The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Canadian national tree aboveground biomass equations
Abstract
The estimation of aboveground biomass density (organic dry mass per unit area) is required for balancing Canadian national forest carbon budgets. Tree biomass equations are the basic tool for converting inventory plot data into biomass density. New sets of national tree biomass equations have therefore been produced from archival biomass data collected at the beginning of the 1980s through the ENergy from the FORest research program (ENFOR) of the Canadian Forest Service. Since the sampling plan was not standardized among provinces and territories, data had to be harmonized before any biomass equation could be considered at the national level. Two features characterize the new equations: estimated biomass of the compartments (foliage, branch, wood, and bark) are constrained to equal the total biomass, and dependence among error terms for the considered compartments of the same tree is taken into account in the estimates of both the model parameters and the variance prediction. The estimation method known to economists as seemingly unrelated regression allowed the inclusion of dependencies among the error terms of the considered biomass compartments. Sets of equations based on diameter at breast height (dbh) and on dbh and height have been produced for 33 species, groups of hardwood and softwood, and for all species combined. Biomass predicted by the new equations was compared with that estimated from provincial equations to evaluate the loss of accuracy when scaling up from the regional to the national scale. Bias and error of prediction from the set of national equations based on dbh and height were generally more similar to those from provincial equations than to those of predictions from the set of equations based on dbh alone.
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
Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS
(2001) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2001.s574 · Cited by 9,278
A 70-year retrospective analysis of carbon fluxes in the Canadian forest sector
Kurz, W. A., & Apps, M. J. (1999) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(1999)009[0526:ayraoc]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 680
Cited by
Positive biodiversity-productivity relationship predominant in global forests
Liang, J., Crowther, T. W., Picard, N., Wiser, S., Zhou, M., Alberti, G., Schulze, E.-D., McGuire, A. D., Bozzato, F., Pretzsch, H., et al. (2016) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaf8957 · Cited by 1,490
The effect of biodiversity on tree productivity: from temperate to boreal forests
Paquette, A., & Messier, C. (2011) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00592.x · Cited by 924
Hogg, E. H. (., Brandt, J. P., & Michaelian, M. (2008) · Canadian Journal of Forest Research · doi:10.1139/x08-001 · Cited by 396
Foster, A. C., Armstrong, A. H., Shuman, J. K., Shugart, H. H., Rogers, B. M., Mack, M. C., Goetz, S. J., & Ranson, K. J. (2019) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2019.108765 · Cited by 67
Hember, R. A., Kurz, W. A., & Girardin, M. P. (2019) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences · doi:10.1029/2018jg004573 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Lambert, M.-C., Ung, C.-H., & Raulier, F.
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Forest Research
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 2005-08-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1996-2018
- ISSN
- 0045-5067 (ISSN-L)
- 1208-6037
- OpenAlex
- W2090137677
- Cited by
- 542
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.12
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Canadian national tree aboveground biomass equations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/x05-112
- The paper
- Lambert, M.-C., Ung, C.-H., & Raulier, F. (2005). Canadian national tree aboveground biomass equations. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. https://doi.org/10.1139/x05-112
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.