2012
DOI: 10.5849/forsci.10-129
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationship between Aboveground Biomass and Percent Cover of Ground Vegetation in Canadian Boreal Plain Riparian Forests

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
14
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although we observed numerous plant cover responses to N addition, and percent cover is typically a good predictor of variation in biomass (MacDonald & Burke ), there were no significant N effects on aboveground biomass; total aboveground biomass increased in response to both levels of N addition, but the variability among samples was very high. The size of our biomass sampling quadrats (0.25 × 0.25 m) was consistent with that used elsewhere for prairie communities (Seastedt et al ; Tilman & Wedin ; Biondini ; Dickson & Busby ; Socher et al ; Seabloom et al ), and was selected to minimize disturbance of the long‐term plots.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…Although we observed numerous plant cover responses to N addition, and percent cover is typically a good predictor of variation in biomass (MacDonald & Burke ), there were no significant N effects on aboveground biomass; total aboveground biomass increased in response to both levels of N addition, but the variability among samples was very high. The size of our biomass sampling quadrats (0.25 × 0.25 m) was consistent with that used elsewhere for prairie communities (Seastedt et al ; Tilman & Wedin ; Biondini ; Dickson & Busby ; Socher et al ; Seabloom et al ), and was selected to minimize disturbance of the long‐term plots.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…; Quint & Dech ; MacDonald et al. ). Stratum height was important to differentiate between trees and shrubs with fundamentally different cover–stem density relationships (Figs and ), and its inclusion in our models allowed us to predict stem counts of woody plants in multiple strata simultaneously (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Heightbiomass relationships (used in conjunction with cover) would be helpful, but known relationships are very few and far between for wetland plants. A scant few do exist and should be used (e.g., MacDonald et al 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%