Affiliation:
1. Transilvania University of Brasov
2. University of Minnesota
Abstract
Abstract
Background:
Improving forest biomass and carbon estimates is essential for sustaining the mitigation of climate change efforts in the forestry sector. An important source of uncertainty in forest estimates originates in the allometric model predictions. When developing allometric biomass models, the tree selection process is an important step that affects the model’s predictive performance. Typically, the diameter at breast height (D) range of the species is divided into D-classes, followed by random selection of sample trees within the D-classes; the number of trees in each D-class defines the sample tree D-distribution. Here, using a simulation study, we compared six types of sample tree D-distributions with respect to the precision of estimates of mean population biomass that the models produced.
Results:
The results showed that randomly selecting from each D-class a number of trees that is proportional to the basal area in that specific D-class in the population (i.e., sample trees were selected to produce a distribution of basal area in the sample that matched the distribution in the population) was the optimal D-distribution of the sample trees for minimizing the standard errors of the estimates of the population mean for a given sample size. When a-priori information about the distribution of tree attributes in the population is unknown, a uniform D-distribution represents a good alternative to the optimal sample D-distribution. Although producing the greatest precision of the estimate, the optimal D-distribution of sample trees did not produce models with the most accurate model fit (greatest coefficient of determination), suggesting that model fit alone is not a sufficient indicator of model’s predictive performance.
Conclusions:
The sample tree D-distribution affected considerably the precision of estimates of mean population biomass that the models produced. Therefore, to optimize the tree selection, and, therefore, to develop the models that produce precise estimators of the population mean, we recommend using an optimal D-distribution of the sample trees.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference36 articles.
1. Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2017 Apr 19];333:988–93. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21764754.
2. The European forest carbon budget under future climate conditions and current management practices;Pilli R;Biogeosciences,2022
3. Grassi G, Pilli R, House J, Federici S, Kurz WA. Science-based approach for credible accounting of mitigation in managed forests. Carbon Balance Manag [Internet]. 2018;13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13021-018-0096-2.
4. Grassi G, House J, Dentener F, Federici S, den Elzen M, Penman J. The key role of forests in meeting climate targets requires science for credible mitigation. Nat Clim Chang [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Nov 29];7:220–6. http://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3227.
5. Jucker T, Caspersen J, Chave J, Antin C, Barbier N, Bongers F et al. Allometric equations for integrating remote sensing imagery into forest monitoring programmes. Glob Chang Biol [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Mar 6];23:177–90. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/gcb.13388.