Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Self-thinning and Stem Surface Area

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Stem Surface Area in Modeling of Forest Stands

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Plant Science ((BRIEFSPLANT))

  • 260 Accesses

Abstract

Any object of study is a number of variables, or measures, whose values are delivered by corresponding direct or indirect measurements. These variables are often dependent on time and other variables, which produces relationships of variables to time and to each other.In this chapter, modeling of alterations in the stem surface area is used to study two questions. The first is about whether “secondary” relationships may exist in the structure of a forest stand as a system of growing and competing trees. Definitions of “primary” and “secondary” relationships are given in the section, Primary and Secondary Relationships: Look Through a Geometrical Model of Forest Stand, below. Here a model is required that predicts an interplay of relationships of different variables in a forest stand. The model should be transparent enough to allow an analytical consideration. On the other hand, it should bear enough similarity with real forest stands to allow a comparison with field data.The second question deals with understanding the current status of the famous “ − 3∕2 rule.” It turns out that a model based on stem surface area helps to clarify the place of the rule in the theory of self-thinning and further to illustrate similarities in the self-thinning within tree species.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Berger U, Hildenbrandt H, Grimm V (2002) Towards a standard for the individual-based modeling of plant populations: self-thinning and the field-of-neighborhood approach. Nat Res Model 15(1):39–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Curtis RO, Marshall DD et al (2009) Levels-of-growing-stock cooperative study in Douglas-fir: Report No. 19–the Iron Creek study, 1966–2006. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station

    Google Scholar 

  3. Curtis RO, Marshall DD et al (2006) Levels-of-growing-stock cooperative study in Douglas-fir: Report No. 18-Rocky Brook, 1963–2006. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station

    Google Scholar 

  4. Frothingham EH (1914) White pine under forest management. Bull Dep Agric 13:1–70

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gavrikov VL (2014) A simple theory to link bole surface area, stem density and average tree dimensions in a forest stand. Eur J For Res 133(6):1087–1094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gavrikov VL (2015) An application of bole surface growth model: a transitional status of ‘ − 3∕2’ rule. Eur J For Res 134(4):715–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hamilton NRS, Matthew C, Lemair G (1995) In defense of the − 3∕2 boundary rule: a re-evaluation of self-thinning concepts and status. Ann Bot 76:569–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hilmi GF (1955) Biogeophysical theory and prognosis of forest self-thinning. Izd-vo AN SSSR, Moscow (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Inoue A (2004) Relationships of stem surface area to other stem dimensions for Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica D. Don) and Japanese cypress (Chamaecyparis obtusa Endl.) trees. J For Res 9(1):45–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Inoue A (2009) Allometric model of the maximum size–density relationship between stem surface area and stand density. J For Res 14(5):268–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jack SB, Long JN (1996) Linkages between silviculture and ecology: an analysis of density management diagrams. For Ecol Manage 86(1):205–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. King JE, Marshall DD, Bell JF (2002) Levels-of-growing-stock cooperative study in Douglas-fir: Report No. 17-the Skykomish study, 1961–93; The Clemons study, 1963–1994. Pacific Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kira T, Ogawa H, Sakazaki N (1953) Intraspecific competition among higher plants. i. Competition-yield-density interrelationship in regularly dispersed populations. J Inst Polytech Osaka City Univ Ser D 4:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kofman GB (1986) Growth and form of trees. Nauka, Novosibirsk (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  15. LaBarbera M (1989) Analyzing body size as a factor in ecology and evolution. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 20:97–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Larjavaara M (2010) Maintenance cost, toppling risk and size of trees in a self-thinning stand. J Theor Biol 265(1):63–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lonsdale WM (1990) The self-thinning rule: dead or alive? Ecology 71(4):1373–1388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Marshall DD, Curtis RO (2001) Levels-of-growing-stock cooperative study in Douglas-fir: report no. 15-Hoskins: 1963–1998. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

    Google Scholar 

  19. Matyssek R, Agerer R, Ernst D, Munch J-C, Osswald W, Pretzsch H, Priesack E, Schnyder H, Treutter D (2005) The plant’s capacity in regulating resource demand. Plant Biol 7(6):560–580

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Newton PF, Smith VG (1990) Reformulated self-thinning exponents as applied to black spruce. Can J For Res 20(7):887–893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Niklas KJ, Kutschera U (2015) Kleiber’s Law: How the Fire of Life ignited debate, fueled theory, and neglected plants as model organisms. Plant Signal Behav 10(7):e1036216

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Niklas KJ, Midgley JJ, Enquist BJ (2003) A general model for mass–growth–density relations across tree-dominated communities. Evol Ecol Res 5(3):459–468

    Google Scholar 

  23. Palahí M, Pukkala T, Miina J, Montero G (2003) Individual-tree growth and mortality models for scots pine (Pinus sylvestris l.) in north-east Spain. Ann For Sci 60(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Perala D, Leary R, Cieszewski C (1999) Self-thinning and stockability of the circumboreal aspens (Populus tremuloides Michx., and P. tremula L.). Research Paper NC-335. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station., St. Paul

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pretzsch H (2006) Species-specific allometric scaling under self-thinning: evidence from long-term plots in forest stands. Oecologia 146(4):572–583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pretzsch H (2009) Forest dynamics, growth, and yield. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Pretzsch H, Biber P (2005) A re-evaluation of Reineke’s rule and stand density index. For Sci 51(4):304–320

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pretzsch H, Schütze G (2005) Crown allometry and growing space efficiency of Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) in pure and mixed stands. Plant Biol 7(6):628–639

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Reineke LH (1933) Perfecting a stand-density index for even-aged forests. J Agric Res 46(7):627–638

    Google Scholar 

  30. Reynolds JH, Ford ED (2005) Improving competition representation in theoretical models of self-thinning: a critical review. J Ecol 93(2):362–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shinozaki K, Kira T (1956) Intraspecific competition among higher plants. vii. logistic theory of the cd effect. J Inst Polytech Osaka City Univ D 7:35–72

    Google Scholar 

  32. Smith N, Hann DW (1984) A new analytical model based on the −3/2 power rule of self-thinning. Can J For Res 14(5):605–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Sterba H (1987) Estimating potential density from thinning experiments and inventory data. For Sci 33(4):1022–1034

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sterba H, Monserud RA (1993) The maximum density concept applied to uneven-aged mixed-species stands. For Sci 39(3):432–452

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sterba H, Monserud RA (1995) Potential volume yield for mixed-species Douglas-fir stands in the northern Rocky Mountains. For Sci 41(3):531–545

    Google Scholar 

  36. Tausch RJ (2015) A structurally based analytic model of growth and biomass dynamics in single species stands of conifers. Nat Res Model 28(3):289–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Usoltsev VA (2003) Forest phytomass of Northern Eurasia: limited productivity and geography. Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Yekaterinburg (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Usoltsev VA (2010) Eurasian forest biomass and primary production data. Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Yekaterinburg (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Vanclay JK, Sands PJ (2009) Calibrating the self-thinning frontier. For Ecol Manage 259(1):81–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. von Gadow K (1986) Observations on self-thinning in pine plantations. S Afr J Sci 82:364–368

    Google Scholar 

  41. von Gadow K, Kotze H (2014) Tree survival and maximum density of planted forests–observations from South African spacing studies. For Ecosyst 1(1):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Vospernik S, Sterba H (2014) Do competition-density rule and self-thinning rule agree? Ann For Sci:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  43. West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1997) A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science 276(5309):122–126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1999) A general model for the structure and allometry of plant vascular systems. Nature 400(6745):664–667

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. White J, Harper JI (1970) Correlated changes in plant size and number of plant populations. J Ecol 64:467–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Whittaker R, Woodwell G (1967) Surface area relations of woody plants and forest communities. Am J Bot:931–939

    Google Scholar 

  47. Xue L, Hou X, Li Q, Hao Y (2015) Self-thinning lines and allometric relation in Chinese fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata) stands. J For Res 26(2):281–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Yoda K, Kira T, Ogawa H, Hozumi K (1963) Intraspecific competition among higher plants. xi. Self-thinning in over-crowded pure stands under cultivated and natural conditions. J Biol Osaka City Univ 14:107–129

    Google Scholar 

  49. Zeide B (1987) Analysis of the 3/2 power law of self-thinning. For Sci 33(2):517–537

    Google Scholar 

  50. Zhang L, Bi H, Gove JH, Heath LS (2005) A comparison of alternative methods for estimating the self-thinning boundary line. Can J For Res 35(6):1507–1514

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk, Russia

    Vladimir L. Gavrikov

Authors
  1. Vladimir L. Gavrikov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gavrikov, V.L. (2017). Self-thinning and Stem Surface Area. In: Stem Surface Area in Modeling of Forest Stands. SpringerBriefs in Plant Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52449-8_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation