Towards harmonization of forest deposition collectors - case study of comparing collector designs

IForest

Volumn 4, Issue NOVEMBER, 2011, Pages 218-225

  Zlindra, Daniel ^a   Eler, K ^b   Clarke, N ^c   Simoncic P ^a  

^a SLOVENIAN FORESTRY INSTITUTE   (Slovenia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

^c NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF BIOECONOMY RESEARCH   (Norway)

Author keywords

Collector design; Forest monitoring; Harmonization; Precipitation amount; Precipitation chemistry

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861543394     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19717458     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3832/ifor0586-004     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Altman DG, Bland JM (1983). Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. The Statistician 32: 307-317.-doi: 10.2307/2987937
2. Astrua M, Ichim D, Pennecci F, Pisani M (2007). Statistical techniques for assessing the agreement between two instruments. Metrologia 44: 385-392.-doi: 10.1088/0026-1394/44/5/015
3. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods in clinical measurement. Lancet 1 (8476): 307-310.-doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8
4. Bland JM, Altman DG (2007). Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 17: 571-582.-doi: 10.1080/10543400701329422
5. Bleeker A, Draaijers G, van der Veen D, Erisman JW, Möls H, Fonteijn P, Geusebroek M (2003). Field intercomparison of throughfall measurements performed within the framework of the Pan European intensive monitoring program of EU/ICP Forest. Environmental Pollution 125: 123-138.-doi: 10.1016/S0269-7491(03)00142-8
6. Clarke N, Zlindra D, Ulrich E, Mosello R, Derome J, Derome K, König N, Lövblad G, Draaijers GPJ, Hansen K, Thimonier A, Waldner P (2010). Sampling and analysis of deposition. Part XIV. In: "Manual on methods and criteria for harmonized sampling, assessment, monitoring and analysis of the effects of air pollution on forests". UNECE, ICP Forests, Hamburg, Germany, pp. 66. (ISBN: 978-3-926301-03-1) [online] URL: http://www.icp-forests.org/Manual. htm
7. Crockford RH, Richardson DP (1990). Partitioning of rainfall in a eucalypt forest and pine plantation in southeastern Australia. I. Throughfall measurement in aeucalypt forest: effect of method and species composition. Hydrological Processes 4: 131-144.-doi: 10.1002/(ISSN) 1099-1085
8. FAO (1998). World reference base for soil resources. FAO, Rome, Italy, pp. 88.
9. Kostelnik KM, Lynch JA, Grimm JW, Corbett ES (1989). Sample size requirements for estimation of throughfall chemistry beneath a mixed hardwood forest. Journal of Environmental Quality 18: 274-280.-doi: 10.2134/jeq1989.0047242 5001800030005x
10. nd edn). Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 870.
11. Linnet K (1993). Evaluation of regression procedures for methods comparison studies. Clinical Chemistry 39: 424-432. [online] URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8448852
12. Llorens P, Domingo F (2007). Rainfall partitioning by vegetation under Mediterranean conditions. A review of studies in Europe. Journal of Hydrology 335: 37-54.-doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol. 2006.10.032
13. Ludbrook J (2002). Statistical techniques for comparing measurers and methods of measurement: a critical review. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology 29: 527-536.-doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1681.2002.03686.x
14. Myles PS, Cui J (2007). Using Altman-Bland method to measure agreement with repeated measures. British Journal of Anaesthesia 99: 309-311.-doi: 10.1093/bja/aem214
15. Nieminen TM, Derome J, Helmisaari HS (1999). Interactions between precipitation and Scots pine canopies along a heavy-metal pollution gradient. Environmental Pollution 106: 128-137.-doi: 10.1016/S0269-7491(99)00050-0
16. Parker GG (1983). Throughfall and stemflow in the forest nutrient cycle. Advances in Ecological Research 13: 57-133.
17. Reynolds ERC, Leyton L (1963). Measurement and significance of throughfall in forest stands. In: "Water relations of plants" (Rutter AJ, Whitehead FH eds). Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK, pp. 127-141.
18. Reynolds B, Neal C (1991). Trough versus funnel collectors for measuring throughfall volumes. Journal of Environmental Quality 20: 518-521.-doi: 10.2134/jeq1991.00472425002000030003x
19. Rodda JC, Smith SW (1986). The significance of the systematic error in rainfall measurement for assessing wet deposition. Atmospheric Environment 20: 1059-1064.-doi: 10.1016/0004-6981(86)90293-3
20. Sevruk B, Hertig JA, Tettamanti R (1994). The effect of orifice rim thickness on the wind speed above precipitation gauges. Atmospheric Environment 28: 1939-1944.-doi: 10.1016/1352-2310(94)90334-4
21. rd edn). W.H. Freeman, New York, USA, pp. 888.
22. Thimonier A (1998). Measurement of atmospheric deposition under forest canopies: some recommendations for equipment and sampling design. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 52: 353-387.-doi: 10.1023/A:1005853429853
23. th edn). World Metereological Organization Publication, no. 8, Geneva, Switzerland. [online] URL: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/IMOP/pub lications/CIMO-Guide/CIMO%20Guide%207th %20Edition,%202008/CIMO_Guide-7th_Edition-2008.pdf
24. Ziegler AD, Giambelluca TW, Nullet MA, Sutherland RA, Tantasarin C, Vogler JB, Negishi JN (2009). Throughfall in an evergreen-dominated forest stand in northern Thailand: comparison of mobile and stationary methods. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 149: 373-384.-doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2008.09.002