Courtney L. Giebink , Kelly A. Heilman , Sean M.P. Cahoon , Grant M. Domke
{"title":"对美国全国森林清查中指示树的选择标准、作用和代表性的评估","authors":"Courtney L. Giebink , Kelly A. Heilman , Sean M.P. Cahoon , Grant M. Domke","doi":"10.1016/j.foreco.2025.123200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In forest inventories, trees are often singled out to represent forest attributes and other environmental conditions. These “indicator” trees may be selected to estimate site level attributes, including site productivity, stand age, climate history, and growth rates. Here, we use data from the nationwide forest inventory (NFI) in the United States (US) to assess how indicator tree attributes compare to tally tree attributes across space and through time. First, we use contemporary field guides and NFI data to describe indicator tree selection criteria across regions of the US. Second, we compare indicator tree diameter, height, and species to two subsets of associated tally trees: a) all live tally trees and b) tally trees conforming to indicator tree selection criteria. Finally, we use annual ring width information from indicator trees to compare growth rates, as well as diameter and species to compare site trees and tally trees from historic inventories in the northeastern US. Contemporary and historic indicator tree attributes are rarely equivalent to either subset of tally tree attributes, but the differences are smaller when comparing to tally trees with consistent selection criteria. Across regions of the US, the differences between indicator tree and tally tree attributes are often close to or centered around zero, suggesting they may represent population-level tree attributes. With the increasing use of NFI data, it is important to understand the original intent for data collection, how the data were collected, and potential limits that might impact the efficacy of the data in new contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12350,"journal":{"name":"Forest Ecology and Management","volume":"598 ","pages":"Article 123200"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An assessment of the selection criteria, roles, and representativeness of indicator trees in the nationwide forest inventory of the United States\",\"authors\":\"Courtney L. Giebink , Kelly A. Heilman , Sean M.P. Cahoon , Grant M. Domke\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.foreco.2025.123200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In forest inventories, trees are often singled out to represent forest attributes and other environmental conditions. These “indicator” trees may be selected to estimate site level attributes, including site productivity, stand age, climate history, and growth rates. Here, we use data from the nationwide forest inventory (NFI) in the United States (US) to assess how indicator tree attributes compare to tally tree attributes across space and through time. First, we use contemporary field guides and NFI data to describe indicator tree selection criteria across regions of the US. Second, we compare indicator tree diameter, height, and species to two subsets of associated tally trees: a) all live tally trees and b) tally trees conforming to indicator tree selection criteria. Finally, we use annual ring width information from indicator trees to compare growth rates, as well as diameter and species to compare site trees and tally trees from historic inventories in the northeastern US. Contemporary and historic indicator tree attributes are rarely equivalent to either subset of tally tree attributes, but the differences are smaller when comparing to tally trees with consistent selection criteria. Across regions of the US, the differences between indicator tree and tally tree attributes are often close to or centered around zero, suggesting they may represent population-level tree attributes. With the increasing use of NFI data, it is important to understand the original intent for data collection, how the data were collected, and potential limits that might impact the efficacy of the data in new contexts.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forest Ecology and Management\",\"volume\":\"598 \",\"pages\":\"Article 123200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forest Ecology and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037811272500708X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FORESTRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Ecology and Management","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037811272500708X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
An assessment of the selection criteria, roles, and representativeness of indicator trees in the nationwide forest inventory of the United States
In forest inventories, trees are often singled out to represent forest attributes and other environmental conditions. These “indicator” trees may be selected to estimate site level attributes, including site productivity, stand age, climate history, and growth rates. Here, we use data from the nationwide forest inventory (NFI) in the United States (US) to assess how indicator tree attributes compare to tally tree attributes across space and through time. First, we use contemporary field guides and NFI data to describe indicator tree selection criteria across regions of the US. Second, we compare indicator tree diameter, height, and species to two subsets of associated tally trees: a) all live tally trees and b) tally trees conforming to indicator tree selection criteria. Finally, we use annual ring width information from indicator trees to compare growth rates, as well as diameter and species to compare site trees and tally trees from historic inventories in the northeastern US. Contemporary and historic indicator tree attributes are rarely equivalent to either subset of tally tree attributes, but the differences are smaller when comparing to tally trees with consistent selection criteria. Across regions of the US, the differences between indicator tree and tally tree attributes are often close to or centered around zero, suggesting they may represent population-level tree attributes. With the increasing use of NFI data, it is important to understand the original intent for data collection, how the data were collected, and potential limits that might impact the efficacy of the data in new contexts.
期刊介绍:
Forest Ecology and Management publishes scientific articles linking forest ecology with forest management, focusing on the application of biological, ecological and social knowledge to the management and conservation of plantations and natural forests. The scope of the journal includes all forest ecosystems of the world.
A peer-review process ensures the quality and international interest of the manuscripts accepted for publication. The journal encourages communication between scientists in disparate fields who share a common interest in ecology and forest management, bridging the gap between research workers and forest managers.
We encourage submission of papers that will have the strongest interest and value to the Journal''s international readership. Some key features of papers with strong interest include:
1. Clear connections between the ecology and management of forests;
2. Novel ideas or approaches to important challenges in forest ecology and management;
3. Studies that address a population of interest beyond the scale of single research sites, Three key points in the design of forest experiments, Forest Ecology and Management 255 (2008) 2022-2023);
4. Review Articles on timely, important topics. Authors are welcome to contact one of the editors to discuss the suitability of a potential review manuscript.
The Journal encourages proposals for special issues examining important areas of forest ecology and management. Potential guest editors should contact any of the Editors to begin discussions about topics, potential papers, and other details.