Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Methods of Forest Structure Research: a Review

  • Forest Management (H Vacik, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Forestry Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The forest structure generally refers to the configuration and distribution of different plant species and sizes. Investigation and analysis of forest structures help us to understand the history, current status, and future development of forest ecological systems. This paper aims at a systematic summary of the quantitative analysis methods of forest structure.

Recent Findings

The marked second-order characteristic method has obvious advantages in explaining the relationships among tree species and the dynamic relationship between tree size differentiation and scale. The quantitative analysis method of spatial structure based on the relationships of nearest neighbor trees, compared with traditional non-spatial indices or functions, does not only analyze four important aspects of the forest structure (spatial distribution pattern diversity, species diversity, size diversity, crowding degree diversity), but also demonstrates its strength in elaborating fine-scale spatial stand structure. This nearest-neighbor analytical method also bridges the gap between stand structure parameters and tree competition indices, especially through the multivariate distribution of structural parameters.

Summary

This nearest-neighbor analytical method provides an in-depth, multi-faceted interpretation of forest structure at different levels. Structure-based forest management has been proposed based on this analytical method of spatial structure, and is a proven way to effectively improve forest quality.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Spies TA. Forest structure: a key to the ecosystem. Northwest Science. 1998;72(2):34–9.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pommerening A. Evaluating structural indices by reversing forest structural analysis. Forest Ecol Manag. 2006;224(3):266–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.12.039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Brown C, Law R, Illian JB, Burslem DFR. Linking ecological processes with spatial and non-spatial patterns in plant communities. J Ecol. 2011;99(6):1402–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2011.01877.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. •• Wiegand T, Moloney KA. Handbook of spatial point-pattern analysis in ecology. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2013. Spatial point-pattern analysis is introduced in detail

    Google Scholar 

  5. • Pretzsch H, Zenner EK. Toward managing mixed-species stands: from parametrization to prescription. For Ecosyst. 2017;4:19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-017-0105-z This paper reviews the mixing effects on the structure and growth at different levels.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gamfeldt L, Snäll T, Bagchi R, Jonsson M, Gustafsson L, Kjellander P, et al. Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species. Nat Commun. 2013;4:1340. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2328.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Brian JE, Geoffrey BW, James HB. Extensions and evaluations of a general quantitative theory of forest structure and dynamics. PNAS. 2009;106(17):7046–51. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0812303106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. O’Hara KL. Silviculture for structural diversity: a new look at multiaged systems. J Forest. 1998;96(7):4–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/96.7.4a.

  9. Franklin JF, Spies TA, Van Pelt R, Carey AB, Thornburgh DA, Berg DR, et al. Disturbances and structural development of natural forest ecosystems with silvicultural implications, using Douglas-Fir forests as an example. For Ecol Manag. 2002;155(1–3):399–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00575-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Valbuena R, Packalen P, Martín-Fernández S, Maltamo M. Diversity and equitability ordering profiles applied to study forest structure. Forest Ecol Manag. 2012;276(4):185–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.03.036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. • Fardusi MJ, Castaldi C, Chianucci F, Corona P, Franco M, Minari E, et al. A spatial-temporal dataset of forest mensuration for the analysis of tree species structure and diversity in semi-natural mixed floodplain forests. Ann For Sci 2018; 75(1): 1–5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-018-0688-8. This paper performed replicated, repeated measures of height, diameter, and vitality at tree level to allow analysis of spatial and temporal structure and diversity.

  12. • Pommerening A, Meador AJS. Tamm review: tree interactions between myth and reality. Forest Ecol Manag. 2018;424:164–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.04.051. This paper gives an overview of the quantification methods of tree interaction between myth and reality.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gadow K, Zhang CY, Wehenkel C, Pommerening A, Corral-Rivas C, Korol M, et al. Forest structure and diversity. In: Gadow KV, Nagel J, Saborowski J, editors. Continuous cover forestry. Berlin: Springer Netherlands; 2012. p. 28–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2202-6_2.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Pommerening A, Stoyan D. Reconstructing spatial tree point patterns from nearest neighbour summary statistics measured in small subwindows. Can J For Res. 2008;38(5):1110–22. https://doi.org/10.1139/X07-222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. •• Pommerening A. Approaches to quantifying forest structures. Forestry. 2002;75(3):305–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/75.3.305 This paper outlines a classification of structural indices and examines typical representatives of the classification groups.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Tang XL, Pérezcruzado C, Vor T, Fehrmann, González Á, Kleinn C. Development of stand density management diagrams for Chinese fir plantations. Forestry. 2016;89(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpv024.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sterba H, Zingg A. Distance dependent and distance independent description of stand structure. Allg Forst Jagdztg. 2006;177(8):169–76.

    Google Scholar 

  18. • Hui GY, Gadow KV, Albert MA. New parameter for stand spatial structure——neighbourhood comparison. For Res. 1999;12(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1001-1498.1999.01.001 This paper propose the dominance to describe the DBH differentiation.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Clark PJ, Evans FC. Distance to nearest neighbor as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology. 1954;35(4):445–53. https://doi.org/10.2307/1931034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. • Hui GY, Kv G, Albert M. The neighbourhood pattern--a new structure parameter for describing distribution of forest tree position. Scientia Silvae Sinicae. 1999;35(1):37–42. https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.1999.01.006. This paper proposes the uniform angle index to describe the distribution pattern of tree individuals.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Aguirre O, Hui GY, Gadow KV, Jiménez J. An analysis of spatial forest structure using neighbourhood-based variables. For Ecol Manag. 2003;183(1–3):137–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00102-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. • Hui GY, Hu YB. Measuring species spatial isolation in mixed forests. For Res. 2001;14(1):23–7. https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1001-1498.2001.01.004. The mingling is proposed to indicate the spatial isolation degree.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Füldner K. Strukturbeschreibung von Buchen-Edellaubholz-Mischwäldern. Cuvillier Verlag. Ph.D. dissertation. Göttingen: University of Göttingen; 1995.

  24. Hui GY, Zhao XH, Zhao ZH, Gadow KV. Evaluating tree species spatial diversity based on neighborhood relationships. For Sci. 2011;57(4):292–300. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/57.4.292.

  25. Pretzsch H, Biber P. Tree species mixing can increase maximum stand density. Can J For Res. 2016;46(10):1179–93. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2015-0413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hui GY, Zhang LJ, Hu YB, Wang HX, Zhang GQ. Stand crowding degree and its application. Journal of Beijing Forestry University. 2016;38(10):1–6. https://doi.org/10.13332/j.1000-1522.20160107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. • Hu YB, Hui GY. How to describe the crowding degree of trees based on the relationship of neighboring trees. J Beijing For Univ. 2015;37(9):1–8. https://doi.org/10.13332/j.1000-1522.20150125 The crowding ( C ) is proposed to describe the degree of crowding.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pyke CR, Condit R, Aguilar S, Lao S. Floristic composition across a climatic gradient in a neotropical lowland forest. J Veg Sci. 2010;12(4):553–66. https://doi.org/10.2307/3237007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Munoz F, Ramesh BR, Couteron P. How do habitat filtering and niche conservatism affect community composition at different taxonomic resolutions? Ecology. 2014;95(8):2179–91. https://doi.org/10.1890/13-0064.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Petchey OL, Gaston KJ. Functional diversity (FD), species richness and community composition. Ecol Lett. 2010;5(3):402–11. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1461-0248.2002.00339.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lamprecht J. Social dominance and reproductive success in a goose flock (Anser indicus). Behaviour. 1986;97(1/2):50–65. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853986X00315.

  32. Song YC. Vegetation ecology. Shanghai: East China Normal University Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Magurran A. Measuring biological diversity. Oxford: Blackwell; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wiegand T, Gunatilleke CVS, Gunatilleke IAUN, Huth A. How individual species structure diversity in tropical forests. PNAS. 2007;104(48):19029–33. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0705621104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Reardon S, O’Sullivan D. Measures of spatial segregation. Sociol Methodol. 2004;34(1):121–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0081-1750.2004.00150.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Motz K, Sterba H, Pommerening A. Sampling measures of tree diversity. For Ecol Manag. 2010;260(11):1985–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.08.046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Podani J, Czaran T. Individual-centered analysis of mapped point patterns representing multi-species assemblages. J Veg Sci. 1997;8(2):259–70. https://doi.org/10.2307/3237355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Shimatani K. Multivariate point processes and spatial variation of species diversity. For Ecol Manag. 2001;142(1-3):215–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-1127(00)00352-2.

  39. Rajala T, Illian J. A family of spatial biodiversity measures based on graphs. Environ Ecol Stat. 2012;19(4):545–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10651-012-0200-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tang MP, Tang SZ, Lei XD, Zhou GM, Xie ZX. Comparison analysis on two minglings. Forest Resour Manag. 2004;4(8):25–7. https://doi.org/10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2004.04.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lima DRAF, Batista JLF, Prado PI. Modeling tree diameter distributions in natural forests: an evaluation of 10 statistical models. For Sci. 2015;61(2):320–7. https://doi.org/10.5849/forsci.14-070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Liu FX, Li FR, Zhang LJ, Jin XJ. Modeling diameter distributions of mixed-species forest stands. Scand J Forest Res. 2014;29(7):653–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2014.960891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Buongiorno J, Dahir S, Lu HC, Lin CR. Tree size diversity and economic returns in uneven-aged forest stands. For Sci. 1994;40(1):83–103. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/40.1.83.

  44. Bai C, Hui GY. Study on diversity indices of tree diameter size. For Res. 2016;29(3):340–7. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-1498.2016.03.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Lai JS, Coomes DA, Du XJ, Hsieh CF, Sun IFA, Chao WC, et al. A general combined model to describe tree diameter distributions within subtropical and temperate forest communities. Oikos. 2013;122(11):1636–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00436.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Hafley WL, Schreuder HT. Statistical distributions for fitting diameter and height data in even-aged stands. Can J For Res. 1977;7(3):481–7. https://doi.org/10.1139/x77-062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Palahí M, Pukkala T, Blasco E, Trasobares A. Comparison of beta, Johnson’s SB, Weibull and truncated Weibull functions for modeling the diameter distribution of forest stands in Catalonia (north-east of Spain). Eur J Forest Res. 2007;126(4):563–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-007-0177-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Newton PF, Lei YC, Zhang SY. Stand-level diameter distribution yield model for black spruce plantations. Forest Ecol Manag. 2005;209(3):181–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.01.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rupšys P, Petrauskas E. The bivariate Gompertz diffusion model for tree diameter and height distribution. For Sci. 2010;56(3):271–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/56.3.271.

  50. Li FS, Zhang LJ, Davis CJ. Modeling the joint distribution of tree diameters and heights by bivariate generalized beta distribution. For Sci. 2002;48(1):47–58. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/48.1.47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Gorgoso-Varela JJ, García-Villabrille JD, Rojo Alboreca A, Gadow KV, Álvarez-González JG. Comparing Johnson’s SBB, Weibull and logit-logistic bivariate distributions for modeling tree diameters and heights using copulas. Forest Syst. 2016;25(1):eSC07. https://doi.org/10.5424/fs/2016251-08487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Wang ML, Rennolls K, Tang SZ. Bivariate distribution modeling of tree diameters and heights: dependency modeling using copulas. For Sci. 2008;54(3):284–93. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/54.3.284.

  53. Wang ML, Upadhyay A, Lianjun Z. Trivariate distribution modeling of tree diameter, height, and volume. For Sci. 2010;56(3):290–300. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/56.3.290.

  54. Rupšys P, Petrauskas E. A linkage among tree diameter, height, crown base height, and crown width 4-variate distribution and their growth models: a 4-variate diffusion process approach. Forests. 2017;8(12):479. https://doi.org/10.3390/f8120479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Vastaranta M, Niemi M, Wulder MA, Joanne CW, Kimmo N, Paula L, et al. Forest stand age classification using time series of photogrammetrically derived digital surface models. Scand J Forest Res. 2016;31(2):194–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2015.1060256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Pond NC, Froese RE. Interpreting stand structure through diameter distributions. For Sci. 2015;61(3):429–37. https://doi.org/10.5849/forsci.14-056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. •• Hui GY, Gadow KV, Hu YB, Xu H. Structure-based forest management. Beijing: China Forestry Press; 2007. The introduction of structured-based forest management.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Meyer HA. Structure, growth and drain in balanced uneven-aged forests. J Forest. 1952;50(2):85–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/50.2.85.

  59. •• Hui GY, Gadow KV, Zhao ZH, Hu YB, Xu H, Li YF, et al. Principles of structure-based forest management. Beijing: China Forestry Press; 2016. A thorough introduction of the quantitative analysis of forest spatial structure based on nearest neighbors and structure-based forest management.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Li JQ. Forest ecology. Beijing: Higher Education Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Latham PA, Zuuring HR, Coble DW. A method for quantifying vertical forest structure. Forest Ecol Manag. 1998;104(1–3):157–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(97)00254-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Laurans M, Hérault B, Vieilledent G, Vincent G. Vertical stratification reduces competition for light in dense tropical forests. Forest Ecol Manag. 2014;329(8):79–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2014.05.059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Wilkes PTV. Assessment of forest canopy vertical structure with multi-scale remote sensing: from the plot to the large area. PhD dissertation Enschede: University of Twente; 2016. https://doi.org/10.3990/1.9789036540384.

  64. Hotanen JP, Maltamo M, Reinikainen A. Canopy stratification in peatland forests in Finland. Silva Fenn. 2006;40(1):53–82. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. An HJ. A study on the spatial structure of the broad-leaved Korean pine forest. PhD dissertation. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University. 2003.

  66. Assmann E. The principles of forest yield study. For Sci. 1971; 17(4):498–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/17.4.498.

  67. Kramer H. Waldwachstumslehre. Verlag Paul Parey Hamburg und Berlin. 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Hui GY, Zhang GQ, Zhao ZH, Hu YB, Liu WZ, Zhang SZ, et al. A new rule of π value of natural mixed forest optimal stand state. Sci Silvae Sinicae. 2016;52(5):1–8. https://doi.org/10.11707/j.1001-7488.20160501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. • Hui GY, Hu YB, Zhao ZH. Research Progress of structure-based forest management. For Res. 2018;31(1):85–93. https://doi.org/10.13275/j.cnki.lykxyj.2018.01.011 This paper reviews the latest progress of structure-based forest management from the perspectives of the basic theory, evaluation index system, and specific application example.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Blackman GE. Statistical and ecological studies in the distribution of species in plant communities. I. Dispersion as a factor in the study of changes in plant populations. Ann Bot. 1942;6(2):351–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a088411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Pielou EC. The use of point to plant distances in the study of the pattern of plant populations. J Ecol. 1959;47(3):607–13. https://doi.org/10.2307/2257293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Assuncao R. Testing spatial randomness by means of angles. Biometrics. 1994;50(2):531–7. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Zhang GQ, Hui GY. Analysis and application of polygon side distribution of Voronoi diagram in tree patterns. J Beijing For Univ. 2015;37(4):1–7. https://doi.org/10.13332/j.1000-1522.20140369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Kint V, Mvan M, Nachtergale L, Geudens G, Lust N. Spatial methods for quantifying forest stand structure development: a comparison between nearest-neighbor indices and variogram analysis. For Sci. 2003;49(1):36–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/49.1.36.

  75. Marchette DJ. Random graphs for statistical pattern recognition. New Jersey: John & Sons, lnc; 2004.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  76. Wiegand T, Moloney KA. Rings, circles, and null-models for point pattern analysis in ecology. Oikos. 2004;104(2):209–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12497.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. • Illian J, Penttinen A, Stoyan H, Stoyan D. Statistical analysis and modelling of spatial point patterns. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008. The detailed introduction of spatial point pattern

    Google Scholar 

  78. • Pommerening A, Gonçalves AC. Rodríguez-Soalleiro R. species mingling and diameter differentiation as second-order characteristics. Allg Forst Jagdztg. 2011;182:115–29. Mark mingling function and mark differentiation function are proposed.

    Google Scholar 

  79. •• Hui GY, Pommerening A. Analysing tree species and size diversity patterns in multi-species uneven-aged forests of Northern China. Forest Ecol Manag. 2014;316:125–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.029. Mark mingling function and mark differentiation function are applied.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. •• Wang HX, Peng H, Hui GY, Hu YB, Zhao ZH. Large trees are surrounded by more heterospecific neighboring trees in Korean pine broad-leaved natural forests. Sci Rep. 2018;8:9149. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-27140-7. The Cumulative marked mingling function is proposed and applied for different tree size classes. The large trees were more likely to have heterospecific neighbours.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. •• Hui GY, Gadow KV. Quantitative analysis of forest spatial structure. Beijing: China Science and Technology Press; 2003. The methods outlined in this paper introduce how to quantitatively analyze the forest spatial structure.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Zhao ZH, Hui GY, Hu YB. Testing the significance of different tree spatial distribution patterns based on the uniform angle index. Can J For Res. 2014;44(11):1419–25. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2014-0192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. •• Zhang GQ, Hui GY, Zhao ZH, Hu YB, Wang HX, Liu WZ, et al. Composition of basal area in natural forests based on the uniform angle index. Ecol Inform. 2018;45:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2018.01.002 This paper analyzes the proportion of the total basal area of 11 selected natural forests with specific patterns, being helpful in the design of planting patterns or harvesting schedules to improve the stability of planted monocultures.

  84. Li YF, Hui GY, Zhao ZH, Hu YB, Adler P. The bivariate distribution characteristics of spatial structure in natural Korean pine broad-leaved forest. J Veg Sci. 2012;23(6):1180–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2012.01431.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Chai ZZ, Sun CL, Wang DX, Liu WZ, Zhang CS. Spatial structure and dynamics of predominant populations in a virgin old-growth oak forest in the Qinling Mountains, China. Scand J Forest Res. 2016;32(1):19–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2016.1183703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. • Zhang LJ, Hui GY, Hu YB, Zhao ZH. Spatial structural characteristics of forests dominated by Pinus tabulaeformis Carr. PLoS One. 2018;13(4):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194710 This paper shows the specific application of the bivariate distribution method characterizing the forest spatial structure.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. • Bai C. Spatial structure parameters and the application on studying structure dynamics of natural Quercus aliena var. acuteserrata forest. PhD dissertation. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Forestry. 2016. The specific application of the trivariate distribution method characterizing the forest spatial structure.

  88. Wang HX, Hui GY, Zhang GQ, Li YF, Liu E. Stand density estimation based on the measurement of spatial structure. Chin J Appl Ecol. 2014;25(7):1912–8. https://doi.org/10.13287/j.1001-9332.20140429.003.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Mason WL, Connolly T, Pommerening A, Edwards C. Spatial structure of semi-natural and plantation stands of scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in Northern Scotland. Forestry. 2007;80(5):567–86. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpm038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. •• Wang HX, Zhang GQ, Hui GY, Li YF, Hu YB, Zhao ZH. The influence of sampling unit size and spatial arrangement patterns on neighborhood-based spatial structure analyses of forest stands. Forest Syst. 2016;25(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.5424/fs/2016251-07968 This paper shows the influence of different numbers of nearest neighbor trees on neighborhood-based structure parameters.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Laarmann D, Korjus H, Sims A, Stanturf JA, Kiviste A, Köster K. Analysis of forest naturalness and tree mortality patterns in Estonia. Forest Ecol Manag. 2009;258:S187–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.07.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. • Pommerening A, Gonçalves AC, Rodríguez-Soalleiro R. Species mingling and diameter differentiation as second-order characteristics. Allg Forst Jagdztg. 2011;182(7–8):115–29 Mark mingling function and mark differentiation function are proposed.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Petritan AM, Biris IA, Merce O, Turcu DO, Petritan IC. Structure and diversity of a natural temperate sessile oak (Quercus petraea L.)–European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) forest. Forest Ecol Manag. 2012;280:140–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2012.06.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. • Li YF, Ye SM, Hui GY, Hu YB, Zhao ZH. Spatial structure of timber harvested according to structure-based forest management. Forest Ecol Manag. 2014;322:106–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2014.02.042. The specific application of structure-based forest management and its structural characteristics of harvested timbers.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. • Li YF, Hui GY, Wang HX, Zhang GQ, Ye SM. Selection priority for harvested trees according to stand structural indices. IForest. 2017; 10(3): 561–566. doi: https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor2115-010. This paper shows the specific application of the bivariate distribution method characterizing the selection priority for harvested trees spatial structure.

  96. • Zhao ZH, Hui GY, Hu YB, Li YF, Li YH. Application of structure-based forest management in broadleaved Korean pine mixed forest. For Res. 2013;26(4):467–72. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-1498.2013.04.012 The specific application of structure-based forest management.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. • Vandekerkhove K, Vanhellemont M, Vrška T, Meyer P, Tabaku V, Armo T, et al. Very large trees in a lowland old-growth beech (Fagus sylvatica, L.) forest: density, size, growth and spatial patterns in comparison to reference sites in Europe. Forest Ecol Manag. 2018;417:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.02.033 This paper analyzed the density, diameter range, increment, mortality rate, and spatial distribution of very large trees.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Pretzsch H. Forest Dynamics, Growth, and Yield. In: Forest dynamics, growth, and yield. Berlin: Springer; 2009.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  99. Gavrikov V, Stoyan D. The use of mamerked point processes in ecological and environmental forest studies. Environ Ecol Stat. 1995;2(4):331–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00569362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. 【117】Abetz P, Klädtke J. The target tree management system. Forstw Cbl. 2002;121(2):73–82. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0337.2002.00073.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Lu YC, Lei XD, Hong LX, Ning JK, Liu XZ, Meng JH. Demonstrative application of the close-to-nature forest management planning system to forestry practice. J Southwest For Univ. 2010;30(2):1–6. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.2095-1914.2010.02.001.

  102. •• Hui GY, Wang Y, Zhang GQ, Zhao ZH, Bai C, Liu WZ. A novel approach for assessing the neighborhood competition in two different aged forests. Forest Ecol Manag. 2018;422:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.03.045 Structure-based competition index is introduced and proved to be useful for assessing the competitive status of individual trees in natural forests.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. • Wan P. Impacts of forest management methods on stand quality of natural Quercus aliena var. acuteserrata forest in Xiaolongshan, Gansu Province. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Forestry; 2018. The structure-based forest management is applied specifically, and it could improve forest quality effectively.

  104. • Wan P, Zhang GQ, Wang HX, Zhao ZH, Zhang GG, Hui GY, et al. Impacts of different forest management methods on the stand spatial structure of a natural Quercus aliena var. acuteserrata forest in Xiaolongshan, China. Ecol Inform. 2019;50:86–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2019.01.007 The influence of close-to-nature forest management, structured-based forest management, and secondary forest comprehensive silviculture on the forest spatial structure indicates that structure-based forest management can preferably optimize forest structure.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the “Plantation Structure Regulation and Stability Maintenance mechanism and its productivity effect” of the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFD0600203) and the “Research and Demonstration of Regional Forest Ecosystem Multi-objective Balanced Recovery and Re-establishment” of the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC050400501).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ganggang Zhang and Gangying Hui contributed equally to this work as first co-authors.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Center of Forest Management Engineering of State Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, 100083, China

    Gangying Hui

  2. Research Institute of Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing, 100091, China

    Gangying Hui, Ganggang Zhang, Zhonghua Zhao & Aiming Yang

Authors
  1. Gangying Hui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ganggang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhonghua Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aiming Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gangying Hui.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Gangying Hui, Ganggang Zhang, Zhonghua Zhao, and Aiming Yang declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Forest Management

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hui, G., Zhang, G., Zhao, Z. et al. Methods of Forest Structure Research: a Review. Curr Forestry Rep 5, 142–154 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-019-00090-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-019-00090-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation