Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
4759582 | Forest Ecology and Management | 2017 | 18 Pages |
Abstract
A key finding of this study is that the Jenkins, FFE, and CRM methods are not universally equivalent, and that equivalence varies across regions, forest types, and levels of data aggregation. No consistent alignment of approaches was identified. In general, equivalence was identified in a greater proportion of cases when forests were summarized at more aggregate levels such as all softwood type groups or entire variants. Most frequently, the FIA inventory-based CRM and FFE were determined to be equivalent.
Related Topics
Life Sciences
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Authors
Coeli M. Hoover, James E. Smith,