Examining Clumpiness in FPS David K. Walters Roseburg Forest Products.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Returns and Yields 2005 AFA Landowner Clinic April 9, 2005 Magnolia, Arkansas Matthew H. Pelkki University of Arkansas-Monticello School of Forest Resources.
Advertisements

S tand D evelopment M onitoring FREP Timber Production Protocol SDM.
Objectives 10.1 Simple linear regression
Figure 3. Outlines of the study with links between different components used. The figure presents the main inputs and outputs from the model used (Glob3PG)
Chapter 6 Sampling and Sampling Distributions
1 Yield Implications of Variable Retention Harvesting VR Team: Mario Di Lucca, Ken Polsson, Jim Goudie, and Tim Bogle Research & Timber Supply Branches.
CHAPTER 2 Building Empirical Model. Basic Statistical Concepts Consider this situation: The tension bond strength of portland cement mortar is an important.
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS of the FOREST VEGETATION SIMULATOR Southern Variant (FVS-Sn) Nathan D. Herring Dr. Philip J. Radtke Virginia Tech Department of Forestry.
The Effects of Site and Soil on Fertilizer Response of Coastal Douglas-fir K.M. Littke, R.B. Harrison, and D.G. Briggs University of Washington Coast Fertilization.
NASP IMDS Stand Density THE BIG THREE: Absolute stand density Quadratic Mean Diameter Basal Area.
Growth Model Users Group Growth Model Run-Off January 2002.
Modeling Effects of Genetic Improvement in Loblolly Pine Plantations Barry D. Shiver Stephen Logan.
Impact of plot size on the effect of competition in individual-tree models and their applications Jari Hynynen & Risto Ojansuu Finnish Forest Research.
Chapter 7: Statistical Applications in Traffic Engineering
A Young Douglas-fir Plantation Growth Model for the Pacific Northwest Nick Vaughn University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
Chapter 7 Sampling and Sampling Distributions
Combining Biased and Unbiased Estimators in High Dimensions Bill Strawderman Rutgers University (joint work with Ed Green, Rutgers University)
Part III: Inference Topic 6 Sampling and Sampling Distributions
Chapter 5. Operations on Multiple R. V.'s 1 Chapter 5. Operations on Multiple Random Variables 0. Introduction 1. Expected Value of a Function of Random.
Dr. Mario MazzocchiResearch Methods & Data Analysis1 Correlation and regression analysis Week 8 Research Methods & Data Analysis.
What Do You See? Message of the Day: The management objective determines whether a site is over, under, or fully stocked.
Cruise Design Measurement Computations. Determined by 1.Value of product(s) 2.Variability within the stand 3.Budget limitations Sampling Intensity.
Sampling Designs Avery and Burkhart, Chapter 3 Source: J. Hollenbeck.
CHAPTER 19: Two-Sample Problems
Estimation and Application of Genetic- Gain Multipliers for Douglas-Fir Height and Diameter Growth Peter J. Gould 1, David D. Marshall 2, Randy Johnson.
 Used by NRCS foresters  Simple and Quick way to determine  Average tree diameter  Range of tree diameters  Trees per acre  Stand composition 
Regression and Correlation Methods Judy Zhong Ph.D.
PATTERN RECOGNITION AND MACHINE LEARNING
STA Lecture 161 STA 291 Lecture 16 Normal distributions: ( mean and SD ) use table or web page. The sampling distribution of and are both (approximately)
The Potential of the Alder Resource: Challenges and Opportunities David Hibbs and Andrew Bluhm Hardwood Silviculture Cooperative Department of Forest Science.
Name: Angelica F. White WEMBA10. Teach students how to make sound decisions and recommendations that are based on reliable quantitative information During.
Generic Approaches to Model Validation Presented at Growth Model User’s Group August 10, 2005 David K. Walters.
Logistic regression. Analysis of proportion data We know how many times an event occurred, and how many times did not occur. We want to know if these.
Effect of retained trees on growth and structure of young Scots pine stands Juha Ruuska, Sauli Valkonen and Jouni Siipilehto Finnish Forest Research Institute,
Modeling Crown Characteristics of Loblolly Pine Trees Modeling Crown Characteristics of Loblolly Pine Trees Harold E. Burkhart Virginia Tech.
PCB 3043L - General Ecology Data Analysis. OUTLINE Organizing an ecological study Basic sampling terminology Statistical analysis of data –Why use statistics?
+ Chapter 12: More About Regression Section 12.1 Inference for Linear Regression.
Sustainable Production Forestry THE JOINT FORCES OF CSIRO & SCION Development of a productivity Index for Douglas-fir Leith Knowles.
Improving the accuracy of predicted diameter and height distributions Jouni Siipilehto Finnish Forest Research Institute, Vantaa
Incorporating stand density effects in modeling tree taper Mahadev Sharma Ontario Forest Research Institute Sault Ste Marie, Canada.
Course Review FORE 3218 Course Review  Sampling  Inventories  Growth and yield.
Thinning mixed-species stands of Douglas-fir and western hemlock in the presence of Swiss needle cast Junhui Zhao, Douglas A. Maguire, Douglas B. Mainwaring,
“The MB&G Silviculture Support System” Steve Fairweather Ellen Voth Reggie Fay Mason, Bruce & Girard, Inc. Portland, Oregon GMUG 12/15/05.
CHAPTER-6 Sampling error and confidence intervals.
Comparisons of DFSIM, ORGANOIN and FVS David Marshall Olympia Forestry Sciences Laboratory PNW Research Station USDA Forest Service Growth Model Users.
+ Unit 6: Comparing Two Populations or Groups Section 11.2 Comparing Two Means.
Imputating snag data to forest inventory for wildlife habitat modeling Kevin Ceder College of Forest Resources University of Washington GMUG – 11 February.
PCB 3043L - General Ecology Data Analysis.
Looking for the Plateau in Douglas-fir Annual Volume Increment
1 Module One: Measurements and Uncertainties No measurement can perfectly determine the value of the quantity being measured. The uncertainty of a measurement.
Modeling regional variation in the self-thinning boundary line Aaron Weiskittel Sean Garber Hailemariam Temesgen.
Education 793 Class Notes Inference and Hypothesis Testing Using the Normal Distribution 8 October 2003.
Overfitting, Bias/Variance tradeoff. 2 Content of the presentation Bias and variance definitions Parameters that influence bias and variance Bias and.
Dan Couch Olympia, WA DNR January, Outline Rogue Valley LiDAR Background Stand Metrics Comparison Results:  LiDAR vs Timber Cruise BLM Forest Inventory.
GROWTH AND YIELD How will my forest grow? Dr. Glenn Glover School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences Auburn University.
Chapter 11 Linear Regression and Correlation. Explanatory and Response Variables are Numeric Relationship between the mean of the response variable and.
CFI NPT Forestry & Fire Management Division.
1 C.A.L. Bailer-Jones. Machine Learning. Data exploration and dimensionality reduction Machine learning, pattern recognition and statistical data modelling.
Cruise Summaries.
Logistic regression.
PCB 3043L - General Ecology Data Analysis.
BPK 304W Correlation.
Ratio and regression estimation STAT262, Fall 2017
Comparing Several Means: ANOVA
Young Stand Monitoring
Unit 6: Comparing Two Populations or Groups
CHAPTER 19: Two-Sample Problems
Psych 231: Research Methods in Psychology
CHAPTER 19: Two-Sample Problems
Section 10.2 Comparing Two Means.
Presentation transcript:

Examining Clumpiness in FPS David K. Walters Roseburg Forest Products

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Background n Clumpiness - described as the degree to which the trees on a given acre are dispersed in a less than uniform fashion n Example, – TPA estimated at 200, but there is a 0.2 acre hole…with no trees. The clumpiness would be ~80% and the trees would be growing at 200/.80 or 250tpa.

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Motivation n Intuitively, FPS Clumpiness is a sensible variable in that the spatial orientation of trees should affect growth over time. However, the actual effect of a difference in clumpiness is not clearly known (at least it wasn’t to me). n It is common practice to “assign” a clumpiness index to “new” stands…0.85 is an oft suggested number for DF plantations. n Inherited data may or may not contain the information necessary to compute clumpiness.

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Approach - A Computer Simulation n Using selected values of input variables, we can generate modeled outcomes

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Choosing Input Variables n To maximize information about the model (system) response, inputs should? – cover the range of possible values efficiently – begin on the boundary of variable space

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Methods of identifying the values for input variables... n Enumeration, consider the model: where only site class and age groups data are available,:

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, (continued) – Enumeration not possible with complex models (e.g., a model requiring 10 continuous input variables means that 3 10 (59,049) cells would be required to generate a very coarse response surface) n Sampling... – simple random sampling (SRS) – stratified sampling (SS) will yield higher precision wrt estimation of response surface) – SS extensions such as Latin Hypercube Sampling (McKay et al., 1979)

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Efficiency of LHS Example, V=a(Ha/D) b (D 2 H) where V is individual tree volume above 1.37m, H is tree height (m), and D is tree diameter at breast height (cm). Fitted to SW Oregon Douglas-fir tree data (Hann et al. 1987)

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Efficiency of LHS Change in the estimate of the population mean Change in the estimate of the population variance

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Efficiency - summary Relative efficiency (SRS to LHS) in estimating population mean is 8.1% (SE SRS = 0.037, SE LHS =0.003) in estimating population variance is 46% (If the methods were equally efficient, the relative efficiency would be 100 percent. )

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Back to Clumpiness and FPS n Input Variables – Clumpiness – Site Index – Initial stocking n Output Variables – limit to DF Plantations – TPA, Basal Area, Volume trajectories and harvest values

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Selecting Values of Input Variables n Site Index – 65, 85, 105, 125, 145 n Initial Stocking – 9x9 (538), 10x10 (436), 11x11 (360), 13x13 (258) n Clumpiness – what does it look like?

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Clumpiness Variable Empirical Distribution measured stands

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Clumpiness, continued Empirical Distribution DF Stands <80yrs old

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, What does Clumpiness Variable look like? Only DF>70%, <80yrs old (1021 stands) All Ages and Types (3033 stands)

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, What does Clumpiness Variable look like? 3003 stands DF, <80yrs (1021 stands)

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Input Variables n Site Index (5) – 65, 85, 105, 125, 145 n Initial Stocking (4) – 9x9 (538), 10x10 (436), 11x11 (360), 13x13 (258) n Clumpiness (10) – Sample 10 Clumpiness Values between 0.3 and 1.0 using LHS from empirical pdf n 200 combinations

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Experiment n Create 10 (clumpiness) x 5 (SI) x 4 (TPA 0 ) or 200 initial starting conditions. Assuming Douglas-fir only. n “Grow” initial tree lists 100 years (only looking at first 60) using FPS, library 11 (Western Oregon Calibration).

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Results n How do different clumpiness values affect growth trajectories and final harvest values?

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Trees Per Acre - SI 65

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Trees Per Acre - SI 85

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Trees Per Acre - SI 105

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Trees Per Acre - SI 125 9x9: 61, 81, 96,100,102 % 10x10: 71, 87, 97,100,102 % 11x11: 76, 89, 97,100,102 % 13x13: 83, 92, 98,100,101 %

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Trees Per Acre - SI 145

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BF/Acre - SI 65

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BF/Acre - SI 85

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BF/Acre - SI 105

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BF/Acre - SI 125 9x9: 52, 73, 94,100,103 % 10x10: 55, 76, 94,100,103 % 11x11: 61, 79, 94,100,104 % 13x13: 70, 85, 96,100,102 %

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BF/Acre - SI 145

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, TPA - SI 105, Spacing 11x11

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BA - SI 105, Spacing 11x11

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BF/Acre - SI 105, Spacing 11x11

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BF/Acre - SI 105, Spacing 11x11

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Age 50 Volumes

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, BF Reduction vs. Clumpiness 13x13 11x11 10x10 9x9

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, What to do? Stepwise Regression with Age, SI, QMD, BA, BF, TPA, %Spp, transformations yielded R 2 approaching 18% Experience Table approach by Type/Size/Density classes may be less problematic

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Summary and Conclusions n Clumpiness can have a huge impact on predicted stand and tree characteristics (50% or more volume reduction at rotation) n The effect of changing clumpiness is greater on higher sites. n The effect of changing clumpiness is greater on stands with more TPA n As Age increases, the observed clumpiness value increases (3000 stand sample). In FPS, clumpiness is static (except for re-inventory) n The effect of lowering clumpiness on volume (tpa,ba, etc.) is not linear. Have a rationale for the choice of clumpiness in young plantations, be careful about using a low number. n Clumpiness cannot be predicted well from stand characteristics. Avoid imputing it when possible

Examining Clumpiness in FPS, Presented at GMUG on August 29, Questions?