The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Allometric Models for Tree Volume and Total Aboveground Biomass in a Tropical Humid Forest in Costa Rica1
Abstract
Allometric equations for the estimation of tree volume and aboveground biomass in a tropical humid forest were developed based on direct measurements of 19 individuals of seven tree species in Northern Costa Rica. The volume and the biomass of the stems represented about two‐thirds of the total volume and total aboveground biomass, respectively. The average stem volume varied between 4 and 11 Mg/tree and the average total aboveground biomass ranged from 4 to 10 mg/tree. The mean specific gravity of the sampled trees was 0.62 ± 0.06 (g/cm 3). The average biomass expansion factor was 1.6 ± 0.2. The best‐fit equations for stem and total volume were of logarithmic form, with diameter at breast height (R2= 0.66 − 0.81) as an independent variable. The best‐fit equations for total aboveground biomass that were based on combinations of diameter at breast height, and total and commercial height as independent variables had R2 values between 0.77 and 0.87. Models recommended for estimating total aboveground biomass are based on diameter at breast height, because the simplicity of these models is advantageous. This variable is easy to measure accurately in the field and is the most common variable recorded in forest inventories. Two widely used models in literature tend to underestimate aboveground biomass in large trees. In contrast, the models developed in this study accurately estimate the total aboveground biomass in these trees.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: A primer
Brown, S. (1997) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,320
Biomass Estimation Methods for Tropical Forests with Applications to Forest Inventory Data
Brown, S., Gillespie, A. J. R., & Lugo, A. E. (1989) · Forest Science · doi:10.1093/forestscience/35.4.881 · Cited by 1,279
Assessing Tree and Stand Biomass: A Review with Examples and Critical Comparisons
Parresol, B. R. (1999) · Forest Science · doi:10.1093/forestscience/45.4.573 · Cited by 711
Biomass and Carbon Budget of European Forests, 1971 to 1990
Kauppi, P. E., Mielikäinen, K., & Kuusela, K. (1992) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.256.5053.70 · Cited by 651
Biomass of Tropical Forests: A New Estimate Based on Forest Volumes
Brown, S., & Lugo, A. E. (1984) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.223.4642.1290 · Cited by 469
Ecología basada en zonas de vida
Holdridge, L., & Saa, H. J. (1978) · Cited by 429
Retaining Forest Biomass by Reducing Logging Damage
Pinard, M. A., & Putz, F. E. (1996) · Biotropica · doi:10.2307/2389193 · Cited by 424
Interspecific and Inter‐site Variation in Wood Specific Gravity of Tropical Trees
Muller‐Landau, H. C. (2004) · Biotropica · doi:10.1111/j.1744-7429.2004.tb00292.x · Cited by 419
Wood density for estimating forest biomass in Brazilian Amazonia
Fearnside, P. M. (1997) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(96)03840-6 · Cited by 326
Biomass Estimation for Temperate Broadleaf Forests of the United States Using Inventory Data
Schroeder, P., Brown, S., Mo, J., Birdsey, R., & Cieszewski, C. (1997) · Forest Science · doi:10.1093/forestscience/43.3.424 · Cited by 273
Cited by
A critical review of forest biomass estimation models, common mistakes and corrective measures
Sileshi, G. W. (2014) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2014.06.026 · Cited by 437
Methods to Estimate Above-Ground Biomass and Carbon Stock in Natural Forests - A Review
T. Vashum, K. (2012) · Journal of Ecosystem & Ecography · doi:10.4172/2157-7625.1000116 · Cited by 331
Fonseca, W., Rey Benayas, J. M., & Alice, F. E. (2011) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2011.06.036 · Cited by 140
Metadata
- Authors
- Segura, M., & Kanninen, M.
- Venue
- Biotropica
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-02-28
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 2-8
- ISSN
- 0006-3606 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-7429
- OpenAlex
- W2113120016
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 4.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.