Is the reverse J-shaped diameter distribution universally applicable in European virgin beech forests?

By Christina Westphal, Nils Tremer, G. Oheimb, J. Hansen, Klaus von Gadow, W. Härdtle. 2006

179 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Insect Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9233a4bb8b20f3bf858f8d5cb6d4cfcffe330d67

How researchers see this paper

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

In Insect Science

1. Lianjun Zhang
2. T. Pukkala
3. E. Lähde
4. O. Laiho

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. J. Gove
2. E. Lähde
3. O. Laiho
4. Lianjun Zhang
5. T. Pukkala
6. Mark J. Ducey
7. W. Leak
8. Rafal Podlaski

Citations in the corpus

• Developmental phases in a temperate natural spruce-fir-beech forest: determination by a supervised classification method (2010, methodology): “Some exceptions are the studies of Lorimer and Krug (1983) and Westphal et al. (2006), where a Weibull function was mostly successfully used to model diameter distributions.”
• Optimizing the structure and management of uneven-sized stands of Finland (2010, background): “Their diameter distribution is a descending curve, which, however, may have small peaks in larger diameter classes (Westphal et al., 2006).”
• Rotated sigmoid structures in managed uneven-aged northern hardwood stands: a look at the Burr Type III distribution (2008, background): “In Europe, the wisdom of strong management adherence to reverse J conditions is also being questioned, while rotated sigmoid structures are evidently beginning to be considered (Kerr and O’Hara, 2000; Westphal et al., 2006).”