ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2022
Comparing methods that quantify forest disturbances in the United States' national forest inventory.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Forest disturbances play a critical role in ecosystem dynamics. However, the methods for quantifying these disturbances at broad scales may underestimate disturbances that affect individual trees. Utilizing individual tree variables may provide early disturbance detection that directly affects tree demographics and forest dynamics. The goals of this study were to (1) describe different methods for quantifying disturbances at individual tree and condition-level scales, (2) compare the differences between disturbance variables, and (3) provide a methodology for selecting an appropriate disturbance variable from national forest inventories for diverse applications depending on user needs. To achieve these goals, we used all the remeasurements available from the USDA Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) database since the start of the annual inventory for the lower 48 US states. Variables used included disturbance code, treatment code, agent of mortality, and damage code. Chi-square tests of independence were used to verify how the choice of the variable that represents disturbance affects its magnitude. Disturbed plots, as classified by each disturbance variable, were mapped to observe their spatial distribution. We found that the Chi-square tests were significant when using all the states and comparing each state individually, indicating that different results exist depending on which variable is used to represent disturbance. Our results will be a useful tool to help researchers measure the magnitude and scale of disturbance since the manner in which disturbances are categorized will impact forest management plans, national and international reports of forest carbon stocks, and sequestration potential under future global change scenarios.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35348883What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.