Complexity in modelling forest ecosystems: How much is enough?

Forest Ecology and Management

Volumn 256, Issue 10, 2008, Pages 1646-1658

  Scoullar, Kim ^b  

^a Hamish) Kimmins, James P   (Canada)

^b Life Science Programming   (Canada)

Author keywords

Boreal mixedwoods; Chinese fir yield decline; Douglas fir thinning trials; FORECAST model; Hybrid simulation; Model complexity

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGY; FORECASTING; FORESTRY;

BOREAL MIXEDWOODS; CHINESE FIR YIELD DECLINE; DOUGLAS-FIR THINNING TRIALS; FORECAST MODEL; HYBRID SIMULATION; MODEL COMPLEXITY;

ECOSYSTEMS;

COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPLEXITY; ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; EVERGREEN FOREST; FOREST ECOSYSTEM; FORESTRY MODELING; MIXED FOREST; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; THINNING; YIELD RESPONSE;

ECOLOGY; ECOSYSTEMS; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY; FORESTS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PSEUDOTSUGA; SIMULATION;

ASIA; BRITISH COLUMBIA; CANADA; CHINA; EURASIA; FAR EAST; NORTH AMERICA; VANCOUVER ISLAND;

CUNNINGHAMIA LANCEOLATA; PICEA GLAUCA; PSEUDOTSUGA; PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII;

EID: 54049116996     PISSN: 03781127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.011     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Aber J.D., and Melillo J.M. FORTNITE: a computer model of organic matter and nitrogen dynamics in forest ecosystems. Univ. Wisconsin Res. Bull. R3130 (1982) 49 pp.
2. Anand M., and Orlóci L. On hierarchical partitioning of an ecological complexity function. Ecol. Model. 132 (2000) 51-62
3. Assmann E. The Principles of Forest Yield Study (1970), Pergamon Press, New York 506 pp.
4. Aumann C.A. A methodology for developing simulation models of complex systems. Ecol. Model. 2002 (2007) 385-396
5. Bi J., Blanco J.A., Kimmins J.P., Ding Y., Seely B., and Welham C. Yield decline in Chinese fir plantations: a simulation investigation with implications for model complexity. Can. J. For. Res. 37 (2007) 1615-1630
6. Blanco J.A. The representation of allelopathy in forest ecosystem-level models. Ecol. Model. 209 (2007) 65-77
7. Blanco J.A., Seely B., Welham C., Kimmins J.P., and Seebacher T.M. Testing the performance of a forest ecosystem model (FORECAST) against 29 years of field data in a Pseudotsga menziesii plantation. Can. J. For. 37 (2007) 1808-1820
8. Blanco J.A., Zavala M.A., Imbert J.B., and Castillo F.J. Evaluation of thinning sustainability using a nutrient cycling simulation model. For. Ecol. Manage. 213 (2005) 209-228
9. Botkin D.J., Janak F., and Wallace J.R. Some ecological consequences of a computer model of forest growth. J. Ecol. 60 (1972) 849-872
10. Cale W.G. Modeling aggregation: ecological perspectives. In: Patten B.C., and Jørgensen S.E. (Eds). Complex Ecology: The Part-whole Relation in Ecosystems (1995), Prentice-Hall PTR, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 230-241
11. Cox G.M., Gibbons J.M., Wood A.T.A., Ramsden S.J., and Crout N.M.J. Towards the systematic simplification of mechanistic models. Ecol. Model. 198 (2006) 240-246
12. Crown M., and Brett C.P. Fertilization & thinning effects on a Douglas-fir ecosystem at Shawnigan Lake: an establishment report. Can. For. Serv. Pac. For. Res. Cent. Inf. Rep. BC-X-110 (1975)
13. DeAngelis D.L., and Mooij W.M. In praise of mechanistically rich models. In: Canham C.D., Cole J.J., and Lauenroth W.K. (Eds). Models in Ecosystem Science (2003), Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey 63-82
14. DeAngelis D.L., Rose K.A., and Huston M.A. Individual-oriented approaches to modeling ecological populations and communities. In: Levin S.A. (Ed). Frontiers in Mathematical Biology (1994), Springer, Berlin 290-410
15. Ebermeyer E. Die gesamte Lehre der Waldstreu mit Riichsicht auf die chemische Statik des Waldbaues (1876), Springer, Berlin
16. Farnden C. Stand density management diagrams for Lodgepole pine, white spruce and interior Douglas-fir. Can. For. Serv. Pac. For. Res. Cent. Inf. Rep. BC-X-360 (1996) 37 pp.
17. Grimm V. Ten years of individual-based modelling in ecology: what have we learned and what could we learn in the future?. Ecol. Model. 115 (1999) 129-148
18. Hans R.D., Knight J.D., and Van Rees C.J. Interspecific competition for nitrogen between early successsional species and planted white spruce and jack pine seedlings. Can. J. For. Res. 32 (2002) 1813-1821
19. Harrington T.B. Plant competition, facilitation, and other overstory-understory interactions in longleaf pine ecosystems. In: Jose S., Jokela E.J., and Miller D.L. (Eds). The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Ecology, Silviculture, and Restoration, Ch. 5, 135-156 (2006), Springer, NY 438 p
20. Kay J., and Regier H. Uncertainty, complexity and ecological integrity: insights from an ecosystem approach. In: Crabbé P., Holland A., Ryszkowski L., and Westra L. (Eds). Implementing Ecological integrity: Restoring Regional and Global Environmental and Human Health (2000), Kluwer, NATO Science Series, Environmental security 121-156
21. Kimmins, J.P., 2007. Forest Ecosystem Management: miracle or mirage? In: Harrington, T.B., Nicholas, G.E. (Eds.), Managing for Wildlife Habitat in West-side Production Forests. USDA Forest Service, PNW Res. Sta., Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-695, pp 19-31.
22. Kimmins J.P. From science to stewardship: harnessing forest ecology in the service of society. For. Ecol. Manage. 256 (2008) 1625-1635
23. Kimmins J.P., Mailly D., and Seely B. Modelling forest ecosystem net primary production: the hybrid simulation approach used in FORECAST. Ecol. Model. 122 (1999) 195-224
24. Kimmins J.P., Welham C., Seely B., Meitner M., Rempel R., and Sullivan T. Science in forestry: why does it sometimes disappoint or even fail us. For. Chron. 81 (2005) 723-734
25. Korzukhin M.D., Ter-Mikaelian M.T., and Wagner R.G. Process versus empirical models: which approach for forest ecosystem management?. Can. J. For. Res. 26 (1996) 879-887
26. Landsberg J.J. Modelling forest ecosystems: state of the art, challenges, and future directions. Can. J. For. Res. 33 (2003) 385-397
27. Landsberg J.J., and Waring R.H. A generalized model of forest productivity using simplified concepts of radiation-use efficiency, carbon balance and partitioning. For. Ecol. Manage. 95 (1997) 209-228
28. Lawrie J., and Hearne J. Reducing model complexity via output sensitivity. Ecol. Model. 207 (2007) 137-144
29. Lieffers V.J., and Stadt K.J. Growth of understory Picea glauca, Calamagrostis canadiensis, and Epilobium angustifolium in relation to overstory light transmission. Can. J. For. Res. 24 (1994) 1193-1198
30. Manson S.M. Simplifying complexity: a review of complexity theory. Geoforum 31 (2001) 405-414
31. Matsushima M., and Chang S.X. Vector analysis of understory competition, N fertilization, and litter layer removal effects on white spruce growth and nutrition in a 13-year-old plantation. For. Ecol. Manage. 236 (2006) 332-341
32. McWilliams, E.R.G., Thérien, G., 1997. Fertilization and thinning effects on a Douglas-fir ecosystem at Shawnigan Lake: 24-year growth response. For. Can. and B.C. Min. For., Victoria, BC FRDA Rep. No. 269.
33. Messier C. Factors limiting early growth of western redcedar, western hemlock and Sitka spruce seedlings on ericaceous-dominated clearcut in coastal British Columbia. For. Ecol. Manage. 60 (1993) 181-206
34. Messier C., and Kimmins J.P. Nutritional stress in Picea sitchensis plantations in coastal British Columbia: the effects of Gaultheria shallon and declining site fertility. Water Soil Pollut. 54 (1990) 257-267
35. Mitchell K.J. Dynamics and simulated yield of Douglas-fir. For. Sci. Monogr. 17 (1975) 39 pp.
36. Mitchell, K.J., Grout, S.E., Macdonald, R.N., Watmough, C.A., 1991. User's Guide for TIPSY: A Table Interpolation Program for Stand Yields. B.C. Min. For., Res. Branch., F.P.D.S. Victoria, BC. Unpubl. Rep. 49 pp.
37. Oliver C.D., and Larson B.C. Forest Stand Dynamics (1996), John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York
38. Oreskes N., and Belitz K. Philosophical issues in model assessment. In: Anderson M.G., and Bates P.D. (Eds). Model Validation: Perspectives in Hydrological Science (2001), John Wiley & Sons, New York 23-41
39. Pacala S.W., Canham C.D., Saponara J., Silander J.A., Kobe R.K., and Ribbens E. Forest models defined by field measurements: estimation, error analysis and dynamics. Ecol. Monogr. 66 (1993) 1-43
40. Pace M.L. The utility of simple models in ecosystem science. In: Canham C.D., Cole J.J., and Lauenroth W.K. (Eds). Models in Ecosystem Science (2003), Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey 49-62
41. Parker D.C., Manson S.M., Janssen M.A., Hoffmann M.J., and Deadman P. Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land-use and land-cover change: a review. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 93 (2003) 314-337
42. Pastor J., and Post W.M. Development of a Linked Forest Productivity-Soil Process Model 2455 (1985), Oak Ridge Nat. Lab., Env. Sci. Div. Publ. 162 pp.
43. Peck S.L. Simulation as experiment: a philosophical reassessment for biological modeling. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19 (2004) 530-534
44. Peek J.M., Korol J.J., Gay D., and Hershey T. Overstory-understory biomass changes over a 35-year period in southcentral Oregon. For. Ecol. Manage. 150 (2001) 267-277
45. Peters R.H. A Critique for Ecology (1991), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 367 pp.
46. Peterson G.D., Carpenter S.R., and Brock W.A. Uncertainty and the management of multistate ecosystems: an apparently rational route to collapse. Ecology 84 (2003) 1403-1411
47. Rastetter E.B., King A.W., Cosby B.J., Hornberger G.H., O'Neill R.V., and Hobbie J.H. Aggregating fine-scale ecological knowledge to model coarser-scale attributes of ecosystems. Ecol. Appl. 2 (1992) 55-70
48. Rowe J.S. The level-of-integration concept and ecology. Ecology 42 (1961) 420-427
49. Running S.W., and Gower S.T. FOREST-BGC, a general model of forest ecosystem processes for regional applications. Part II. Dynamic carbon allocation and nitrogen budgets. Tree Physiol. 9 (1991) 147-160
50. Seely B., Hawkins C., Blanco J.A., Welham C., and Kimmins J.P. Evaluation of an ecosystem-based approach to mixedwood modelling. For. Chron. 84 (2008) 181-193
51. Seely B., Nelson J., Wells R., Peter B., Meitner M., Anderson A., Harshaw H., Sheppard S., Bunnell F.L., Kimmins H., and Harrison D. The application of a hierarchical, decision support system to evaluate multi-objective forest management strategies: a case study in northeastern British Columbia, Canada. For. Ecol. Manage. 199 (2004) 283-305
52. Seely B., Welham C., and Kimmins J.P. Carbon sequestration in a boreal forest ecosystem: results from the ecosystem simulation model, FORECAST. For. Ecol. Manage. 169 (2002) 123-135
53. Snowling S.D., and Kramer J.R. Evaluating modelling uncertainty for model selection. Ecol. Model. 138 (2001) 17-30
54. Sober E. The principle of parsimony. Brit. J. Philos. Sci. 32 (1981) 145-156
55. Standish J.T., Manning G.H., and Demaershalk J.P. Development of biomass equations for British Columbia tree species. Can. For. Ser. Pac. For. Res. Cent. Inf. Rep. BC-X-264 (1985)
56. Tilman D. Plant Strategies and the Dynamics and Structure of Plant Communities (1988), Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey 360 pp.
57. Walters C.J. Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources (1986), MacMillan, New York 374 pp.
58. Westoby J. The Purpose of Forests (1987), Blackwell, Oxford 343 pp.
59. Welham C., Seely B., and Kimmins J.P. The utility of the two-pass harvesting system: an analysis using the ecosystem simulation model FORECAST. Can. J. For. Res. 32 (2002) 1071-1079
60. Welham C., Van Rees K., Seely B., and Kimmins H. Projecting long-term productivity in Saskatchewan hybrid poplar plantations: weed competition and fertilizer effects. Can. J. For. Res. 37 (2007) 356-370
61. Yu X.T. Silviculture of Chinese-fir (1997), Science and Technology Press of Fujian, Fuzhou, Popular Republic of China (in Chinese)