Articles containing the keyword 'crown architecture'

The architecture of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) was studied in an eight-year-old progeny test. The measurements included characteristics of crown structure, spatial distribution of shoots and yield components. The spatial distribution of shoots showed striking between-tree differences, and two extreme distribution patterns were detected. One represented a non-layered structure with a vertically relative even shoot distribution, and the other a layered structure with a vertically highly uneven shoot distribution.

Close correlations existed between several components of tree architecture and it is suggested that changes in the phenotypic architecture in Scots pine follow an epigenetic pattern, which enables the prediction of adaptational changes in structural components. The structural characteristics related to high above-ground biomass were a long crown, high total shoot length, high number of branches per whorl and big shoots of low needle density occupying a big share of the crown volume.

The PDF includes a summary in Finnish.

• Kuuluvainen, E-mail: tk@mm.unknown
• Kanninen, E-mail: mk@mm.unknown
• Salmi, E-mail: js@mm.unknown

Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) has been applied to estimate forest wood volume based on detailed 3D tree reconstructions from point cloud data. However, sources of uncertainties in the point cloud data (alignment and scattering errors, occlusion, foliage...) and the reconstruction algorithm type and parameterisation are known to affect the reconstruction, especially around finer branches. To better understand the impacts of these uncertainties on the accuracy of TLS-derived woody volume, high-quality TLS scans were collected in leaf-off conditions prior to destructive harvesting of two forest-grown common ash trees (Fraxinus excelsior L.; diameter at breast height ~28 cm, woody volume of 732 and 868 L). We manually measured branch diameters at 265 locations in these trees. Estimates of branch diameters and tree volume from Quantitative Structure Models (QSM) were compared with these manual measurements. The accuracy of QSM branch diameter estimates decreased with smaller branch diameters. Tree woody volume was overestimated (+336 L and +392 L) in both trees. Branches measuring < 5 cm in diameter accounted for 80% and 83% of this overestimation respectively. Filtering for scattering errors or improved coregistration approximately halved the overestimation. Range filtering and modified scanning layouts had mixed effects. The small branch overestimations originated primarily in limitations in scanner characteristics and coregistration errors rather than suboptimal QSM parameterisation. For TLS-derived estimates of tree volume, a higher quality point cloud allows smaller branches to be accurately reconstructed. Additional experiments need to elucidate if these results can be generalised beyond the setup of this study.

• Demol, CAVElab – Computational and Applied Vegetation Ecology, Department of Environment, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium; PLECO – Plants and Ecosystems, Faculty of Science, Antwerp University, Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610 Wilrijk, Belgium https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5492-2874 E-mail: miro.demol@ugent.be
• Wilkes, UCL Department of Geography, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK; NERC National Centre for Earth Observation (NCEO), UK https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6048-536X E-mail: p.wilkes@ucl.ac.uk
• Raumonen, Mathematics, Tampere University, FI-33101 Tampere, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5471-0970 E-mail: pasi.raumonen@tuni.fi
• Krishna Moorthy, CAVElab – Computational and Applied Vegetation Ecology, Department of Environment, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6838-2880 E-mail: Sruthi.KrishnaMoorthyParvathi@ugent.be
• Calders, CAVElab – Computational and Applied Vegetation Ecology, Department of Environment, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4562-2538 E-mail: kim.calders@ugent.be
• Gielen, PLECO – Plants and Ecosystems, Faculty of Science, Antwerp University, Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610 Wilrijk, Belgium https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4890-3060 E-mail: bert.gielen@uantwerpen.be
• Verbeeck, CAVElab – Computational and Applied Vegetation Ecology, Department of Environment, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1490-0168 E-mail: hans.verbeeck@ugent.be

• Hou, Department of Life Sciences, Shangqiu Normal University, Shangqiu, China E-mail: yh@nn.cn
• Qu, Department of Life Sciences, Shangqiu Normal University, Shangqiu, China E-mail: jq@nn.cn
• Luo, School of Environment and Life Sciences, Kaili University, Kaili, China E-mail: zl@nn.cn
• Zhang, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Urbanization and Ecological Restoration, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China, and University of Eastern Finland, School of Forest Sciences, Joensuu, Finland E-mail: cz@nn.cn
• Wang, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Urbanization and Ecological Restoration, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China, and University of Eastern Finland, School of Forest Sciences, Joensuu, Finland E-mail: kywang@re.ecnu.edu.cn