2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.05.029
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of different survey methods for assessing gap parameters in old-growth forests

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…; Green ; Kathke & Bruelheide ; Yamamoto et al. ) confirm what seems to be a general pattern in forest ecology: canopy gaps smaller than 150 m 2 are very abundant (>75%) whereas gaps larger than 400 m 2 are rare (<5%). The exceptionally high proportion of large gaps found by Sanford et al.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…; Green ; Kathke & Bruelheide ; Yamamoto et al. ) confirm what seems to be a general pattern in forest ecology: canopy gaps smaller than 150 m 2 are very abundant (>75%) whereas gaps larger than 400 m 2 are rare (<5%). The exceptionally high proportion of large gaps found by Sanford et al.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…Despite the importance of gaps to forest ecology, patterns associated with their frequency, size and shape remain open after more than three decades of gap research. For example, there continues to be uncertainty with regard to which statistical distribution best describes gap sizes (Foster & Reiners 1986;Lertzman & Krebs 1991;Yamamoto et al 2011) or whether gap opening is a random or clumped process in space and time (Brokaw 1985;van der Meer & Bongers 1996a;Nuske et al 2009). Assessments of gap shape, which has a direct influence on gap microclimate and species colonization (Howe 1990;Brown 1993;van Dam 2001), are also scarce (Lertzman & Krebs 1991;Battles et al 1996;Eysenrode et al 1998).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies in beech-dominated primeval forests reported higher gap fractions, varying between Kenderes et al 2009, Garbarino et al 2012, Rugani et al 2013. Differences in the gap fraction can be due to different gap definitions (e.g., Runkle 1992) and the methods of gap sampling (e.g., Yamamoto et al 2011). Some canopy gap definitions are based on a minimum size of the gaps or a threshold of height difference compared to the surrounding canopy.…”
Section: Canopy Gap Patternmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A partir de esas mediciones es posible estimar estructura y transmisión de luz al sotobosque (Rich, 1990;Hu et al, 2009), ambas de gran importancia para el inventario forestal (Chen et al, 2006;Cruz-leyva et al, 2010) y el manejo de la regeneración natural (Yamamoto, 2000;Yamamoto et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionunclassified