USE OF DESTRUCTIVE AND NON-DESTRUCTIVE METHODOLOGIES TO ESTIMATE STEM BIOMASS ACCUMULATION AND CARBON STOCK IN AN EUCALYPTUS FOREST

IF 0.6 4区 农林科学 Q4 FORESTRY
B. Schettini, L. Jacovine, C. M. M. E. Torres, A. Carneiro, R. Castro, Paulo Henrique Villanova, S. J. S. S. D. Rocha, Maria Paula Miranda Xavier Rufino, S. Oliveira Neto, Vicente Toledo Machado de Morais Júnior
{"title":"USE OF DESTRUCTIVE AND NON-DESTRUCTIVE METHODOLOGIES TO ESTIMATE STEM BIOMASS ACCUMULATION AND CARBON STOCK IN AN EUCALYPTUS FOREST","authors":"B. Schettini, L. Jacovine, C. M. M. E. Torres, A. Carneiro, R. Castro, Paulo Henrique Villanova, S. J. S. S. D. Rocha, Maria Paula Miranda Xavier Rufino, S. Oliveira Neto, Vicente Toledo Machado de Morais Júnior","doi":"10.1590/1806-908820220000011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Predicting wood biomass and carbon stock contents in planted forests can vary due to limitations associated with the measurement of parameters. Therefore, reducing possible errors generated over biomass and carbon stock quantification is an important step in obtaining reliable data. The study aimed to compare the use of destructive and non-destructive methodologies for predicting biomass and carbon stock in a planted Eucalyptus forest. Scaling was performed on 21 trees and 3 methodologies for carbon stock estimation were compared. For methodology 1, a control sample was harvested, sectioned, weighted in the field, and the carbon stock calculated based on these data. Methodology 2 was also destructive, as trees were harvested, scaled and the carbon stock predicted based on these data. Methodology 3 was non-destructive, as trees were scaled upright with the aid of equipment and the predicted carbon stock was based on these data. Biomass and carbon stock were compared by Test F and no statistical difference was observed. The data were separated according to diametric classes and compared by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, and again no significant difference was observed. Furthermore, three equations were generated based on the Schumacher & Hall model and compared by the identity test model and no differences between the methodologies were observed. Thus, both nondestructive and destructive methodologies herein evaluated were effective and showed equal results to the control sample. Moreover, the use of the non-destructive methodology reduces time and cost destined to predicting biomass and carbon stock.","PeriodicalId":21214,"journal":{"name":"Revista Arvore","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Arvore","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-908820220000011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Predicting wood biomass and carbon stock contents in planted forests can vary due to limitations associated with the measurement of parameters. Therefore, reducing possible errors generated over biomass and carbon stock quantification is an important step in obtaining reliable data. The study aimed to compare the use of destructive and non-destructive methodologies for predicting biomass and carbon stock in a planted Eucalyptus forest. Scaling was performed on 21 trees and 3 methodologies for carbon stock estimation were compared. For methodology 1, a control sample was harvested, sectioned, weighted in the field, and the carbon stock calculated based on these data. Methodology 2 was also destructive, as trees were harvested, scaled and the carbon stock predicted based on these data. Methodology 3 was non-destructive, as trees were scaled upright with the aid of equipment and the predicted carbon stock was based on these data. Biomass and carbon stock were compared by Test F and no statistical difference was observed. The data were separated according to diametric classes and compared by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, and again no significant difference was observed. Furthermore, three equations were generated based on the Schumacher & Hall model and compared by the identity test model and no differences between the methodologies were observed. Thus, both nondestructive and destructive methodologies herein evaluated were effective and showed equal results to the control sample. Moreover, the use of the non-destructive methodology reduces time and cost destined to predicting biomass and carbon stock.
利用破坏性和非破坏性方法估算桉树林树干生物量积累和碳储量
人工林木材生物量和碳储量的预测可能会因参数测量的限制而有所不同。因此,减少生物量和碳储量量化可能产生的误差是获得可靠数据的重要一步。该研究旨在比较破坏性和非破坏性方法在预测桉树人工林生物量和碳储量方面的应用。对21棵树进行了尺度分析,比较了3种估算碳储量的方法。对于方法1,采集对照样本,在田间进行切片和加权,并根据这些数据计算碳储量。方法2也是破坏性的,因为树木被采伐、缩放并根据这些数据预测碳储量。方法3是非破坏性的,在设备的帮助下,树木被垂直缩放,并根据这些数据预测碳储量。生物量和碳储量经检验F比较,差异无统计学意义。数据按径类分离,采用Kolmogorov-Smirnov检验比较,同样无显著差异。此外,基于Schumacher & Hall模型生成了三个方程,并通过同一性检验模型进行了比较,发现方法之间没有差异。因此,本文评估的非破坏性和破坏性方法都是有效的,并显示出与对照样本相同的结果。此外,非破坏性方法的使用减少了预测生物量和碳储量的时间和成本。
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
Revista Arvore
Revista Arvore FORESTRY-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: A Revista Árvore é um veículo de comunicação científica da Sociedade de Investigações Florestais – SIF. O jornal é de acesso gratuito, revisado por pares, que publica bimestralmente trabalhos científicos originais no campo da Ciência Florestal. As áreas temáticas para publicação são: Ambiência e Conservação da Natureza, Manejo Florestal, Silvicultura e Tecnologia da Madeira e Utilização de Produtos Florestais. A política editorial visa manter alta conduta ética em relação à publicação e aos seus funcionários, rigor na qualidade dos artigos científicos, seleção de revisores qualificados, respeito profissional aos autores e processo de tomada de decisão imparcial. A Revista Árvore publica artigos apenas em inglês. Artigos de revisão podem ser publicados se houver uma discussão relevante resumindo o estado da arte sobre o assunto. A revisão estrita da literatura não é aceita.
×
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