Comparison of a physiological model and a statistical model for prediction of growth and yield in boreal forests

By J. Matala, Jari Hynynen, J. Miina, R. Ojansuu, H. Peltola, Risto Sievänen, H. Väisänen, Seppo Kellomäki. 2003

133 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Forest Growth and Yield Modeling (2011, methodology): “For example, Matala et al. (2003) found that a process-based and a statistical model gave similar predictions of relative growth rate, but the statistical model was more stable in its predictions and not as sensitive to initial stand conditions and silvicultural treatments.”
Models for supporting forest management in a changing environment (2011, methodology): “It was based on FinnFor (a PBM) and Motti (a growth and yield model), and annual stem volume increment was the transfer variable (Matala et al., 2003).”
Growing Plantation Forests (2010, background): “Many works discuss both older and more recent approaches to forest modelling (e.g. Vanclay 1995; Battaglia and Sands 1998; Mäkelä et al. 2000; Peng 2000a, b; Davis et al. 2001; Le Roux et al. 2001; Avery and Burkhart 2002; Porté and Bartelink 2002; Mäkelä 2003; Matala et al. 2003; Almeida et al. 200”