ArticlePlants (Basel, Switzerland)2024
"Mortality, or not mortality, that is the question …": How to Treat Removals in Tree Survival Analysis of Central European Managed Forests.
Article in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tree mortality is an objective forest health criterion and is particularly suitable for long-term and large-scale studies of forest condition. However, it is impossible to determine actual tree mortality in Central European managed forests where trees are removed for various reasons. In this case, the only way to approximate tree mortality is to define the range in which it occurs. This can be carried out by including in the mortality calculations either dead trees that remain in the stand at the end of the assessment period or additionally trees that have been removed from the stand. We used data from the annual forest monitoring surveys in Poland from 2009 to 2022 for pine, spruce, oak and birch to perform a survival analysis in which we included all removals or sanitary cuttings either as censored or complete observations. The differences between the calculated mortality rates were significant, indicating the importance of how removals are treated in the analysis. To assess which method used for mortality calculation was more appropriate, we compared values for last recorded defoliation and severity of damage from live, dead and thinned or salvaged trees. For all species studied, significant differences were found between dead trees or trees removed by sanitation cuts and living trees or trees removed by thinning, suggesting that not only dead trees remaining in the forest, but also trees removed by sanitation cuts, should be considered when calculating mortality in managed stands. We also recommend the use of survival analysis in forest monitoring as a routine method for assessing the health of stands.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.