Differences in Optimal Growth Equations For White Oak in the Interior Highlands

This article is part of a larger document. View the larger document here.

  • Authors: Bragg, Don C.; Guldin, James M.
  • Publication Year: 2003
  • Publication Series: Miscellaneous Publication
  • Source: In: Van Sambeek, J.W.; Dawson, J.O.; Ponder, F., Jr.; Loewenstein, E.F.; Fralish, J.S., eds. 2003. Proceedings, 13th Central Hardwood Forest conference; 2002 April 1-3; Urbana, IL. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-234. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station. 565 p. [Peer-reviewed paper from oral presentation].

Abstract

Optimal growth equations are fundamental to many ecological simulators, but few have been critically examined. This paper reviews some of the behavior of the Potential Relative Increment (PRI) approach. Models for white oak were compared for Arkansas River Valley (ARV), Boston Mountains (BoM), Ouachita Mountains (OM), and Ozark Highlands (OH) ecological sections of the Interior Highlands. Noticeable divergence in equation shape was observed in the section and pooled models. PRI curves for the ARV and OM models predicted poor optimal growth, especially in the smallest size classes. The OH equation predicted high juvenile performance but limited large tree optima while the BoM model peaked at intermediate diameters. These distinctions may arise from differences in physiological potential between sections, or, more likely, from inadequate sample distributions. Our study supports pooling to improve optimal growth modeling if phenotypic conditions do not vary substantially.

  • Citation: Bragg, Don C.; Guldin, James M. 2003. Differences in Optimal Growth Equations For White Oak in the Interior Highlands. In: Van Sambeek, J.W.; Dawson, J.O.; Ponder, F., Jr.; Loewenstein, E.F.; Fralish, J.S., eds. 2003. Proceedings, 13th Central Hardwood Forest conference; 2002 April 1-3; Urbana, IL. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-234. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station. 565 p. [Peer-reviewed paper from oral presentation].
  • Posted Date: April 1, 1980
  • Modified Date: August 22, 2006
  • Requesting Print Publications

    Publication requests are subject to availability. Fiscal responsibility limits the hardcopies of publications we produce and distribute. Electronic versions of publications may be downloaded, distributed and printed.

    Please make any requests at pubrequest@fs.fed.us.

    Publication Notes

    • This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.
    • Our online publications are scanned and captured using Adobe Acrobat. During the capture process some typographical errors may occur. Please contact the SRS webmaster if you notice any errors which make this publication unusable.
    • To view this article, download the latest version of Adobe Acrobat Reader.