4.1 Article

SEMI-DESTRUCTIVE METHOD TO DERIVE ALLOMETRIC ABOVEGROUND BIOMASS MODEL FOR VILLAGE FOREST OF BANGLADESH: COMPARISON OF REGIONAL AND PAN-TROPICAL MODELS

期刊

JOURNAL OF TROPICAL FOREST SCIENCE
卷 32, 期 3, 页码 246-256

出版社

FOREST RESEARCH INST MALAYSIA
DOI: 10.26525/jtfs2020.32.3.246

关键词

Allometry; biomass expansion factor; inventory; pan-tropical model; village forest

类别

资金

  1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [GCP/BGD/058/USA, FAOBGDLOA 2017-008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pan-tropical biomass models were developed for natural and plantation forests, which cover a wide range of geographical areas and tree species. Tree architecture of a species significantly varies among plantations and natural forests as well as village forests or homestead areas. Tree architecture has a significant influence on biomass estimation in allometric models. Therefore, it was hypothesised that pan-tropical biomass models may not be able to address the desired accuracy in biomass estimation for village forests. The objective of this study was to derive a common allometric above-ground biomass model for a village forest in Bangladesh and to compare the efficiency of the derived model with frequently used pan-tropical models. This study adopted a semi-destructive method, where the biomass of individual sampled trees was derived from stem volume, wood density and biomass expansion factor. Eight linear models [natural logarithm (Ln) transformed] were used to derive the best-fit allometric biomass model. In comparison with the best-fit model, the frequently used pan-tropical models showed significant estimation of total above-ground biomass (TAGB). Therefore, the derived model for the village forest showed higher capacity to reduce uncertainty in biomass estimation compared to pan-tropical models. This finding may restrict the indiscriminate use of pan-tropical models without checking their accuracy towards a particular forest type and species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据