A comparison between derivative and numerical optimization methods used for diameter distribution estimation

References

• Bailey RL, Dell TR. 1973. Quantifying diameter distributions with the Weibull function. For Sci. 19(2):97–104.
   Google Scholar
• Bliss CI, Reinker KA. 1964. A log-normal approach to diameter distributions in even-aged stands. For Sci. 10:350–360.
   Google Scholar
• Cao Q. 2004. Predicting parameters of a Weibull function for modeling diameter distribution. For Sci. 50(5):682–685.
   Google Scholar
• Cao L, Zhang Z, Yun T, Wang G, Ruan H, She G. 2019. Estimating tree volume distributions in subtropical forests using airborne LiDAR data. Remote Sens. 11:97. doi:10.3390/rs11010097.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubey SD. 1967. Some percentile estimators for Weibull parameters. Technometrics. 9:119–129. doi: 10.1080/00401706.1967.10490445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eerikäinen K, Maltamo M. 2003. A percentile based basal area diameter distribution model for predicting the stand development of Pinus kesiya plantations in Zambia and Zimbabwe. For Ecol Manage. 172:109–124. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00443-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonseca TF, Marques CP, Parresol BR. 2009. Describing maritime pine diameter distributions with Johnson’s sb distribution using a new all-parameter recovery approach. For Sci. 55(4):367–373.
   Google Scholar
• Gorgoso JJ, Rojo A, Camara-Obregon A, Dieguez-Arenda U. 2012. A comparison of estimation methods for fitting Weibull, Johnson’s SB and beta functions to Pinus pinaster, Pinus radiata and Pinus sylvestris stands in Northwest Spain. For Syst. 21(3):446–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorgoso-Varela JJ, Ogana FN, Alonso Ponce R. 2019. Evaluation of direct and indirect methods for modelling the joint distribution of tree diameter and height data with the bivariate Johnson’s SBB function of forest stands. For Syst. 28(1):e004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorgoso-Varela JJ, Rojo-Alboreca A. 2014. A comparison of estimation methods for fitting Weibull and Johnson’s SB functions to pedunculate oak (Quercus robur) and birch (Betula pubescens) stands in northwest Spain. For Syst. 23(3):500–505.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorgoso-Varela JJ, Rojo-Alboreca A, Afif-Khouri E, Barrio-Anta M. 2008. Modelling diameter distributions of birch (Betula alba L.) and pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.) stands in Northwest Spain with the beta distribution. Invest Agrar Sist Recur For. 17:271–281. doi: 10.5424/srf/2008173-01041
   Google Scholar
• Hafley WL, Buford MA. 1985. A bivariate model for growth and yield prediction. For Sci. 31:237–247.
   Google Scholar
• Hafley WL, Schreuder HT. 1977. Statistical distributions for fitting diameter and height data in even-aged stands. Can J For Res. 7(3):481–487. doi: 10.1139/x77-062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ige PO. 2017. Inter-tree competition models using Gmelina arborea Roxb. stands in Omo forest reserve, Ogun State, Nigeria. Ph.D Thesis, Department of Forest Resources Management, University of Ibadan, Nigeria. 173p.
   Google Scholar
• Ige PO, Akinyemi GO, Abi EA. 2013. Diameter distribution models for tropical natural forest trees in Onigambari forest reserve. J Nat Sci Res. 3(12):14–22.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen M. 1995. Trees commonly cultivated in southeast Asia: illustrated field guide. RAP publication 38. FAO, Bangkok, Thailand, p. 93.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson NL. 1949. Systems of frequency curves generated by methods of translation. Biometrika. 36:149–176. doi: 10.1093/biomet/36.1-2.149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoebel BR, Burkhart HE. 1991. A bivariate distribution approach to modeling forest diameter distributions at two points in time. Biometrics. 47:241–253. doi: 10.2307/2532509
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li F, Zhang L, Davis CJ. 2002. Modeling the joint distribution of tree diameters and heights by bivariate generalized beta distribution. For Sci. 48(1):47–58.
   Google Scholar
• Lindsay SR, Wood GR, Woollons RC. 1996. Modelling the diameter distribution of forest stands using the Burr distribution. J Appl Stat. 23(6):609–620. doi: 10.1080/02664769623973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loetsch F, Zöhrer F, Haller KE. 1973. Forest inventory 2. Munich: Verlagsgesellschaft. BLV.
   Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Puumalaine J, Päivinen R. 1995. Comparison of beta and Weibull functions for modelling basal area diameter distribution in stands of Pinus sylvestris and Picea abies. Scand J For Res. 10:284–295. doi: 10.1080/02827589509382895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mateus A, Tomé M. 2011. Modelling the diameter distribution of eucalyptus plantations with Johnson’s SB probability density function: parameters recovery from a compatible system of equations to predict stand variables. Ann For Sci. 68:325–335. doi: 10.1007/s13595-011-0037-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayrinck RC, Filho ACF, Ribeiro A, de Oliveira XM, de Lima RR. 2018. A comparison of diameter distribution models for Khaya ivorensis A. chev. Plantations in Brazil. Southern For: J For Sci 80:373–380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehtatalo L. 2013. Forest biometrics with examples in R. Univ. of Eastern Finland. School of Computing, 406pp.
   Google Scholar
• MMAMRM. 2011. Cuarto Inventario Forestal Nacional [Fourth National Forest Inventory]. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Medio Rural y Marino, Galicia, Spain, pp. 52. [in Spanish].
   Google Scholar
• Nanos N, Montero G. 2002. Spatial prediction of diameter distributions models. For Ecol Manag. 161(1–3):147–158. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00498-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelder JA, Mead R. 1965. A simplex algorithm for function minimization. Comput J. 7:308–313. doi:10.1093/comjnl/7.4.308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson TC. 1964. Diameter distribution and growth of loblolly pine. For Sci. 10:105–115.
   Google Scholar
• Ogana FN, Gorgoso-Varela JJ. 2015. Comparison of estimation methods for fitting Weibull distribution to the natural stand of Oluwa Forest Reserve, Ondo State, Nigeria. J Res For Wild Environ. 7(2):81–90.
   Google Scholar
• Ogana FN, Gorgoso-Varela JJ, Osho JSA. 2018b. Modelling joint distribution of tree diameter and height using Frank and Plackett copulas. J For Res.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ogana FN, Itam ES, Osho JSA. 2017. Modelling diameter distributions of Gmelina arborea plantation in Omo Forest Reserve, Nigeria with Johnson’s SB. J Sustain For. 36:121–133. doi: 10.1080/10549811.2016.1263575
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ogana FN, Osho JSA, Gorgoso-Varela JJ. 2015. Comparison of beta, gamma and Weibull distributions for characterising tree diameter in Oluwa Forest Reserve, Ondo State, Nigeria. J Nat Sci Res. 5(4):28–36.
   Google Scholar
• Ogana FN, Osho JSA, Gorgoso-Varela JJ. 2018a. Application of extreme value distribution for assigning optimum fractions to distributions with boundary parameters: an eucalyptus plantations case study. Siberian J For Sci. 4:39–48.
   Google Scholar
• Özçelik R, Fidalgo-Fonseca T, Parresol BR, Eler Ü. 2016. Modeling the diameter distributions of Brutian pine stands using Johnson’s SB distribution. For Sci. 62(6):587–593. doi: 10.5849/forsci.15-089
   Google Scholar
• Palahí M, Pukkala T, Blasco E, Trasobares A. 2007. Comparison of beta, Johnson’s SB, Weibull and truncated Weibull functions for modelling the diameter distribution of forest stands in Catalonia (northeast of Spain). Eur J For Res. 126:563–571. doi: 10.1007/s10342-007-0177-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parresol BR. 2003. Recovering parameters of Johnson’s SB distribution. US For. Ser. Res. Paper SRS-31. 9 pp. Retrieved from http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/5455.
   Google Scholar
• Podlaski R. 2008. Characterization of diameter distribution data in near-natural forests using the Birnbaum–Saunders distribution. Can J For Res. 38:518–527. doi: 10.1139/X07-190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podlaski R. 2016. Highly skewed and heavy-tailed tree diameter distributions: approximation using the gamma shape mixture model. Can J For Res. 46(11):1275–1283. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2016-0175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podlaski R. 2017. Forest modeling: the gamma shape mixture model and simulation of tree diameter distributions. Ann For Sci. 74(2):29. doi: 10.1007/s13595-017-0629-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pogoda P, Ochał W, Orzeł S. 2019. Modeling diameter distribution of Black Alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.) Stands in Poland. Forests. 10:412. doi:10.3390/f10050412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. 2019. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• SAS Institute Inc. 2004. SAS/STAT 9.1 user’s guide. Cary, NC.
   Google Scholar
• Schnur GL. 1934. Diameter distributions for old-field loblolly pine stands in Maryland. J Agric Res. 49:731–743.
   Google Scholar
• Scolforo JRS, Vitti FC, Grisi RL, Acerbi F, De Assis AL. 2003. SB distribution’s accuracy to represent the diameter distribution of Pinus taeda, through five fitting methods. For Ecol Manage. 175:489–496. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00183-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sghaier T, Cañellas I, Calama R, Sánchez-González M. 2016. Modelling diameter distribution of Tetraclinis articulata in Tunisia using normal and Weibull distributions with parameters depending on stand variables. iForest – Biogeosci For. 9:702–709. doi: 10.3832/ifor1688-008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tewari VP, Gadow Kv. 1999. Modelling the relationship between tree diameters and heights using SBB distribution. For Ecol Manage. 119:171–176. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(98)00520-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang M. 2005. Distributional modelling in forestry and remote sensing. PhD thesis, University of Greenwich, UK, 187pp.
   Google Scholar
• Wang M, Rennolls K. 2005. Tree diameter distribution modeling: Introducing the logit – logistic distribution. Can J For Res. 35:1305–1313. doi: 10.1139/x05-057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang M, Rennolls K. 2007. Bivariate distribution modeling with tree diameter and height data. For Sci. 53(1):16–24.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Packard KC, Liu C. 2003. A comparison of estimation methods for fitting Weibull and Johnson’s SB distributions to mixed spruce–fir stands in northeastern North America. Can J For Res. 33:1340–1347. doi: 10.1139/x03-054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou B, McTague JP. 1996. Comparison and evaluation of five methods of estimation of the Johnson System parameters. Can J For Res. 26:928–935. doi: 10.1139/x26-102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zöhrer F. 1969. The application of the beta function for best fit of stem diameter distributions in inventories of tropical forest. Mitt. Bundesforsch-.anst. Forst-u. Holzwirtsch. Reinbek/Hamburg. 74:279–293.
   Google Scholar