A neighborhood analysis of canopy tree competition: Effects of shading versus crowding

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 778-787

  Canham, Charles D ^a   LePage, Philip T ^b   Coates, K Dave ^b  

^a CARY INSTITUTE OF ECOSYSTEM STUDIES   (United States)

^b RESEARCH BRANCH   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GROWTH KINETICS;

CANOPY TREE COMPETITION;

FORESTRY;

DENSITY DEPENDENCE; GROWTH; INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION; INTRASPECIFIC COMPETITION; SHADING; TREE;

FOREST CANOPY; GROWTH; TREES;

BRITISH COLUMBIA; CANADA; NORTH AMERICA;

CONIUM; CONIUM MACULATUM; THUJA; THUJA PLICATA; TSUGA; TSUGA HETEROPHYLLA;

EID: 3042602359     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/x03-232     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Banner, A., MacKenzie, W., Haeussler, S., Thomson, S., Pojar, J., and Trowbridge, R. 1993. A field guide to site identification and interpretation for the Prince Rupert Forest Region. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Victoria, B.C. Land Manage. Handb. 26.
2. Bella, I.E. 1971. A new competition model for individual trees. For. Sci. 17: 364-372.
3. Berger, U., and Hildenbrandt, H. 2000. A new approach to spatially explicit modelling of forest dynamics: spacing, ageing and neighbourhood competition in mangrove trees. Ecol. Model. 132: 287-302.
4. Bigelow, S.W., and Canham, C.D. 2002. Edaphic effects on growth and distribution of juvenile canopy trees in northeastern USA. J. Ecol. 90: 188-200.
5. Biging, G.S., and Dobbertin, M. 1992. A comparison of distance-dependent competition measures for height and basal area growth of individual conifer trees. For. Sci. 38: 695-720.
6. Biging, G.S., and Dobbertin, M. 1995. Evaluation of competition indices in individual tree growth models. For. Sci. 41: 360-377.
7. Canham, C.D. 1988. An index for understory light levels in and around canopy gaps. Ecology, 69: 1634-1638.
8. Canham, C.D., Finzi, A.C., Pacala, S.W., and Burbank, D.H. 1994. Causes and consequences of resource heterogeneity in forests: interspecific variation in light transmission by canopy trees. Can. J. For. Res. 24: 337-349.
9. Canham, C.D., Coates, K.D., Bartemucci, P., and Quaglia, S. 1999. Measurement and modeling of spatially-explicit variation in light transmission through interior cedar-hemlock forests of British Columbia. Can. J. For. Res. 29: 1775-1783.
10. Coates, K.D., Banner, A., Steventon, J.D., LePage, P., and Bartemucci, P. 1997. The Date Creek silvicultural systems study in the interior cedar-hemlock forests of northwestern British Columbia: overview and treatment summaries. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Victoria, B.C. For. Land Manage. Handb. 38.
11. Coates, K.D., Canham, C.D., Beaudet, M., Sachs, D.L., and Messier, C. 2004. Use of a spatially explicit individual-tree model (SORTIE-BC) to explore the implications of patchiness in structurally complex forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 186: 297-310.
12. Collins, D.B., Feller, M.C., Klinka, K., de Montigny, L. 2001. Forest floor nutrient properties in single- and mixed-species, second growth stands of western hemlock and western redcedar. Northwest Sci. 75: 407-416.
13. Deutschman, D.H., Levin, S.A., and Pacala, S.W. 1999. Error propagation in a forest succession model: the role of fine-scale heterogeneity in light. Ecology, 80: 1927-1943.
14. Foli, E.G., Alder, D., Miller, H.G., and Swaine, M.D. 2003. Modelling growing space requirements for some tropical forest tree species. For. Ecol. Manage. 173: 79-88.
15. Goffe, W.L., Ferrier, G.D., and Rogers, J. 1994. Global optimization of statistical functions with simulated annealing. J. Econometrics, 60: 65-99.
16. He, F., and Duncan, R.P. 2000. Density-dependent effects on tree survival in an old-growth Douglas fir forest. J. Ecol. 88: 676-688.
17. Hegyi, F. 1974. A simulation model for managing jack-pine stands. In Growth models for tree and stand simulation. Edited by J. Fries. Royal College of Forestry, Stockholm, Sweden. pp. 74-90.
18. Herwitz, S.R., Slye, R.E., and Turton, S.M. 2000. Long-term survivorship and crown area dynamics of tropical rainforest canopy trees: effects of lateral shading. Ecology, 81: 585-597.
19. Hilborn, R., and Mangel, M. 1997. The ecological detective: confronting models with data. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
20. Kelty, M.J. 1986. Development patterns in 2 hemlock hardwood stands in southern New England. Can. J. For. Res. 16: 885-891.
21. Larocque, G.R. 2002. Examining different concepts for the development of a distance-dependent competition model for red pine diameter growth using long-term stand data differing in initial stand density. For. Sci. 48: 24-34.
22. LePage, P. 1995. The structure and development pattern of mixed-species forest stands in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock zone: Moist Cold subzone of northwestern British Columbia. M.Sc. thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Ore.
23. LePage, P.T., Canham, C.D., Coates, K.D., and Bartemucci, P. 2000. Seed source versus substrate limitation of seedling recruitment in northern temperate forests of British Columbia. Can. J. For. Res. 30: 415-427.
24. Lorimer, C.G. 1983. Test of age-independent competition indices for individual trees in natural hardwood stands. For. Ecol. Manage. 6: 343-360.
25. Pacala, S.W., Canham, C.D., Saponara, J., Silander, J.A., Jr., Kobe, R.K., and Ribbens, E. 1996. Forest models defined by field measurements: estimation, error analysis and dynamics. Ecol. Monogr. 66: 1-43.
26. Peng, C. 2000. Growth and yield models for uneven-aged stands: past, present and future. For. Ecol. Manage. 132: 259-279.
27. Pojar, J., Klinka, K., and Meidinger, D.V. 1987. Biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification in British Columbia. For. Ecol. Manage. 22: 119-154.
28. Prescott, C.E. 2000. The influence of the forest canopy on nutrient cycling. Tree Physiol. 22: 1193-1200.
29. Pretzsch, H. 1997. Analysis and modeling of spatial stand structures. Methodological considerations based on mixed beechlarch stands in Lower Saxony. For. Ecol. Manage. 97: 237-253.
30. Puettmann, K.J., and Reich, P.B. 1995. The differential sensitivity of red pine and quaking aspen to competition. Can. J. For. Res. 25: 1731-1737.
31. Stoll, P., Weiner, J., and Schmid, B. 1994. Growth variation in a naturally established population of Pinus sylvestris. Ecology, 75: 660-670.
32. Uriarte, M., Canham, C.D., Thompson, J., and Zimmerman, J.K. 2004. A maximum-likelihood, spatially-explicit analysis of tree growth and survival in a tropical forest. Ecology. In press.
33. USDA Forest Service. 2001. 2000 RPA assessment of forest and range lands. FS687. USDA Forest Service, Washington, D.C.
34. Vanclay, J.K. 1995. Growth models for tropical forests: a synthesis of models and methods. For. Sci. 41: 7-42.
35. Vettenranta, J. 1999. Distance-dependent models for predicting the development of mixed coniferous forests in Finland. Silva Fenn. 33: 51-72.
36. Wagner, R.G., and Radosevich, S.R. 1998. Neighborhood approach for quantifying interspecific competition in coastal Oregon forests. Ecol. Appl. 8: 779-794.
37. Wang, X.L., Klinka, K., Chen, H.Y.H., and de Montigny, L. 2002. Root structure of western hemlock and western redcedar in single- and mixed-species stands. Can. J. For. Res. 32: 997-1004.
38. Wimberly, M.C., and Bare, B.B. 1996. Distance-dependent and distance independent models of Douglas-fir and western hemlock basal area growth following silvicultural treatment. For. Ecol. Manage. 89: 1-11.
39. Wright, E.F., Canham, C.D., and Coates, K.D. 2000. Effects of suppression and release on sapling growth for 11 tree species of northern, interior British Columbia. Can. J. For. Res. 30: 1571-1580.
40. Zar, J.H. 1996. Biostatistical analysis. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.