Evaluating height structure in Scots pine forests using marked point processes

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 38, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 1924-1934

  Montes, Fernando ^a,c   Barbeito, Ignacio ^b   Rubio, Agustín ^a   Cañellas, Isabel ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria   (Spain)

^c Technical University of Madrid   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGY; RESEARCH;

COMPLETE SPATIAL RANDOMNESS; HEIGHT DISTRIBUTION; MARKED POINT PATTERN; MARKED POINT PROCESS; SECOND MOMENT MEASURE; SPATIAL CLUSTERING; SPATIAL POINT PROCESS; TREE-HEIGHT DISTRIBUTION;

FORESTRY;

ALTITUDE; CONIFEROUS FOREST; HEIGHT; HETEROGENEITY; MODELING; MOUNTAIN ENVIRONMENT; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; STAND STRUCTURE;

CORRELATION; FORESTRY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SIMULATION;

EURASIA; EUROPE; SOUTHERN EUROPE; SPAIN;

PINUS SYLVESTRIS;

EID: 47649084674     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/X08-002     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aguirre, O., Hui, G., von Gadow, K., and Jiménez, J. 2003. An analysis of spatial forest structure using neighbourhood-based variables. For. Ecol. Manage. 183: 137-145. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00102-6.
2. Amarasekare, P., and Nisbet, R.M. 2001. Spatial heterogeneity, source-sink dynamics, and the local coexistence of competing species. Am. Nat. 158: 572-584. doi:10.1086/323586.
3. Ballani, F., Daley, D.J., and Stoyan, D. 2006. Modelling the microstructure of concrete with spherical grains. Comput. Mater. Sci. 35: 399-407. doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2005.03.005.
4. Beisbart, C., and Kerscher, M. 2000. Luminosity- and morphology-dependent clustering of galaxies. Astrophys. J. 545: 6-25. doi:10.1086/317788.
5. Camarero, J.J., Gutiérrez, E., and Fortin, M.J. 2000. Spatial pattern of subalpine forest - alpine grassland ecotones in the Spanish Central Pyrenees. For. Ecol. Manage. 134: 1-6. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00241-8.
6. Comas, C., and Mateu, J. 2007. Modelling forest dynamics: a perspective from point process methods. Biom. J. 49: 176-196. doi:10.1002/bimj. 200510268.
7. Cressie, N.A.C. 1993. Statistics for spatial data. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York.
8. Dale, M.R.T., Dixon, P., Fortin, M.J., Legendre, P., Myers, D.E., and Rosenberg, M.S. 2002. Conceptual and mathematical relationships among methods for spatial analysis. Ecography, 25: 558-577. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0587. 2002.250506.x.
9. del Río, M., Montes, F., Cañellas, I., and Montero, G. 2003. Revisión: Índices de diversidad estructural en masas forestales. Invest. Agrar. Sist. Recursos For., 12: 159-176.
10. Diggle, P.J., Besag, J.E., and Gleaves, J.T. 1976. Statistical analysis of spatial point patterns by means of distance methods. Biometrics, 32: 659-667. doi:10.2307/2529754.
11. Dixon, P.M. 2002. Ripley's K function. In Encyclopedia of environmetrics. Vol. 3. Edited by A.H. El-Shaarawi and W.W. Piegorsch. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Chichester, UK. pp. 1796-1803.
12. Ferris-Kaan, R., Peace, A.J., and Humphrey, J.W. 1998. Assessing structural diversity in managed forests. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
13. Gavrikov, V.L., and Stoyan, D. 1995. The use of marked point processes in ecological and environmental forest studies. Environ. Ecol. Stat. 2: 331-344. doi:10.1007/BF00569362.
14. Goreaud, F., and Pélissier, R. 1999. On explicit formulas of edge correction for Ripley's K-function. J. Veg. Sci. 10: 433-438. doi:10.2307/3237072.
15. 12-function: population independence vs. random labelling hypothesis. J. Veg. Sci. 14: 681-692. doi:10.1658/1100-9233(2003)014[0681:AMOBIW]2.0.CO;2.
16. Grassi, G., Minotta, G., Tonon, G., and Bagnaresi, U. 2004. Dynamics of Norway spruce and silver fir natural regeneration in a mixed stand under uneven-aged management. Can. J. For. Res. 34: 141-149. doi:10.1139/x03-197.
17. Guan, Y. 2006. Tests for independence between marks and points of a marked point process. Biometrics, 62: 126-134. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0420. 2005.00395.x. PMID:16542238.
18. Guan, Y., Sherman, M., and Calvin, J.A. 2007. On asymptotic properties of the mark variogram estimator of a marked point process. J. Stat. Plann. Inference, 137: 148-161. doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2005.10.004.
19. Hirsch, D.M., Ketcham, R.A., and Carlson, W.D. 2000. An evaluation of spatial correlation functions in textural analysis of metamorphic rocks. Geol. Mater. Res. 2(3): 1-42.
20. Kelly, D.L., and Connolly, A. 2000. A review of the plant communities associated with Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in Europe, and an evaluation of putative indicator/specialist species. Invest. Agrar. Sist. Recurosos For. 9(Suppl. 1): 15-39.
21. Kint, V. 2003. Structural development in ageing Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) stands in western Europe. Ph.D. thesis, Faculteit Landbouwkundige en Toegepaste Biologische Wetenschappen, Melle-Gontrode, Belgium.
22. Kuuluvainen, T., Penttinen, A., Leionen, L., and Nygren, M. 1996. Statistical opportunities for comparing stand structural heterogeneity in managed and primeval forests: an example from boreal spruce forest in southern Finland. Silva Fenn. 30: 315-328.
23. MacArthur, R.M., and MacArthur, J.W. 1961. On bird species diversity. Ecology, 42: 594-598. doi:10.2307/1932254.
24. Mason, W.L., and Alía Miranda, R. 2000. Current and future status of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forest in Europe. Invest. Agrar. Sist. Recurosos For. 9(Suppl. 1): 317-335.
25. Matérn, B. 1960. Spatial variation. Meddelanden fran Statens Skogsforskningsinstitut 49(5). [2nd ed. 1986.] Springer-Verlag, New York. Lect. Notes Stat. 36.
26. Moeur, M. 1993. Characterizing spatial patterns of trees using stem-mapped data. For. Sci. 39: 756-775.
27. Moeur, M. 1997. Spatial models of competition and gap dynamics in old-growth Tsuga heterophylla / Thuja plicata forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 94: 175-186. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03976-X.
28. Montes, F., and Cañellas, I. 2007. The spatial relationship between post-crop remaining trees and the establishment of saplings in Pinus sylvestris stands in Spain. Appl. Veg. Sci. 10(2): 151-160.
29. Montes, F., Sánchez, M., del Río, M., and Cañellas, I. 2005. Using historic management records to characterize the effects of management on the structural diversity of forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 207: 279-293. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.031.
30. Murrell, D.J., and Law, R. 2003. Heteromyopia and the spatial co-existence of similar competitors. Ecol. Lett. 6: 48-59. doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00397.x.
31. Neyman, J., and Scott, E.L. 1952. A theory of the spatial distribution of galaxies. Astrophys. J. 116: 144-163. doi:10.1086/145599.
32. Pacala, S.W., and Levin, S.A. 1997. Biologically generated spatial pattern and the coexistence of competing species. In Spatial ecology: the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions. Edited by D. Tilman and P. Kareiva. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. pp. 204-232.
33. Penttinen, A.K., Stoyan, D., and Henttonen, H.M. 1992. Marked point processes in forest statistics. For. Sci. 38: 806-824.
34. Politis, D.N., and Sherman, M. 2001. Moment estimation for statistics from marked point processes. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol. 63: 261-275. doi:10.1111/1467-9868.00284.
35. Renshaw, E., and Särkkä, A. 2001. Gibbs point processes for studying the development of spatial-temporal stochastic processes. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 36: 85-105. doi:10.1016/S0167-9473(00)00028-1.
36. Ripley, B.D. 1977. Modelling spatial patterns (with discussion). J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A, 39: 172-212.
37. Satō, K., and Iwasa, Y. 1993. Modelling of wave regeneration in subalpine Abies forests, population dynamics with spatial structure. Ecology, 75: 1538-1550. doi:10.2307/1940081.
38. Schlather, M. 2001. On the second-order characteristics of marked point processes. Bernoulli, 7: 99-117. doi:10.2307/3318604.
39. Skellam, J.G. 1951. Random dispersal in theoretical populations. Biometrika, 38: 196-218. PMID:14848123.
40. Staudhammer, C.L., and LeMay, V.M. 2001. Introduction and evaluation of possible indices of stand structural diversity. Can. J. For. Res. 31: 1105-1115. doi:10.1139/x01-033.
41. Stoyan, D. 1984. On correlations of marked point processes. Math. Nachrichten, 116: 197-207. doi:10.1002/mana.19841160115.
42. Stoyan, D., and Penttinen, A. 2000. Recent applications of point process methods in forestry statistics. Stat. Sci. 15: 61-78. doi:10.1214/ss/1009212674.
43. Stoyan, D., and Stoyan, H. 1994. Fractals, random shapes and point fields. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Chichester, UK.
44. Varga, P., Chen, H.Y.H., and Klinka, K. 2005. Tree-size diversity between single- and mixed-species stands in three forest types in western Canada. Can. J. For. Res. 35: 593-601. doi:10.1139/x04-193.
45. von Gadow, K. 1993. Zur Bestandesbeschreibung in der Forsteinrichtung. Forst Holz, 21: 601-606.
46. Wälder, O., and Stoyan, D. 1996. On variograms in point process statistics. Biom. J. 38: 895-905. doi:10.1002/bimj.4710380802.
47. Wiegand, T., and Moloney, K.A. 2004. Ring, circles, and null-models in point pattern analysis in ecology. Oikos, 104: 209-229. doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12497.x.
48. Zenner, E., and Hibbs, D. 2000. A new method for modelling the heterogeneity of a forest structure. For. Ecol. Manage. 129: 75-87. doi:10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00140-1.