The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Forest Dimensions and Production in the Great Smoky Mountains
Abstract
Samples based on stand measurements and borings of trees, and clippings of undergrowth, were taken from 24 forests and forest heaths in the Great Smoky Mountains. Samples were taken also from heath balds and grassy balds and a California coastal redwood forest. Available information on ratios and regressions of forest tree and shrub dimensions were used to estimate stand biomass and net annual production above ground. Mature climax forests of mesic environments below 1,400 m are characterized by: wood basal areas of 50—64 m 2/ha and basal area increments of 0.3—0.6 m 2/ha/yr, stem wood volumes (parabolic estimate) of 750—900 m 3/ha and estimated wood volume increments of 530—590 cm 3/m 2/yr, aboveground biomasses of 500—610 t/ha and aboveground net annual productions of 1,000—1,200 g/m 2, and biomass accumulation ratios of 40—50. These and other stand dimensions decrease along the moisture gradient to xeric sites and decrease toward higher elevations. Above—ground net annual productions of forest heaths of xeric slopes and forests of highest elevations are 420—650 g/m 2. Evergreen spruce—fir forests are more productive than deciduous forests above 1,400 m. Among mesic high—elevation beech and fir forests, production is higher on south slopes than on north slopes. Production and biomass of steady—state forests were estimated from multiple correlations using elevation and weighted—average index of site moisture as independent variables. Apart from some high—elevation stands, production is not significantly correlated with evergreen vs. deciduous foliage or with direction of exposure affecting incident sunlight. When unstable stands are excluded, production and biomass are strongly correlated with each other and with mean tree height and other stand dimensions. A wide range of temperate—zone climax forests of relatively favorable environments have net annual productions above and below ground of 1,200—1,500 g/m 2. Productions of stable closed heath balds are lower, 700—1,200 g/m 2, but productions of heath balds and less productive forests overlap broadly. Production of unstable forests, both successional stands and those opened by removal of large trees, exceeds that of steady—state forests of similar environments. Canopy coverage and light penetration are not strongly correlated with forest production. Light penetration to the herb stratum ranges from 1.4—7.0% of incident sunlight in more open forests and forest heaths to 0.3—0.9% in cove forests. Foliage live/dry ratios decrease along the moisture gradient from mesic to xeric stands–from about 5.0 to 2.8 in shrub clippings, 7.6 to 2.8 in herb clippings. Undergrowth production and biomass are trivial compared with the tree stratum in many forests. Shrub production is generally higher in xeric environments and is 20—145% of tree production in forest heaths. Herb production is higher at the extremes of the moisture gradient (exceeding 3% of total aboveground production in mesic and in open xeric stands) than in intermediate stands (below 1%). Apart from such differences, her and thallophyte biomass and production increase with elevation to maximum values in fir forests of the highest summits.
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
Cited by
A General Hypothesis of Species Diversity
Huston, M. (1979) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283366 · Cited by 3,390
Leaf Life‐Span in Relation to Leaf, Plant, and Stand Characteristics among Diverse Ecosystems
Reich, P. B., Walters, M. B., & Ellsworth, D. S. (1992) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/2937116 · Cited by 1,646
Niinemets, Ü. (2010) · Ecological Research · doi:10.1007/s11284-010-0712-4 · Cited by 676
Gholz, H. L. (1982) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1938964 · Cited by 481
Forest Overstory Vegetation and Environment on the Missouri River Floodplain in North Dakota
Johnson, W. C., Burgess, R. L., & Keammerer, W. R. (1976) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942394 · Cited by 411
Metadata
- Authors
- Whittaker, R. H.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1966-01
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 103-121
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2087015750
- Cited by
- 248
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.71
- 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: Forest Dimensions and Production in the Great Smoky Mountains. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1935749
- The paper
- Whittaker, R. H. (1966). Forest Dimensions and Production in the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1935749
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.