2014
DOI: 10.1007/s00468-014-1134-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of wood density profiles of tree stems: incorporating vertical variations to optimize wood sampling strategies for density and biomass estimations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
38
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
4
38
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For this species, contradictory results were previously obtained, showing either higher or lower density in juvenile wood compared with mature wood (Nepveu 1981), whereas, for Quercus sp., the radial decrease in BSG from pith to bark is well-known (e.g. Wassenberg et al, 2015). Last, the relationship reported by Woodcock and Shier (2002), Poorter (2008) and some other authors, mainly for tropical species but for some temperate species as well, between wood density and the successional status of species was not applicable for two of our five temperate species: Q. petraea/robur and A. alba.…”
Section: Comparison Between Our Data and The Theories/models/patternsmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…For this species, contradictory results were previously obtained, showing either higher or lower density in juvenile wood compared with mature wood (Nepveu 1981), whereas, for Quercus sp., the radial decrease in BSG from pith to bark is well-known (e.g. Wassenberg et al, 2015). Last, the relationship reported by Woodcock and Shier (2002), Poorter (2008) and some other authors, mainly for tropical species but for some temperate species as well, between wood density and the successional status of species was not applicable for two of our five temperate species: Q. petraea/robur and A. alba.…”
Section: Comparison Between Our Data and The Theories/models/patternsmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…Applying such volume tables as a basis, the carbon content can be calculated utilising the density and a general conversion factor as suggested by Pretzsch (2010). This efficient approach has some limitations due to the fact that the density is acknowledged not only to differ within tree species (Hamilton 1975) and between sites (Maniatis et al 2011), but is also recognised not to be homogenous throughout a tree (Wassenberg et al 2015). Additionally, the carbon content is neither the same between tree species nor among tissue types (Thomas and Martin 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The point cloud post processing with SimpleTree is described in the Appendix A. The volumes of reconstructed trees were multiplied with density values discussed in Wassenberg et al [91] to estimate biomass.…”
Section: Data Setsmentioning
confidence: 99%