2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.10.074
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biomass allometric equations for 10 co-occurring tree species in Chinese temperate forests

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

16
318
2
18

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 382 publications
(354 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
16
318
2
18
Order By: Relevance
“…Existing allometric equations for larch were developed for mature stands (Wang 2006) and thus cannot be applied to young saplings. Therefore, new allometric models are needed.…”
Section: Field Samplingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing allometric equations for larch were developed for mature stands (Wang 2006) and thus cannot be applied to young saplings. Therefore, new allometric models are needed.…”
Section: Field Samplingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The parent material is granite bedrock and the soil is Haplumbrepts or Eutroboralfs. The climate is continental monsoon climate with mean annual values: 700 mm precipitation, 884 mm evaporation , and 2.8 • C air temperature (Wang, 2006).…”
Section: Study Area Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this study, we sampled trees from stands with 50−60 years old age, 1800−3100 trees ha −1 density, 12−22 cm mean diameter at breast height (DBH), and 27−40 m 2 ha −1 basal area. Refer to Wang (2006) for details.…”
Section: Study Area Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding root mean squared errors calculated for aboveground woody biomass estimates of aspen trees, the allometric biomass equations provided by Ruark & Bockheim (1988) [46] and Wang (2006) [49] performed closest to the allometric biomass equations developed in this study (Figure 6). Their relative root mean squared error ranged between 19% and 21%, and was thus 40% to 50% higher compared to the root mean squared error produced by allometric biomass equations developed in this study.…”
Section: Comparison With Other Studiesmentioning
confidence: 56%
“…Their relative root mean squared error ranged between 19% and 21%, and was thus 40% to 50% higher compared to the root mean squared error produced by allometric biomass equations developed in this study. With respect to branch biomass all equations from the literature produced at least 18 kg and thus 150% larger root mean squared errors than equations developed in this study [49].…”
Section: Comparison With Other Studiesmentioning
confidence: 63%