Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of self-thinning models: an exercise in reasoning

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Trees Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Self-thinning of forest stands is one of the clearest and best-documented examples of natural selection. Besides their theoretical interest, understanding of self-thinning is important for forest practice because it produces estimates of stand density and stocking. There is a considerable diversity of views on the processes causing self-thinning, predicting variables, and analytical form of models. The most popular model was proposed by Reineke (J Agric Res 46(7):627–638, 1933) over 70 years ago. This study compares existing models of self-thinning and provides evidence that the virtually unknown model developed by Artur Nilson describes self-thinning more realistically than Reineke’s. While in the Reineke model the rate of mortality (the slope of self-thinning line) is assumed to be constant, it changes from 0 to −2 in Nilson’s model. As a result, Nilson’s model is slightly but consistently more accurate than Reineke’s. Although both models are empirical, their analysis suggests several general conclusions about self-thinning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alban DH, Laidly PR (1982) Generalized biomass equations for jack and red pine in the Lake States. Can J For Res 12:913–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Averell JL (1945) Rules of thumb for thinning loblolly pines. J For 43(9):649–651

    Google Scholar 

  • Avery TE, Burkhart HE (2002) Forest measurements, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, 456 pp

  • Bella IE (1971) A new competition model for individual trees. For Sci 17:364–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnor GM (1964) The influence of stand density on the correlation of stem diameter with crown width for lodgepole pine. For Chron 40(3):347–349

    Google Scholar 

  • Briegleb PA (1952) An approach to density measurement in Douglas-fir. J For 50:529–536

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown J (1882) The forester or a practical treatise on the planting, rearing, and general management of forest trees, 5th edn. Blackwood, Edinburgh, 898 pp

  • Chisman HH, Schumacher FX (1940) On the tree-area ratio and certain of its applications. J For 38(4):311–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis R (1970) Stand density measures: an interpretation. For Sci 16(4):403–414

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis RO (1971) A tree area power function and related stand density measures for Douglas-fir. For Sci 17(2):146–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarnowski MS (1961) Dynamics of even-aged forest stands. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, 132 pp

  • Dawkins HC (1963) Crown diameters: their relation to bole diameter in tropical forest trees. Commonw For Rev 42:318–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Enquist BJ (2002) Universal scaling in tree and vascular plant allometry: toward a general quantitative theory linking plant form and function from cells to ecosystems. Tree Physiol 22:1045–1064

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • FIA data http://srsfia2.fs.fed.us/. Accessed 12 Feb 2007

  • Francis JK (1986) The relationship of bole diameter and crown widths for seven bottomland hardwood species. USDA Forest Service Research Note SO-328, 3 pp

  • Gering LR, May DM (1995) The relationship of diameter at breast height and crown diameter for four species groups in Hardin county, Tennessee. South J Appl For 19(4):177–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Gevorkiantz SR, Zon R (1930) Second-growth white pine in Wisconsin: its growth and yield, and commercial possibilities. Wis Agr Exp Sta Res Bull 98:40

    Google Scholar 

  • Gingrich SF (1967) Measuring and evaluating stocking and stand density in upland hardwood forest in the central states. For Sci 13(1):38–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding RB, Grigal DF (1985) Individual tree biomass estimation equations for plantation-grown white spruce in northern Minnesota. Can J For Res 15:738–739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harms WR, Whitesell CD, DeBell DS (2000) Growth and development of loblolly pine in a spacing trial planted in Hawaii. For Ecol Manag 126:23–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huxley JS (1932) Problems of relative growth. The Dial Press, New York, 276 pp

  • Krajicek JE, Brinkman KA, Gingrich SF (1961) Crown competition—a measure of density. For Sci 7(1):35–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert M-C, Ung C-H, Haulier F (2005) Canadian national tree aboveground biomass equations. Can J For Res 35(8):1996–2018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech JW (1984) Estimating crown width from diameter at breast height for open-grown radiate pine trees in South Australia. Aust For Res 14:33–337

    Google Scholar 

  • Lexen B (1939) Space requirement of ponderosa pine by tree diameter. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Forest and Range Experiment Station Research Note No. 63, 4 pp

  • Lohrey RE (1985) Aboveground biomass of planted and direct-seeded slash ine in the West Gulf Region. In: Saucier JR (ed) The 1984 Southern Forest Biomass Workshop. USDA Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, pp 75–82 (121 pp)

  • Long JN, Smith FW (1984) Relation between size and density in developing stands: a description and possible mechanisms. For Ecol Manag 7:191–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKinney AL, Chaiken LE (1935) A method of determining density of loblolly pine stands. USDA Forest Service Appalachian Forest Experiment Station Technical Note No. 15, 3 pp

  • Mandelbrot BB (1983) The fractal geometry of nature. W. N. Freeman, New York, 468 pp

  • McIntosh RP (1980) The background and some current problems of theoretical ecology. Synthese 43:195–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McQuarrie ADR, Tsai CL (1998) Regression and time series model selection. World Scientific, Singapore, 455 pp

  • Meyer WH (1938) Yield of even-aged stands of ponderosa pine. USDA Technical Bulletin 630, 59 pp

  • Meyer WH (1942) Yield of even-aged stands of loblolly pine in northern Louisiana. School of Forestry Bulletin 51. Yale University, New Haven, 39 pp

  • Mitchell HC (1943) Regulation of farm woodlands by rule of thumb. J For 41(4):243–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilson A (1973) Hooldusraiete arvutusliku projekteerimise teooriast. [On the theory of programming of thinnings] Eesti Põllumajanduse Akadeemia tead. tööde kogumik. Tartu 89:136–142 [In Estonian]

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilson A (2006) Modeling dependence between the number of trees and mean tree diameter of stands, stand density and stand sparsity. In: Cieszewski CJ, Strub M (eds) Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on forest measurements and quantitative methods and management & the 2004 southern mensurationists meeting. Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, pp 74–94 (412 pp)

  • Ouellet D (1985) Biomass equations for six commercial tree species in Quebec. For Chron 61:218–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine DP, Hann DW (1982) Maximum crown-width equations for southwestern Oregon tree species. Forest Research Laboratory, Oregon State University, Corvallis. Research Paper. 46, 20 p

  • Painter PR (2005) The fractal geometry of nutrient exchange surfaces does not provide an explanation for 3/4-power metabolic scaling. Theor Biol Med Model 2:30. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1226149

  • Perez JW (1970) Relation of crown diameter to stem diameter in forests of Puerto Rico, Dominica, and Thailand. In: Odum HT, Pigeon RF (eds) A tropical rain forest; a study of irradiation and ecology at El Verde, Puerto Rico. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Oak Ridge, Tenn, pp B105–B122

    Google Scholar 

  • Reineke LH (1933) Perfecting a stand-density index for even-aged forests. J Agric Res 46(7):627–638

    Google Scholar 

  • Spurr SH (1952) Forest inventory. Ronald Press, New York, 476 p

  • Stahelin R (1949) Thinning even-aged loblolly and slash pine stands to specified densities. J For 47(7):538–540

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarashkevitch A (1926) The composition of pure stands. Collection of works on forestry. Leningrad Agricultural Institute, pp 106–135 (In Russian)

  • Tjurin A (1927) The structure of even-aged stands. Memoirs of the Voronezh Institute of Agriculture 8:5–49 (In Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA (1929) Volume, yield, and stand tables for second-growth southern pines. USDA Miscellaneous publication No. 50, 202 pp

  • Vezina PE (1962) Crown width-d.b.h. relations for open-grown balsam fir and white spruce in Quebec. For Chron 38:463–473

    Google Scholar 

  • Vezina PE (1963) More about the crown competition factor. For Chron 39:313–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller DE (1987) A reevaluation of the -3/2 power rule of self-thinning. Ecol Monogr 57(1):23–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1997) A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science 276:122–126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1999) A general model for the structure and allometry of plant vascular systems. Nature 400:664–667

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Whittington R (1984) Laying down the -3/2 power law. Nature 311:217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams RA (1994) Stand density management diagram for loblolly pine plantations in north Louisiana. South J Appl For 18(1):40–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson FG (1946) Numerical expression of stocking in terms of height. J For 44:758–761

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoda K, Kira T, Ogawa H, Hozumi K (1963) Self-thinning in overcrowded pure stands under cultivated and natural conditions. J Biol Osaka City Univ 14:107–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeide B (1985) Tolerance and self-tolerance of trees. For Ecol Manag 13:149–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeide B (1986) Crown width and stem diameter in open-grown trees. In: Fujimori T, Whitehead D (eds) Crown and canopy structure in relation to productivity. Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, Ibaraki, pp 146–158, 448 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeide B (1987) Analysis of the 3/2 power law of self-thinning. For Sci 33:517–537

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeide B (1991) Self-thinning and stand density. For Sci 37:517–523

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeide B (2005) How to measure stand density. Trees Struct Funct 19(1):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeide B (2008) The science of forestry. J Sustain For 27(4):345–473

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeide B, Pfeifer P (1991) A method for estimation of fractal dimension of tree crowns. For Sci 37:1253–1265

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Mike Olson, Curtis VanderSchaaf, and two anonymous referees for their valuable comments.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Boris Zeide

    Present address: , 1672 Carlson Lane, Marietta, GA, 30064, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Forest Resources, University of Arkansas, Monticello, AR, USA

    Boris Zeide

Authors
  1. Boris Zeide
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Boris Zeide.

Additional information

Communicated by T. Fourcaud.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zeide, B. Comparison of self-thinning models: an exercise in reasoning. Trees 24, 1117–1126 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-010-0484-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-010-0484-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation