Bias in the mean tree model as a consequence of Jensen's inequality

Forest Ecology and Management

Volumn 186, Issue 1-3, 2003, Pages 373-380

  Duursma, R A ^a   Robinson, A P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO   (United States)

Author keywords

Aggregation bias; Allometric equations; Delta method; Forest growth models

Indexed keywords

APPROXIMATION THEORY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FORESTRY; PLANTS (BOTANY);

TAYLOR EXPANSION;

ECOLOGY;

ALLOMETRY; ERROR ANALYSIS; FOREST; GROWTH MODELING; METHODOLOGY;

EID: 0344928074     PISSN: 03781127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00307-4     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Avery, T.E., Burkhart, H.E., 2002. Forest measurements, fifth ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, 456 pp.
2. Band, L.E., Peterson, D.L., Running, S.W., Coughlan, J., Lammers, R., Dungan, J., Nemani, R., 1991. Forest ecosystem processes at the watershed scale: basis for distributed simulation. Ecol. Mod. 56, 171-196.
3. Cale, W.G., O'Neill, R.V., Gardner, R.H., 1983. Aggregation error in nonlinear ecological models. J. Theor. Biol. 100, 539-550.
4. Carrol, R.J., Ruppert, D., Stefanski, L.A., 1995. Measurement errors in nonlinear models. In: Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability, vol. 63. Chapman & Hall, London.
5. Duursma, R.A., Marshall, J.D., Robinson, A.P., in press. Leaf area index inferred from solar beam transmission in mixed conifer forests on complex terrain. Agric. Forest Meteorol.
6. Jensen, J.L., 1906. Sur les fonctions convexes et les inégualités entre les valeurs moyennes. Acta Mathematica 30, 175-193 (in French).
7. Gertner, G.Z., 1990. The sensitivity of measurement error in stand volume estimation. Can. J. Forest Res. 20 (6), 800-804.
8. Gertner, G., 1991. Prediction bias and response surface curvature. Forest Sci. 37 (3), 755-765.
9. Ihaka, R., Gentleman, R., 1996. R: a language for data analysis and graphics. J. Comp. Graph. Stat. 5, 299-314.
10. Kangas, A.S., 1996. On the bias and variance in tree volume predictions due to model and measurement errors. Scand. J. For. Sci. 11, 281-290.
11. Kangas, A.S., 1997. On the prediction bias and variance in long-term growth projections. For. Ecol. Manage. 96, 207-216.
12. Kangas, A.S., 1998. Effect of errors-in-variables on coefficients of a growth model and on prediction of growth. For. Ecol. Manage. 102, 203-212.
13. Landsberg, J.J., Waring, R.H., 1997. A generalised model of forest productivity using simplified concepts of radiation-use efficiency, carbon balance and partitioning. For. Ecol. Manage. 95, 209-228.
14. Landsberg, J.J., Waring, R.H., Coops, N.C., 2002. Performance of the forest productivity model 3-PG applied to a wide range of forest types. For. Ecol. Manage. 5845, 1-16.
15. Moeur, M., Ek, A.R., 1981. Plot, stand, and cover-type aggregation effects on projections with an individual tree based stand growth model. Can. J. For. Res. 11, 309-315.
16. Pierce, L.L., Running, S.W., 1995. The effects of aggregating subgrid land surface variation on large-scale estimates of net primary production. Landscape Ecol. 10 (4), 239-253.
17. Rice, J.A., 1995. Mathematical Statistics and Data Analysis, second ed. Duxbury Press, 602 pp.
18. Ruel, J.J., Ayres, M.P., 1999. Jensen's inequality predicts effects of environmental variation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14 (9), 361-366.
19. Stage, A.R., Crookston, N.L., Monserud, R.A., 1993. An aggregation algorithm for increasing the efficiency of population models. Ecol. Mod. 68, 257-271.
20. Ter-Mikaelian, M.T., Korzukhin, M.D., 1997. Biomass equations for 65 North American tree species. For. Ecol. Manage. 97, 1-24.