Importance of tree basic density in biomass estimation and associated uncertainties: a case of three mangrove species in Tanzania

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Importance of tree basic density in biomass estimation and associated uncertainties : a case of three mangrove species in Tanzania. / Njana, Marco Andrew ; Meilby, Henrik; Eid, Tron; Zahabu, Eliakimu ; Malimbwi, Rogers Ernest .

In: Annals of Forest Science, Vol. 73, No. 4, 2016, p. 1073–1087.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Njana, MA, Meilby, H, Eid, T, Zahabu, E & Malimbwi, RE 2016, 'Importance of tree basic density in biomass estimation and associated uncertainties: a case of three mangrove species in Tanzania', Annals of Forest Science, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 1073–1087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-016-0583-0

APA

Njana, M. A., Meilby, H., Eid, T., Zahabu, E., & Malimbwi, R. E. (2016). Importance of tree basic density in biomass estimation and associated uncertainties: a case of three mangrove species in Tanzania. Annals of Forest Science, 73(4), 1073–1087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-016-0583-0

Vancouver

Njana MA, Meilby H, Eid T, Zahabu E, Malimbwi RE. Importance of tree basic density in biomass estimation and associated uncertainties: a case of three mangrove species in Tanzania. Annals of Forest Science. 2016;73(4):1073–1087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-016-0583-0

Author

Njana, Marco Andrew ; Meilby, Henrik ; Eid, Tron ; Zahabu, Eliakimu ; Malimbwi, Rogers Ernest . / Importance of tree basic density in biomass estimation and associated uncertainties : a case of three mangrove species in Tanzania. In: Annals of Forest Science. 2016 ; Vol. 73, No. 4. pp. 1073–1087.

Bibtex

@article{117dda81cac945be911c53804b334ed6,
title = "Importance of tree basic density in biomass estimation and associated uncertainties: a case of three mangrove species in Tanzania",
abstract = "Key messageAboveground and belowground tree basic densities varied between and within the three mangrove species. If appropriately determined and applied, basic density may be useful in estimation of tree biomass. Predictive accuracy of the common (i.e. multi-species) models including aboveground/belowground basic density was better than for common models developed without either basic density. However, species-specific models developed without basic density performed better than common models including basic density.ContextReducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest degradation and the role of sustainable forest management, conservation and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) initiatives offer an opportunity for sustainable management of forests including mangroves. In carbon accounting for REDD+, it is required that carbon estimates prepared for monitoring reporting and verification schemes should ensure that all known sources of uncertainty are minimised as much as possible. However, uncertainties of applying indirect method of biomass determination are poorly understood.AimsThis study aimed to assess importance of tree basic density in modelling aboveground and belowground biomass and examine uncertainties in estimation of tree biomass using indirect methods.MethodsThis study focused on three dominant mangrove species (Avicennia marina (Forssk.) Vierh, Sonneratia alba J. Smith and Rhizophora mucronata Lam.) in Tanzania. A total of 120 trees were destructively sampled for aboveground biomass, and 30 among them were sampled for belowground biomass. Tree merchantable volume and both aboveground and belowground basic densities were determined. Biomass models including basic density as a predictor variable were developed using the non-linear mixed-effects modelling approach.ResultsResults showed that both tree aboveground and belowground basic density varied significantly between sites between tree species, among individuals of the same species and between tree components. The use of tree- and component-specific aboveground basic density resulted in unbiased tree aboveground biomass estimates; however, uncertainties were high when using aboveground basic density values from the Global Wood Density (GWD) database. Predictive accuracy of the common models including aboveground/belowground basic density was better than for the common models developed previously without basic density. However, the species-specific models developed previously without basic density were superior to the common models including basic density developed in the present study.ConclusionTree aboveground and belowground basic densities were useful in modelling tree aboveground and belowground biomass, respectively. This is demonstrated by improved goodness of fit associated with inclusion of basic density. However, species-specific models developed without basic density performed better than common models including basic density. If appropriately determined and applied, basic density may be useful in estimation of tree biomass and hence contribute to improved accuracy of carbon stock estimates for REDD+ and sustainable management of mangroves in general.",
author = "Njana, {Marco Andrew} and Henrik Meilby and Tron Eid and Eliakimu Zahabu and Malimbwi, {Rogers Ernest}",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1007/s13595-016-0583-0",
language = "English",
volume = "73",
pages = "1073–1087",
journal = "Annals of Forest Science",
issn = "1286-4560",
publisher = "Springer-Verlag France",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Importance of tree basic density in biomass estimation and associated uncertainties

T2 - a case of three mangrove species in Tanzania

AU - Njana, Marco Andrew

AU - Meilby, Henrik

AU - Eid, Tron

AU - Zahabu, Eliakimu

AU - Malimbwi, Rogers Ernest

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Key messageAboveground and belowground tree basic densities varied between and within the three mangrove species. If appropriately determined and applied, basic density may be useful in estimation of tree biomass. Predictive accuracy of the common (i.e. multi-species) models including aboveground/belowground basic density was better than for common models developed without either basic density. However, species-specific models developed without basic density performed better than common models including basic density.ContextReducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest degradation and the role of sustainable forest management, conservation and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) initiatives offer an opportunity for sustainable management of forests including mangroves. In carbon accounting for REDD+, it is required that carbon estimates prepared for monitoring reporting and verification schemes should ensure that all known sources of uncertainty are minimised as much as possible. However, uncertainties of applying indirect method of biomass determination are poorly understood.AimsThis study aimed to assess importance of tree basic density in modelling aboveground and belowground biomass and examine uncertainties in estimation of tree biomass using indirect methods.MethodsThis study focused on three dominant mangrove species (Avicennia marina (Forssk.) Vierh, Sonneratia alba J. Smith and Rhizophora mucronata Lam.) in Tanzania. A total of 120 trees were destructively sampled for aboveground biomass, and 30 among them were sampled for belowground biomass. Tree merchantable volume and both aboveground and belowground basic densities were determined. Biomass models including basic density as a predictor variable were developed using the non-linear mixed-effects modelling approach.ResultsResults showed that both tree aboveground and belowground basic density varied significantly between sites between tree species, among individuals of the same species and between tree components. The use of tree- and component-specific aboveground basic density resulted in unbiased tree aboveground biomass estimates; however, uncertainties were high when using aboveground basic density values from the Global Wood Density (GWD) database. Predictive accuracy of the common models including aboveground/belowground basic density was better than for the common models developed previously without basic density. However, the species-specific models developed previously without basic density were superior to the common models including basic density developed in the present study.ConclusionTree aboveground and belowground basic densities were useful in modelling tree aboveground and belowground biomass, respectively. This is demonstrated by improved goodness of fit associated with inclusion of basic density. However, species-specific models developed without basic density performed better than common models including basic density. If appropriately determined and applied, basic density may be useful in estimation of tree biomass and hence contribute to improved accuracy of carbon stock estimates for REDD+ and sustainable management of mangroves in general.

AB - Key messageAboveground and belowground tree basic densities varied between and within the three mangrove species. If appropriately determined and applied, basic density may be useful in estimation of tree biomass. Predictive accuracy of the common (i.e. multi-species) models including aboveground/belowground basic density was better than for common models developed without either basic density. However, species-specific models developed without basic density performed better than common models including basic density.ContextReducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest degradation and the role of sustainable forest management, conservation and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) initiatives offer an opportunity for sustainable management of forests including mangroves. In carbon accounting for REDD+, it is required that carbon estimates prepared for monitoring reporting and verification schemes should ensure that all known sources of uncertainty are minimised as much as possible. However, uncertainties of applying indirect method of biomass determination are poorly understood.AimsThis study aimed to assess importance of tree basic density in modelling aboveground and belowground biomass and examine uncertainties in estimation of tree biomass using indirect methods.MethodsThis study focused on three dominant mangrove species (Avicennia marina (Forssk.) Vierh, Sonneratia alba J. Smith and Rhizophora mucronata Lam.) in Tanzania. A total of 120 trees were destructively sampled for aboveground biomass, and 30 among them were sampled for belowground biomass. Tree merchantable volume and both aboveground and belowground basic densities were determined. Biomass models including basic density as a predictor variable were developed using the non-linear mixed-effects modelling approach.ResultsResults showed that both tree aboveground and belowground basic density varied significantly between sites between tree species, among individuals of the same species and between tree components. The use of tree- and component-specific aboveground basic density resulted in unbiased tree aboveground biomass estimates; however, uncertainties were high when using aboveground basic density values from the Global Wood Density (GWD) database. Predictive accuracy of the common models including aboveground/belowground basic density was better than for the common models developed previously without basic density. However, the species-specific models developed previously without basic density were superior to the common models including basic density developed in the present study.ConclusionTree aboveground and belowground basic densities were useful in modelling tree aboveground and belowground biomass, respectively. This is demonstrated by improved goodness of fit associated with inclusion of basic density. However, species-specific models developed without basic density performed better than common models including basic density. If appropriately determined and applied, basic density may be useful in estimation of tree biomass and hence contribute to improved accuracy of carbon stock estimates for REDD+ and sustainable management of mangroves in general.

U2 - 10.1007/s13595-016-0583-0

DO - 10.1007/s13595-016-0583-0

M3 - Journal article

VL - 73

SP - 1073

EP - 1087

JO - Annals of Forest Science

JF - Annals of Forest Science

SN - 1286-4560

IS - 4

ER -

ID: 169759018