD, Bell JF (2002) Levels-of-growing-stock Cooperative Study in Douglas-fir: Report no. 17-the Skykomish Study, 1961-93; the Clemons Study, 1963–1994. Research paper PNW-RP-548. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR

[12] Marshall DD, Curtis RO (2001) Levels-of-growing-stock cooperative study in Douglas-fir: Report no. 15-Hoskins: 1963-1998. Reseach paper PNW-RP-537. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR

[13] Mohler CL, Marks PL, Sprugel DG. Stand structure and allometry of trees during self-thinning of pure stands. J Ecol, 1978, 66(2): 599-614.

[14] Reineke LH. Perfecting a stand-density index for even-aged forests. J Agric Res, 1933, 46(7): 627-638.

[15] Usoltsev VA. Eurasian forest biomass and primary production data, 1010, Yekaterinburg: Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences (in Russian)

[16] Vanclay JK. Robust relationships for simple plantation growth models based on sparse data. For Ecol Manag, 2010, 259(5): 1050-1054.

[17] Vanclay JK, Sands PJ. Calibrating the self-thinning frontier. For Ecol Manag, 2009, 259(1): 81-85.

[18] Weller DE. Self-thinning exponent correlated with allometric measures of plant geometry. Ecology, 1987, 68(4): 813-821.

[19] Weller DE. The interspecific size–density relationship among crowded plant stands and its implications for the-3/2 power rule of self-thinning. Am Nat, 1989, 133(1): 20-41.