& Key message Volume predictions of sample trees are basic inputs for essential National Forest Inventory (NFI) estimates. The predicted volumes are rarely comparable among European NFIs because of country-specific dbh-thresholds and differences regarding the inclusion of the tree parts stump, stem top, and branches. Twenty-one European NFIs implemented harmonisation measures to provide consistent stem volume predictions for comparable forest resource estimates. & Context The harmonisation of forest information has become increasingly important. International programs and interest groups from the wood industry, energy, and environmental sectors require comparable information. European NFIs as primary source of forest information are well-placed to support policies and decision-making processes with harmonised estimates. & Aims The main objectives were to present the implementation of stem volume harmonisation by European NFIs, to obtain comparable growing stocks according to five reference definitions, and to compare the different results. & Methods The applied harmonisation approach identifies the deviations between country-level and common reference definitions. The deviations are minimised through country-specific bridging functions. Growing stocks were calculated from the unharmonised, and harmonised stem volume estimates and comparisons were made. This article is part of the topical collection on Forest information for bioeconomy outlooks at European level
• Key message A dataset of forest resource projections in 23 European countries to 2040 has been prepared for forestrelated policy analysis and decision-making. Due to applying harmonised definitions, while maintaining country-specific forestry practices, the projections should be usable from national to international levels. The dataset can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.4t880qh. The associated metadata are available at https://metadata-afs.nancy.inra.fr/ geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/8f93e0d6-b524-43bd-bdb8-621ad5ae6fa9.
⎯ The influence of climate on the vitality and growth of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) has become a focus of forest research over the last decade. Beech locally reaches its continental xeric limit in Hungary within its European distribution area, giving a unique opportunity to study the climatic sensitivity of the species, based on tree-ring analysis. A comparison of four geographically and climatically different sites is presented from Hungary, combining data collected on stand level with systematic forest inventory plots. Tree-ring width chronologies covering the past 90-100 years of the lifetime of mature and middle-aged trees and different climatic variables were used to evaluate the growth-climate relationships and recent growth trends of the selected beech stands by multivariate regression analysis. Strong relationships were found between annual radial growth and (mainly water availability related) meteorological variables of the vegetation season, exceeding previous results from elsewhere in Europe. A clear spatiotemporal variability of the growth sensitivity was also revealed, following a (climatic) gradient from the northern to the southwestern parts of the country. In the northern sites, climatic sensitivity was found to be more fluctuating, while southwestern sites facing more continuous effects of changing climatic conditions seem to show weakening correlation over time. Trends of relative basal area increments and climatic sensitivity of growth over the past decades may be due to unfavorable climatic changes, though extreme and recurrent drought events superimposed on the long-term trends seem to have a decisive impact on growth patterns and associated resilience of beech.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.