1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0378-1127(98)00520-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modelling the relationship between tree diameters and heights using SBB distribution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the Johnson's SBB distribution, the location parameter (εh) of the Johnson's SB marginal distribution of heights is usually fixed as the minimum height of the distribution, while the scale parameter (λh) of the same marginal distribution of heights is considered as the range of the distributions, i.e., as maximum height -minimum height (Schreuder & Hafley 1977, Tewari & Von Gadow 1999, Li et al 2002, Zucchini et al 2001. Some authors have considered a value of 1.3 for the location parameter when fitting the marginal distribution of heights (Siipilehto 2000, Castedo-Dorado et al 2001.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the Johnson's SBB distribution, the location parameter (εh) of the Johnson's SB marginal distribution of heights is usually fixed as the minimum height of the distribution, while the scale parameter (λh) of the same marginal distribution of heights is considered as the range of the distributions, i.e., as maximum height -minimum height (Schreuder & Hafley 1977, Tewari & Von Gadow 1999, Li et al 2002, Zucchini et al 2001. Some authors have considered a value of 1.3 for the location parameter when fitting the marginal distribution of heights (Siipilehto 2000, Castedo-Dorado et al 2001.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of course they can be applied to any of the other bivariate models that are of interest in a forestry context. Bivariate distributions have been used for some time to describe the relationship between diameters and heights (Hafley and Schreuder 1976, Warren et al 1979, Tewari and Gadow 1999) and more recently also to include other tree attributes, such as height to maximum crown width or height to crown base (Uusitalo and Kivinen 1998). More exact estimation of height of maximum crown width, crown base and dead branch height can improve the estimation of branchiness and wood quality (Collin and Houllier 1992, Maguire et al 1994, Seifert 1999.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These features are reflected in a tree's further development by means of tree growth and mortality. One practical motivation is that knowledge of the between-and within-diameter-class height variations increases the possibilities for imitating different types of thinning (Hafley and Buford 1985) whereas the typical motivation is simply the ability to provide a more realistic picture of the stand structure (e.g., Tewari and Gadow 1999). Stand structure as a joint distribution of tree diameters and heights can be described by means of bivariate pdf.…”
Section: Bivariate Distribution Of Tree Diameters and Heightsmentioning
confidence: 99%