Comparing the Use of Three Dendrometers for Measuring Diameters at Breast Height

Shangbin Liu, W. Bitterlich, C. Cieszewski, M. Zasada
{"title":"Comparing the Use of Three Dendrometers for Measuring Diameters at Breast Height","authors":"Shangbin Liu, W. Bitterlich, C. Cieszewski, M. Zasada","doi":"10.1093/SJAF/35.3.136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Three dendrometers are used to measure dbh. Two of the devices are the well-known and widely used d-tape and caliper. The third device is the lesser-known sector fork. In this study, measurements of dbh were collected from each dendrometer for each tree in nine plots, with each of the three plots nested in one of the diameter classes (small, medium, and large). The results from repeated-measures analysis of variance show that different dendrometers, the interaction between the dendrometer and diameter class, and the interaction between the dendrometer and plot significantly affected the dbh measurements. Statistically significant differences were detected in most of the comparisons of dbh measured by the three dendrometers. However, the actual mean differences and limits of agreement (Bland, J.M., and D.G. Altman. 1986. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307‐310) were small enough to support the claim that the dbh measurements made by the three dendrometers agree well in measurements of the small and medium trees (in this study, dbh of 16 in.). Thus, these statistically significant differences are not biologically and/or practically important. For the large trees (dbh 16 in. or more), the dbh measured by d-tape and caliper still agreed well. The sector fork should be used cautiously in measuring large trees.","PeriodicalId":51154,"journal":{"name":"Southern Journal of Applied Forestry","volume":"35 1","pages":"136-141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/SJAF/35.3.136","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Journal of Applied Forestry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/SJAF/35.3.136","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Three dendrometers are used to measure dbh. Two of the devices are the well-known and widely used d-tape and caliper. The third device is the lesser-known sector fork. In this study, measurements of dbh were collected from each dendrometer for each tree in nine plots, with each of the three plots nested in one of the diameter classes (small, medium, and large). The results from repeated-measures analysis of variance show that different dendrometers, the interaction between the dendrometer and diameter class, and the interaction between the dendrometer and plot significantly affected the dbh measurements. Statistically significant differences were detected in most of the comparisons of dbh measured by the three dendrometers. However, the actual mean differences and limits of agreement (Bland, J.M., and D.G. Altman. 1986. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307‐310) were small enough to support the claim that the dbh measurements made by the three dendrometers agree well in measurements of the small and medium trees (in this study, dbh of 16 in.). Thus, these statistically significant differences are not biologically and/or practically important. For the large trees (dbh 16 in. or more), the dbh measured by d-tape and caliper still agreed well. The sector fork should be used cautiously in measuring large trees.
比较三种测径仪在测量胸围高度时的使用
三个测径仪用来测量dbh。其中两种设备是众所周知且广泛使用的d-tape和卡尺。第三种设备是鲜为人知的扇区分叉。在这项研究中,从9个样地的每棵树的每个树径计中收集了dbh的测量值,每个样地都嵌套在一个直径类别(小、中、大)中。重复测量方差分析结果表明,不同的树径计、树径计与径级的交互作用以及树径计与样地的交互作用对树径计测量结果有显著影响。在三种测径仪测量的dbh的大多数比较中,发现了统计学上显著的差异。然而,实际平均差异和协议的限制(布兰德,j.m.和D.G.奥尔特曼,1986)。评估两种临床测量方法一致性的统计方法。《柳叶刀》(Lancet) 1:07 07‐310)的数据足够小,足以支持这样的说法,即三种树径计测量的树径与中小型树木的测量结果非常吻合(在本研究中,树径为16英寸)。因此,这些统计上显著的差异在生物学和/或实践上并不重要。对于大树(胸径16英寸)。(或更多),用d-胶带和卡尺测量的胸径仍然很吻合。在测量大树时应谨慎使用扇形叉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>36 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信