CIPS80 v. 1.0.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Allometric Crown Width Equations for Northwest Trees Nicholas L. Crookston RMRS – Moscow June 2004.
Advertisements

EFIMED Advanced course on MODELLING MEDITERRANEAN FOREST STAND DYNAMICS FOR FOREST MANAGEMENT MARC PALAHI Head of EFIMED Office INDIVIDUAL TREE.
Mathematical Models Chapter 2
Regression Bivariate Multivariate. Simple Regression line – line of best fit Ŷ = a + bX The mean point is always on the line Y is the criterion variable.
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS of the FOREST VEGETATION SIMULATOR Southern Variant (FVS-Sn) Nathan D. Herring Dr. Philip J. Radtke Virginia Tech Department of Forestry.
Douglas-fir mortality estimation with generalized linear mixed models Jeremy Groom, David Hann, Temesgen Hailemariam 2012 Western Mensurationists’ Meeting.
Growth Model Users Group Growth Model Run-Off January 2002.
Northwest Advanced Renewables Alliance Douglas-fir biomass and nutrient removal under varying harvest intensities designed for co-production of timber.
Modeling Effects of Genetic Improvement in Loblolly Pine Plantations Barry D. Shiver Stephen Logan.
Examining Clumpiness in FPS David K. Walters Roseburg Forest Products.
Impact of plot size on the effect of competition in individual-tree models and their applications Jari Hynynen & Risto Ojansuu Finnish Forest Research.
Modeling Branch Characteristics In Douglas-fir & Western Hemlock.
A Young Douglas-fir Plantation Growth Model for the Pacific Northwest Nick Vaughn University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
1 Nutrition Current Situation RFNRP completed measurements of last phase in 1998 Fertilization is part of auxiliary plots on Type I Installations –extends.
15 September 2003 SMC Fall Policy Meeting TreeLab (v1.0) Variable-density Yield Simulator for Immature, Managed Stands of Douglas-fir Sam D. Pittman Eric.
Simulating growth impacts of Swiss needle cast in Douglas-fir: The blood, sweat and tears behind the ORGANON growth multiplier Sean M. Garber April 26,
Estimating Response of Douglas-fir to Urea in Western Oregon & Washington By: Eric Sucre M.S. Thesis Defense.
Estimation and Application of Genetic- Gain Multipliers for Douglas-Fir Height and Diameter Growth Peter J. Gould 1, David D. Marshall 2, Randy Johnson.
Modeling the Effects of Genetic Improvement on Diameter and Height Growth Greg Johnson Weyerhaeuser Company.
1 A hybrid modeling framework for intensively managed Douglas-fir in the Pacific Northwest Aaron Weiskittel Department of Forest Science.
1 Density and Stocking. 2 Potential of the land to produce wood is determined mainly by its site quality. The actual production or growth of wood fiber.
Foliage and Branch Biomass Prediction an allometric approach.
Stem form responses to differing areas of weed control around planted Douglas-fir trees Robin Rose, Douglas A. Maguire, and Scott Ketchum Department of.
Generic Approaches to Model Validation Presented at Growth Model User’s Group August 10, 2005 David K. Walters.
April 6 Logistic Regression –Estimating probability based on logistic model –Testing differences among multiple groups –Assumptions for model.
Modeling Crown Characteristics of Loblolly Pine Trees Modeling Crown Characteristics of Loblolly Pine Trees Harold E. Burkhart Virginia Tech.
Lecture 12 FORE 3218 Forest Mensuration II Lecture 12 Tree-Growth and Stand-Table Projection Avery and Burkhart, Chapter 16.
Do stem form differences mask responses to silvicultural treatment? Doug Maguire Department of Forest Science Oregon State University.
Sustainable Production Forestry THE JOINT FORCES OF CSIRO & SCION Development of a productivity Index for Douglas-fir Leith Knowles.
Unit 1, Chapter 2 Integrated Science. Unit One: Forces and Motion 2.1 Using a Scientific Model to Predict Speed 2.2 Position and Time 2.3 Acceleration.
Incorporating stand density effects in modeling tree taper Mahadev Sharma Ontario Forest Research Institute Sault Ste Marie, Canada.
Thinning mixed-species stands of Douglas-fir and western hemlock in the presence of Swiss needle cast Junhui Zhao, Douglas A. Maguire, Douglas B. Mainwaring,
“The MB&G Silviculture Support System” Steve Fairweather Ellen Voth Reggie Fay Mason, Bruce & Girard, Inc. Portland, Oregon GMUG 12/15/05.
Comparisons of DFSIM, ORGANOIN and FVS David Marshall Olympia Forestry Sciences Laboratory PNW Research Station USDA Forest Service Growth Model Users.
Growth Model Users Group November 15, 2013 Greg Johnson Weyerhaeuser NR Company.
Economics 173 Business Statistics Lecture 10 Fall, 2001 Professor J. Petry
Projecting FIA Data With FVS and ORGANON Greg Latta Oregon State University College of Forest Resources.
Looking for the Plateau in Douglas-fir Annual Volume Increment
THE INFLUENCE OF STAND CONDITIONS ON TREE FORM Sean M. Garber and Aaron R. Weiskittel Oregon State University June 21, 2004.
Warm-Up #1 11/30 1. Write down these 3 formulas:
RAP-ORGANON A Red Alder Plantation Growth Model David Hibbs, David Hann, Andrew Bluhm, Oregon State University.
Estimation of Genetic Multipliers for Douglas-Fir Height- and Diameter- Growth Models Peter J. Gould, David D. Marshall, Randy Johnson and Greg Johnson.
Sustainable Production Forestry THE JOINT FORCES OF CSIRO & SCION Application of the New Zealand Douglas-fir stand-level growth model to data from the.
Annualized diameter and height growth equations for plantation grown Douglas- fir, western hemlock, and red alder Aaron Weiskittel 1, Sean Garber 1, Greg.
Comparing ORGANON & SPS Using the Bakuzis Matrix Growth Model Users Group December 15, 2005 Dave Hamlin.
Incorporating Genetics into Growth Models: Results from Block-Plot Trials of Douglas-Fir Peter Gould and Brad St Clair PNW Research Station Keith Jayawickrama.
Tree and Stand Dynamics: Unravelling the Different Effects Of Site and Competition The impossible dream or an agenda for more research?
Dan Couch Olympia, WA DNR January, Outline Rogue Valley LiDAR Background Stand Metrics Comparison Results:  LiDAR vs Timber Cruise BLM Forest Inventory.
3-1Forecasting Weighted Moving Average Formula w t = weight given to time period “t” occurrence (weights must add to one) The formula for the moving average.
GROWTH AND YIELD How will my forest grow? Dr. Glenn Glover School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences Auburn University.
Forest Management Service Center Providing Biometric Services to the National Forest System Program Emphasis: We provide products and technical support.
Leah Rathbun PhD Candidate, University of British Columbia
What is new with the Forest Vegetation Simulator?
Francisco Mauro, Vicente Monleon, and Hailemariam Temesgen
and Other Related Measurements
Rapeepan Kantavichai, PhD student
Cruise Summaries.
Manipulate broadleaf density Tend individual Sw
Regression Chapter 6 I Introduction to Regression
Developing Edition 3.0 of CIPSANON
Simple Linear Regression
Simple Linear Regression
Tree List Generator (TLG) v1.0
Stand and Tree Characteristics at Age 30
National Forest Inventory for Great Britain
Correlation and Regression
BIOMASS PER RECRUIT MODEL
Kirk Hanson (360)
A medical researcher wishes to determine how the dosage (in mg) of a drug affects the heart rate of the patient. Find the correlation coefficient & interpret.
USING DATA Obj
Presentation transcript:

CIPS80 v. 1.0

Data, Sites ECR—4 yrs of growth on 1 site 2m2y—6 yrs of growth on 1 sites CPT—8 yrs of growth on 3 sites LTSP—8 yrs of growth on 2 sites Fall River—10 years of growth on 1 site Herb1—20 yrs of growth on 2 sites Tanoak—25 years of growth on 2sites SMC type 3—up to 24 years of growth on 30 sites SMC type 2—up to 24 years of growth on 12 sites SMC type 1—up to 28 years of growth on 19 sites LOGS—up to 50 years of growth on 9 sites Blackrock—up to 58 years of growth on 11 control plots SWO-ORGANON—5 years of growth on 525 plots 2

Ht growth dataset Confined to only those trees with measured heights All VMRC installations (n=48001) Fall River (n=25876) Tanoak (n=3665) LSTP—all trees to age 5, subset at age>5 (n=26307) SMC type 1 (n=19514) SMC type 2 (n=2248) SMC type 3 (n=32812) LOGS (n=2117) Blackrock (n=626) Height to crown base (necessary for estimating CCH) Measured at Fall River, subset of VMRC, SMC, LO, BR Estimated using HCB equation constructed from HCB-measured trees 3

Ht growth dataset, calculated variables Potential height growth (Bruce SI50) Determine GEA of height, determine increment associated with GEA+period length Height to crown base (necessary for estimating CCH) Measured at Fall River, subset of VMRC, SMC, LO, BR Estimated using HCB equation constructed from HCB-measured trees Max crown width (necessary for CCH estimate) For trees with ht> 5 m, used Hann (1999) For trees with ht< 5m, fit an equation based on measurements at ECR and CPT estimating MCW from ht. Crown profile was parabolized to match profile of Hann estimates for large trees CCH (Crown closure at height of subject tree) Calculation eased by Hann DLL 4

Ht growth, summed cover, WMSE = 2.7241 I0* a0 + ((1-I0) * (PHG * (Exp(-Exp(a1+a2*HT) * weedcov0.5)) *a3* (Exp(a4* CCH)) * (1 - Exp(-a5 * CRa6)))) 5

Potential Ht growth Total age: p1 = (50 + (Exp(0.000242009 / 2 + 2.589348107 + -0.011049175 * ((SI / 3.6274143) ^ 1.201867)))) p2 = (1 / (-0.447762 - 0.894427 * (SI / 100) + 0.793548 * (SI / 100) ^ 2 - 0.171666 * (SI / 100) ^ 3)) p3 = (-0.447762 - 0.894427 * (SI / 100) + 0.793548 * (SI / 100) ^ 2 - 0.171666 * (SI / 100) ^ 3) gea1 = (((Log(ht / SI)) / (Log(4.5 / SI) / (((Exp(0.000242009 / 2 + 2.589348107 + -0.011049175 * ((SI / 3.6274143) ^ 1.201867)))) ^ p3 - p1 ^ p3))) + (p1 ^ (-0.447762 - 0.894427 * (SI / 100) + 0.793548 * (SI / 100) ^ 2 - 0.171666 * (SI / 100) ^ 3))) ^ p2 gea2 = gea1 + 1 6

Potential Ht growth htgea = SI * Exp((Ln(4.5 / SI) / (((Exp(0.000242009 / 2 + 2.589348107 + -0.011049175 * ((SI / 3.6274143) ^ 1.201867)))) ^ (-0.447762 - 0.894427 * (SI / 100) + 0.793548 * (SI / 100) ^ 2 - 0.171666 * (SI / 100) ^ 3) - (50 + (Exp(0.000242009 / 2 + 2.589348107 + -0.011049175 * ((SI / 3.6274143) ^ 1.201867)))) ^ (-0.447762 - 0.894427 * (SI / 100) + 0.793548 * (SI / 100) ^ 2 - 0.171666 * (SI / 100) ^ 3))) * ((gea1) ^ (-0.447762 - 0.894427 * (SI / 100) + 0.793548 * (SI / 100) ^ 2 - 0.171666 * (SI / 100) ^ 3) - (50 + (Exp(0.000242009 / 2 + 2.589348107 + -0.011049175 * ((SI / 3.6274143) ^ 1.201867)))) ^ (-0.447762 - 0.894427 * (SI / 100) + 0.793548 * (SI / 100) ^ 2 - 0.171666 * (SI / 100) ^ 3))) Hpot= htgea(t+1) – htgea(t) 7

Ht growth, effect by sumcover (%) 8

Dbh dataset Confined to all trees age 12 and under, and only those older trees with measured crown ratio All VMRC installations (n=27676) Fall River (n=24326) Tanoak (n=1215) LSTP—all trees to age 5, subset at age>5 (n=2730) SMC type 1 (n=31480) SMC type 2 (n=2322) SMC type 3 (n=39948) LOGS (n=1192) Blackrock (n=914) SWO-ORGANON (n=15396) 9

Dbh growth, summed cover, RMSE=8.7325 ((b1)*((dbh+1)^b2))*exp(b3*(dbh/100)3) *exp(b4*(cr+0.2)/1.2) *exp(b5*log(si50)) *exp(b6*Iyoung*log(si50)) *exp(b7*(BA)^0.5) *exp(b8*((BAL)/(log(DBH+10))) *exp(b9*Inat*((BAL)/(log(DBH+10))) *(exp((1-Iold)*(-exp(b10+b11*ht)*sumcov^0.5)) 10

Dbhgr, effect of weed cover 11

Mortality, MSE=0.0224 SAS Proc NLIN      Mortality, MSE=0.0224 SAS Proc NLIN Used an annualizing compound interest formula. Selection based on minimization of MSE, comparison of measured to predicted mortality in systematic ranges of independent variables Probability of mort (p) =log ((p) / (1-p)) where p= c0+c1*(dbhless1)+c2*((crless1))+c3*log(balless1+0.001)+c4*log(si50) Probability of mortality increases with: Increasing SI, BAL Decreasing HT, CR, BA 12

Height to crown base For static prediction of crown base Data from five studies: Herb1: measured at 15 and 20 year remeasurements (n=4184) Fall River: measured at 6, 7, 8, and 10 year remeasurements (n=15367) SMC type 1, 2 and 3 (n=75021) LOGS (n=1314) Blackrock (n=334) 13

Height to crown base Model, undamaged (weighted by HCB^0.5) HCB= ht . (1 + Exp(d0 + d1·Log (HT) + d2·Log(DFBA + 0.0001) +d3·(dbh / ht)+ d4·CCFL +d5 · Log(SI50))) 14

Height to Crown base 15

CIPS80, Bakuzis output Bakuzis matrix graphically illustrates the compatibility of model output with the interdependent relationships typically found between the most common stand and tree descriptors of even-aged stands Output from DFSIM provides a proper example for comparison

CIPS80, Bakuzis output Vol vs. ht

CIPS80, Bakuzis output Vol vs. TPA

CIPS80, Bakuzis output Vol vs. qmd

CIPS80, Bakuzis output Vol vs. age

CIPS80, Bakuzis output BA vs TPA

CIPS80, Bakuzis output BA vs ht

CIPS80, Bakuzis output BA vs qmd

CIPS80, Bakuzis output BA vs age

CIPS80, Bakuzis output TPA vs. ht

CIPS80, Bakuzis output TPA vs. qmd

CIPS80, Bakuzis output TPA vs. age

CIPS80, Bakuzis output CR vs. ht

CIPS80, Bakuzis output Ht vs. age

CIPS80, Bakuzis output Scribner volume vs. height

CIPS80, Bakuzis output Scribner volume vs. age