Forest list archive: msg00063

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

re: stem analysis



> Date sent:      Mon, 24 Oct 1994 19:52:00 +0200
> From:           KEN POLSSON 387-6948 <KPOLSSON@galaxy.gov.bc.ca>
> Subject:        re: stem analysis
> To:             forest@nic.funet.fi
> Priority:       normal

Hello, Ken:

Your question should have been answered by some one(s) from forest
measurition easily. I don't know why you have not get proper answeres
yet. However, here I am trying to answered your question.
 
> MR> Most of the first samples are taken at chest height / 4.5 
feet. > MR> What is the significance of chest height / 4.5 feet?
> 
> I think it is just a convenient height that:
>  - is above butt swell,
>  - everyone can measure diameter at this height, and
>  - it is above the height of most competitive brush, so that the
>    tree is well established.
> 
> In metric, we use 1.3m, rather than a direct conversion to 1.37m.

The first question is above "chest height".  Actually, in forest
literature it is normally called "breast height", thus the diameter at
this point is named "breast height diameter" or "diameter at breast
height", or simply using DBH (d.b.h.). 
Why foresters use breast height? There are major reasons. 

The first one is the convenience. When one measures how thick a tree 
is at this point, one does not need to bend your waist or to use 
ladder. Also for convenience, when feet is used, we use 4.5 feet. 
while metric system is used, we use 1.3 m. In any case, 7 centimeter
difference in height around this point do not make any meaningful
difference in diameter.  Indeed 1.2 or 1.5 m point did used or may
still be used in some countries or places.

The second reason is that this point (DBH) is a good reference to 
estimate timer volume of a tree. Thus volume tables are based on 
dbh, more precise tables are based on dbh and height.  Still
more precise tables may use diameters at several height positions 
along the stem, which makes measurement difficult and slow.   
  

> MR> Is there a "standard" distance to be maintained between 
samples?
> MR> If not, what determines how often the samples are collected?

The purpose of stem analysis is to find out annual growth of trees,
including diameters (at differet point), height, and volumes. 
Then this information can be used to correlate climatic soil or 
other enviornmental factors for modeling or predicting growth.

With stem analysis, one can draw a vertical section figure of a 
tree, seeing growth situation at "any points" of the tree. Since 
samples collected only at certain height points, the growth at other 
points are infered from.  Thus the growth at other points other than 
the sampled points is not the real situation.  If you want your 
analysis more precise, you should collect samples at short distance. 
Still more precise method is to split the tree. This is really done 
by foresters in some cases.

The normal samples for stem analysis should include 1 sample at 
buttum, 1 at 0.5 meter high, 1 at dbh. then every 2 meters. The 
reason for collecting at 0.5 meter is that the buttress part changes 
quick and generally showing hyperbola curve.  If the tree is very 
big and stem is very regular, you may take samples at longer 
distance, otherwise you may take samples at short distances. This is 
also very much depending on how precise you wand in your results and
money and labor you will afford. 


Yingmou Yao, Ph.D. plant breeding
(Ms. Forestry)
Dept of Plant Biology
University of Helsinki


> MR> Once the samples are collected, does what is analyzed vary according to
> MR> what the individual researcher is studying?  
> 
> Several people where I work have done stem analysis many times.  I
> think they take ten detailed measurements of diameter outside bark.
> But aside from that, the level of detail of dissecting the trees will
> definately depend on what they are analysing.  They will usually
> split each log, and identify exactly where the "pith nodes" are,
> at least for the species where this is possible.  They want to know
> how the tree grew to where it is now.
> 
> For the most part, the stem analysis we do is to calibrate a tree
> growth model.  We typically choose open-grown trees, so that we can
> model the extreme condition of unrestricted growth, both up and out.
> >From the stem analysis, they will create various equations to model
> height growth, ring width, basal area increment, crown shape, etc.
> In one case, a researcher spent many months measuring branch angles
> and foliar volume.
> 
> Now that I've said all that, I'll step back again, and let the *real*
> foresters correct any points that I may have gotten wrong...
> 
> --- Ken Polsson - Stand Modelling Analyst - BC Ministry of Forests ---
> --- kpolsson@galaxy.gov.bc.ca     ---      "The opinions expressed ---
> --- CompuSpec BBS (604)479-0418   ---     here are not necessarily ---
> --- RelayNet: ->1797              ---   the views of my employer." ---
> 
> 
> 
> 






[Metla] [Main Index] [Thread Index]

Mail converted by MHonArc 1.1.0