Above-Ground Biomass of a Mixed Eucalypt Forest in Eastern Victoria

Abstract

Eleven trees of Eucalyptus muellerana and 10 trees both of E. agglomerata and of E. sieberi growing in an uneven-aged mixed sclerophyll forest on duplex granitoid soils in eastern Victoria were felled, measured. separated into branch and stem components, sampled and weighed. Understorey vegetation and litter were also sampled for dry weight determination. Both linear and allometric regressions were developed for each species to predict branch and stem component dry weights from branch and tree dimensions. The predicted component weights for all branches on each tree were summed to estimate crown component dry weights, and regressions were then fitted for these crown component dry weights as functions of tree dimensions. Land area estimates of above-ground tree biomass were made by measuring tree diameters on sample plots. applying the appropriate regressions relating stem and crown component dry weights to tree diameter, and summing the predicted weights for each plot. The above-ground biomass of the forest ecosystem. which had a tree density of 123 stems per ha, was estimated to be 344.100 kg ha-1 of which 94.6% was in the forest overstorey. The proportions of each tree component in the overstorey were stem wood 60.1%, stem bark 15.8%. branch wood 16.5%, branch bark 3.9%, twigs 2.0%, and leaves 1.7%.

Biomass and aboveground net primary production in a subtropical mangrove stand of Kandelia obovata (S., L.) Yong at Manko Wetland, Okinawa, Japan

“…The aboveground biomass of mangrove forests are widely reported (Golley et al 1962;Briggs 1977;Christensen 1978;Suzuki and Tagawa 1983;Tamai et al 1986;Day et al 1987;Clough and Scott 1989;Lee 1990;Kusmana et al 1992;Soares and Schaeffer-Novelli 2005), the belowground biomass is less focused (Golley et al 1962;Briggs 1977;Komiyama et al 1987Komiyama et al , 2000Comley and McGuinness 2005). Although quantitative net primary production of terrestrial forests are widely reported (Stewart et al 1979;Binkley and Ryan 1998;Hughes et al 1999;Coble et al 2001;Enquist and Niklas 2002;Tanabe et al 2003;Tateno et al 2004;Turner et al 2004;Zhao and Zhou 2005;Newman et al 2006;Cheng and Niklas 2007;Chmura et al 2007;Ozalp et al 2007), only a few studies have focused on mangroves (e.g. Christensen 1978;Day et al 1987Day et al , 1996Lee 1990;Sukardjo and Yamada 1992;Li 1997;Ross et al 2001;Sherman et al 2003;Thi Ha et al 2003).…”

Carbon in Mature Native Forests in Australia: The Role of Direct Weighing in the Derivation of Allometric Equations

“…A high proportion of the AGB in silvertop ash trees was in the bark (Table 4). Stewart et al [29] reported even higher values (20%) for the relative contribution of the stem bark to the AGB in silvertop ash trees in VIC. As logs in native hardwood harvest operations are debarked in the forest, the differences in bark proportion between species can have a marked impact on the total amount of harvest residue left in the forest-this is exemplified by the differences between the bark contributions relative to the total AGB for mountain ash and silvertop ash (Table 4), [20].…”

“…Stewart et al [29] Additive equation developed specifically for silvertop ash, in the State of Victoria. They sampled ten silvertop ash with DBH ranging between 28 and 89 cm, with the larger trees being more than 100-year old.…”

Map-Making of Plant Biomass and Leaf Area Index for Management of Protected Areas

“…They were weighed in the field for total fresh weights and subsampled to enable conversion to a dry-weight basis. Subsamples were oven-dried at 105 C to constant weight, and the conversion of field fresh weight to dry weight was carried out by the ratio of dry weight to fresh weight in the subsamples, according to Bunce (1968) and Stewart et al (1979). Dry weights of the harvested plants for each diameter class were multiplied for the total number of individuals in each class to obtain stand biomass, according to Ovington and Pearsall (1956) and Whittaker and Marks (1975).…”