Skip to main content

Notes: Comparison of Volume Growth Calculation Methods for Remeasured Horizontal Line Sampling

Buy Article:

$29.50 plus tax (Refund Policy)


In remeasured horizontal line sampling, there is only one commonly used method for estimating yield. However, there are several methods for estimating growth. Five different methods of growth estimation, based on how a given classification of tree could be treated in the growth estimation, were tested on four species groups (true fir and spruce, cypress, pine, mixed softwood and hardwood) in Taiwan. The classical method (also called the Strand method, or the compatible method), where tree status was ignored, had significantly larger mean squared error of the estimators than the others. There was no interaction between species group and method. The other four methods were very similar in the precision of estimate. Based on the ease of gathering data, the revised Purdue method is recommended. If volume and growth need to be compatible, the variable diameter factor method should be used for remeasured horizontal line sampling. For. Sci. 33(4):1062-1067.

Keywords: ANOVA; CFI; PPS sampling

Document Type: Miscellaneous

Affiliations: Research Assistant, Department of Forestry, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC

Publication date: 1987-12-01

More about this publication?
  • Forest Science is a peer-reviewed journal publishing fundamental and applied research that explores all aspects of natural and social sciences as they apply to the function and management of the forested ecosystems of the world. Topics include silviculture, forest management, biometrics, economics, entomology & pathology, fire & fuels management, forest ecology, genetics & tree improvement, geospatial technologies, harvesting & utilization, landscape ecology, operations research, forest policy, physiology, recreation, social sciences, soils & hydrology, and wildlife management.
    Forest Science is published bimonthly in February, April, June, August, October, and December.

    2015 Impact Factor: 1.702
    Ranking: 16 of 66 in forestry

    Also published by SAF:
    Journal of Forestry
    Other SAF Publications
  • Submit a Paper
  • Membership Information
  • Author Guidelines
  • Podcasts
  • Ingenta Connect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more