An evaluation of various probability density functions for predicting diameter distributions in pure and mixed-species stands in Türkiye
Abstract
Aim of study: To assess the capabilities of some infrequently used probability density functions (PDFs) in modeling stand diameter distributions and compare their performance to that of typical PDFs.
Area of study: The research was conducted in pure and mixed stands located in the OF Planning Unit of the Trabzon Forest Regional Directorate in Northern Türkiye.
Material and methods: A set of 17,324 DBH measurements, originating from 608 sample plots located in stands of even-aged and pure and mixed stands, were obtained to represent various stand conditions such as site quality, age, and stand density in OF planning unit forests. In order to ensure a minimum of 30-40 trees in each sample plot, the plot sizes ranged from 0.04 to 0.08 hectares, depending on stand density. The parameters of PDFs include Weibull with 3P and 2P, Rice, Rayleigh, Normal, Nagakami, Lognormal with 2P and 3P, Lévy with 1p and 2P, Laplace, Kumaraswamy, Johnson’s SB, and Gamma were estimated using the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) prediction procedure. Additionally, the goodness of fit test was combined with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (statistically at a 95% confidence interval).
Main results: The Rayleigh distribution was the model that best explained the diameter distributions of pure and mixed forests in the OF Planning Unit (as Fit Index (FI) = 0.6743 and acceptance rate 96.4% based on the result of one sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test).
Research highlights: Less commonly used PDFs such as Rice, Nakagami, and Kumaraswamy-4P demonstrated superior predictive performance compared to some traditional distributions widely used in forestry, including Weibull-2P and -3P, Johnson’s SB, Normal, Gamma-3P, and Lognormal-3P.
Downloads
References
Akgül FG, Şenoğlu B, 2023. Comparison of wind speed distributions: a case study for Aegean coast of Turkey. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization and Environmental Effects, 45(1): 2453-2470. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2019.1663309
Aslam M, Tahir M, Hussain Z, Al-Zahrani B, 2015. A 3-component mixture of Rayleigh distributions: properties and estimation in bayesian framework. PLoS ONE 10(5): e0126183. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126183
Bailey RL, Dell TR, 1973. Quantifying diameter distributions with the Weibull function. Forest Sci 19(2): 97-104.
Bettinger P, Izlar B, Harris T, Cieszewski C, Conrad J, Greene D, et al., 2022. Handbook of Land and Tree Measurements. University of Georgia, Harley Langdale, Jr. Center for Forest Business 325 pp.
Binoti DHB, Binoti MLMS, Leite HG, Fardin L, Oliveira JC, 2012. Probability density functions for description of diameter distribution in thinned stands of Tectona grandis. Cerne 18(2): 185-196. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-77602012000200002
Bolat F, Ercanlı İ, 2017. Modeling diameter distribution by using Weibull function in forests located Kestel-Bursa. Kastamonu Univ J Forest Fac 17(1): 107-115. https://doi.org/10.17475/kastorman.296907
Cao QV, 2022. Predicting future diameter distributions given current stand attributes. Can J For Res 52(4): 561-567. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2021-0216
Carus S, 1996. Variation of diameter distribution of even-aged Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky.) stands by site and age. İstanbul Univ J Forest Fac A 46(2): 171-182.
Ciceu A, Pitar D, Badea O, 2021. Modeling the diameter distribution of mixed uneven-aged stands in the South Western Carpathians in Romania. Forests 12(7): 958. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12070958
Diamantopoulou MJ, Özçelik R, Crecente-Campo F, Eler Ü, 2015. Estimation of Weibull function parameters for modelling tree diameter distribution using least squares and artificial neural networks methods. Biosyst Eng 133: 33-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2015.02.013
Duan AG, Zhang JG, Zhang XQ, He CY, 2013. Stand diameter distribution modelling and prediction based on Richards function. PloS one 8(4): e62605. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062605
El-Sagheer RM, 2019. Estimating the parameters of Kumaraswamy distribution using progressively censored data. J Test Eval 47(2): 905-926. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE20150393
Ercanlı İ, Yavuz H, 2010. The probability density functions to diameter distributions for Oriental Spruce and Scots Pine mixed stands. Kastamonu Univ J Forest Fac 10(1): 68-83.
Ercanlı İ, Bolat F, Kahriman A, 2016. Modelling stand diameter distribution by using 3-Parameters Weibull probability density function Sarıçiçek-Vezirköprü Forest Enterprise. Anatolian J For Res 2(1-2): 13-24.
Gadow K von, Hui G, 1999. Modelling forest development (Vol. 57). Springer Science & Business Media, The Netherlands, 213 pp.
Guo H, Lei X, You L, Zeng W, Lang P, Lei Y, 2022. Climate-sensitive diameter distribution models of larch plantations in north and northeast China. For Ecol Manage 506: 119947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119947
Harter HL, Moore AH, 1965. Maximum-likelihood estimation on the parameters of Gamma and Weibull populations from complete and from censored samples. Technometrics 7(4): 639-643. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1965.10490304
Jiang K, Chen X, Zhu Q, Chen L, Xu D, Chen B, 2018. A novel simulation model for nonstationary rice fading channels. Wire Commun Mob Comput 2018(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8086073
Kahriman A, Yavuz H, 2011. The probability density functions to diameter distributions for Scots Pine and Oriental Beech mixed stands. Artvin Çoruh Univ J Forest Fac 12(2): 109-125.
Knopova V, Schilling RL, 2013. A note on the existence of transition probability densities of Lévy processes. In Forum Mathematicum 25(1): 125-149. https://doi.org/10.1515/form.2011.108
Korkmaz MÇ, Chesneau C, Korkmaz ZS, 2022. The unit folded normal distribution: a new unit probability distribution with the estimation procedures, quantile regression modeling, and educational attainment applications. J Reliab Stat Stud 15(1): 261-298. https://doi.org/10.13052/jrss0974-8024.15111
Liu A, Li F, Zhang L, Jin X, 2014. Modeling diameter distributions of mixed species forest stands. Scand J For Res 29(7): 653-663. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2014.960891
Liu Y, Kozubowski TJ, 2015. A folded Laplace distribution. J Stat Distrib Appl 2(1): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40488-015-0033-9
Lu F, Zhang L, 2010. Evaluation of parameter estimation methods for fitting spatial regression models. Forest Sci 56(5): 505-514.
Mathwave, 2014. Who should use easyfit? http://www.mathwave.com/easyfit-distribution-fitting.html [Dec 2014].
Michalowicz JV, Nichols JM, Bucholtz F, 2013. Handbook of differential entropy(1st ed.). CRC Press, New York, 244 pp. https://doi.org/10.1201/b15991
Ogana FN, Osho JSA, Gorgoso-Varela JJ, 2018. An approach to modeling the joint distribution of tree diameter and height data. J Sust Forest 37(5): 475-488. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2017.1422434
Özçelik R, Fonseca TF, Parresol BR, Eler Ü, 2016. Modeling the diameter distributions of Brutian Pine stands Using Johnson's SB distribution. Forest Sci 62(6): 587-593. https://doi.org/10.5849/forsci.15-089
Özdemir GA, 2016. Modelling of diameter distributions of Douglas (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) stands. J Fac Forest İstanbul Univ 66(2): 548-558. https://doi.org/10.17099/jffiu.69022
Packard KC, 2000. Modeling tree diameter distributions for mixed-species conifer forests in the Northeast United States. Master Thesis. State Univ of New York College Environ Sci Forest. 129 pp.
Podlaski R, 2008. Characterization of diameter distribution data in near-natural forests using the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution. Can J For Res 38(3): 518-527. https://doi.org/10.1139/X07-190
Pogoda P, Ochal W, Orzel S, 2019. Modeling diameter distribution of Black Alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.) stands in Poland. Forests 10(5): 412. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10050412
Poudel KP, Cao QV, 2013. Evaluation of methods to predict Weibull parameters for characterizing diameter distributions. Forest Sci 59(2): 243-252. https://doi.org/10.5849/forsci.12-001
Reynolds MR, Burk TE, Huang WC, 1988. Goodness-of-fit tests and model selection procedures for diameter distribution models. Forest Sci 34: 373-399.
Sakıcı OE, 2021. A comparison of diameter models for uneven-aged Kazdağı fir stands in Kastamonu region of Turkey. Globcer'21, Online conference, June 2-5. pp: 578-590.
Sakıcı OE, Gülsunar M, 2012. Diameter distribution of Bornmullerian fir in mixed stands. Kastamonu Univ J Forest Fac, Special issue: 263-270.
Sakıcı OE, Dal E, 2021. Modelling diameter distributions and determination of their relationships with some stands characteristics for Scots Pine Stands in Kastamonu Region. J Bartın Fac Forest 23(3): 1026-1041. https://doi.org/10.24011/barofd.1015603
Schmidt LN, Sanquetta MNI, McTague JP, Da Silva GF, Filho CVF, Sanquetta CR, et al., 2020. On the use of Weibull distribution in modelling and describing diameter distributions of clonal eucalypt stands. Can J For Res 50(10): 1050-1063. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2020-0051
Schütz JP, Rosset C, 2020. Performances of different methods of estimating the diameter distribution based on simple stand structure variables in monospecific regular temperate European forests. Ann Forest Sci 77: 47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-020-00951-3
Sedighi F, Taheri AK, Heidari SKA, 2021. Analyzing the diameter distribution of Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb Stands of Northeast Iran, using probability distribution functions. Ecopersia 9(2): 69-77.
Seki M, 2022. Determination of relationships between stand variables and parameters of Weibull function for Fagus orientalis Lipsky Stands. Kastamonu Univ J Forest Fac 22(1): 68-77. https://doi.org/10.17475/kastorman.1095907
Siipilehto J, Mehtätalo L, 2013. Parameter recovery vs. parameter prediction for the Weibull distribution validated for Scots pine stands in Finland. Silva Fennica 47(4): 1-22. https://doi.org/10.14214/sf.1057
Sivrikaya F, Karakaş R, 2020. Modeling diameter distributions in Önsen natural Stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) stands. Turkish J Forest 21(4): 364-372. https://doi.org/10.18182/tjf.756785
Sönmez T, Günlü A, Karahalil U, Ercanlı İ, Şahin A, 2010. Diameter distribution modelling for pure Oriental spruce. III National Black Sea Forestry Congress, Artvin (Türkiye), May 20-22, pp: 388-398.
Sönmez T, Karahalil U, Günlü A, Şahin A, 2015. Evaluation of diameter distribution of even-aged and pure Oriental spruce (Picea orientalis (L.) Link.) stands by site index and age classes. Kastamonu Univ J Forest Fac 15(1): 26-36. https://doi.org/10.17475/kuofd.88616
Sun S, Cao QV, Cao T, 2019. Characterizing diameter distributions for uneven-aged Pine-Oak mixed forests in the Qinling Mountains of China. Forests 10(7): 596. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10070596
Vanclay JK, 1994. Modelling forest growth and yield: Applications to mixed tropical forests. Cab International, Wallingford, UK, 312 pp.
Waldy J, Kershaw JA, Weiskittel A, Ducey MJ, 2022. Diameter distribution model development of tropical hybrid Eucalyptus clonal plantations in Sumatera, Indonesia: A comparison of estimation methods. New Zeal J Forest Sci 52: 1. https://doi.org/10.33494/nzjfs522022x151x
Yang SI, Cao QV, Shoch DT, Johnson T, 2022. Characterizing stand and biomass tables from diameter distribution models: A case study for mixed-hardwood forests in eastern Tennessee, USA. Forest Sci 68(1): 8-16. https://doi.org/10.1093/forsci/fxab051
Yousof HM, Korkmaz MÇ, Hamedani GG, İbrahim M, 2022. A novel chen extension: theory, characterizations and different estimation methods. Eur J Stat 2: 1-20. https://doi.org/10.28924/ada/stat.2.1
Copyright (c) 2023 CSIC_INIA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
