Bayesian inference for Johnson's SB and Weibull distributions

References

• Bailey RL, Dell T. 1973. Quantifying diameter distributions with the Weibull function. Forest Sci. 19:97–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braswell BH, Sacks WJ, Linder E, Schimel DS. 2005. Estimating diurnal to annual ecosystem parameters by synthesis of a carbon flux model with eddy covariance net ecosystem exchange observations. Glob Chang Biol. 11:335–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorazio RM, Rodriguez DT. 2012. A Gibbs sampler for Bayesian analysis of site-occupancy data. Methods Ecol Evol. 3(6):1093–1098.
   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. Forest Sci. 55:367–373.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilks WR, Best NG, Tan KKC. 1995. Adaptive rejection metropolis sampling within Gibbs sampling. J R Stat Soc Ser C (Appl Stat). 44:455–472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilks WR, Wild P. 1992. Adaptive rejection sampling for Gibbs sampling. J R Stat Soc Ser C (Appl Stat). 41:337–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorgoso-Varela JJ, Grandas-Arias J. 2007. Modelling diameter distributions of betula alba l. stands in northwest Spain with the two-parameter Weibull function. For Syst. 16:113–123.
   Google Scholar
• Gorgoso-Varela JJ, Ponce RA, Cámara-Obregón A, Rodríguez-Puerta F. 2021. Modeling diameter distributions with six probability density functions in Pinus halepensis Mill. plantations using low-Density airborne laser scanning data in aragón (Northeast Spain). Remote Sens. 13(12):2307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorgoso-Varela JJ, Rojo A, Cámara-Obregón A, Diéguez-Aranda U. 2012. A comparison of estimation methods for fitting Weibull, Johnson's SB and beta functions to Pinus pinaster, Pinus radiate and Pinus sylvestris stands in northwest Spain. For Syst. 21:446–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorgoso-Varela JJ, Rojo A, Cámara-Obregón A, Diéguez-Aranda U. 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
• Green EJ, Roesch Jr FA, Smith AF, Strawderman WE. 1994. Bayesian estimation for the three-parameter Weibull distribution with tree diameter data. Biometrics. 50 (1), 254–269.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hafley W, Buford M. 1985. A bivariate model for growth and yield prediction. For Sci. 31:237–247.
   Google Scholar
• Hafley W, Schreuder H. 1977. Statistical distributions for fitting diameter and height data in even-aged stands. Can J For Res. 7(3):481–487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeffreys H. 1961. Theory of probability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson NL. 1949. Systems of frequency curves generated by methods of translation. Biometrika. 36(1–2):149–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerns BK, Westlind DJ, Day MA. 2017. Season and interval of burning and cattle exclusion in the southern Blue Mountains, Oregon: Overstory tree height, diameter and growth. USDA Forest Service Research Data Archive, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2017-0041.
   Google Scholar
• Kiviste A, Nilson A, Hordo M, Merenäkk M. 2003. Diameter distribution models and height-diameter equations for Estonian forests. In: Amaro A, Reed D, Soares P, editors. Modelling Forest Systems. CAB International; p. 169–179.
   Google Scholar
• Knoebel BR, Burkhart HE. 1991. A bivariate distribution approach to modeling forest diameter distributions at two points in time. Biometrics. 3:241–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kudus KA, Ahmad M, Lapongan J. 1999. Nonlinear regression approach to estimating Johnson SB parameters for diameter data. Can J For Res. 29(3):310–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Link WA, Eaton MJ. 2012. On thinning of chains in MCMC. Methods Ecol Evol. 3(1):112–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Kangas A, Uuttera J, Torniainen T, Saramäki J. 2000. Comparison of percentile based prediction methods and the Weibull distribution in describing the diameter distribution of heterogeneous Scots pine stands. For Ecol Manage. 133(3):263–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Puumalainen 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(1–4):284–295.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marto M, Palma J, Mateus A, Tomé M. 2009. Computer program for estimation of Johnson's SB parameters using a parameter recovery method. Publicações Científicas Forchange PC-X/2009. Centro de Estudos Florestais, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Lisboa.
   Google Scholar
• Mateus A, Tomé M. 2011a. 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(2):325–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mateus A, Tomé M. 2011b. Estimating the parameters of the Johnson's SB distribution using an approach of method of moments. AIP Conf Proc. 1389:1483–1485.
   Google Scholar
• Nagatsuka H, Kamakura T, Balakrishnan N. 2013. A consistent method of estimation for the three-parameter Weibull distribution. Comput Stat Data Anal. 58:210–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman LJ, Kotz S, Balakrishnan N. 1994. Continuous univariate distributions. Vol. I. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Ogana FN. 2018. Evaluation of four methods of fitting Johnson's SBB for height and volume predictions. J For Sci. 64(4):187–197.
   Google Scholar
• Ogana FN, Itam ES, Osho JSA. 2017. Modeling diameter distributions of Gmelina arborea plantation in Omo forest reserve, Nigeria with Johnson's SB. J Sustain For. 36(2):121–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özçelik R, Fidalgo Fonseca TJ, Parresol BR, Eler Ü. 2016. Modeling the diameter distributions of Brutian Pine stands using Johnson's SB distribution. Forest Science. 62(6):587–593.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palahí M, Pukkala T, Blasco E, Trasobares A. 2007. Comparison of beta, Johnson's SB, Weibull and truncated Weibull functions for modeling the diameter distribution of forest stands in Catalonia (north-east of Spain). Eur J For Res. 126(4):563–571.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parresol BR. 2003. Recovering parameters of Johnson's SB distribution. Res. Pap. SRS-31. Asheville, NC: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 9 p. 31.
   Google Scholar
• Pogoda P, Ochał W, Orzeł S. 2020. Performance of kernel estimator and Johnson Sb function for modeling diameter distribution of black alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn.) stands. Forests. 11(6):634.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretzsch H. 2009. Forest dynamics, growth, and yield. In: Forest dynamics, growth and yield. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. 2018. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Rennolls K, Wang M. 2005. A new parameterization of Johnson's SB distribution with application to fitting forest tree diameter data. Can J For Res. 35(3):575–579.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robert CP, Casella G. 2010. Introducing Monte Carlo methods with R. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Schreuder HT, Hafley WL. 1977. A useful bivariate distribution for describing stand structure of tree heights and diameters. Biometrics. 35:471–478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scolforo JRS, Tabai FCV, de Macedo RLG, Acerbi Jr FW, de Assis AL. 2003. SB distribution's accuracy to represent the diameter distribution of Pinus taeda, through five fitting methods. For Ecol Manage. 175(1–3):489–496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith RL, Naylor J. 1987. A comparison of maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimators for the three-parameter Weibull distribution. J Royal Statist Soc Ser C Appl Statist. 36:358–369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teimouri M, Abdolahnezhad K, Ghalandarayeshi Sh. 2020b. Evaluation of estimation methods for parameters of the probability functions in tree diameter distribution modeling. Environ Resour Res. 8:25–40.
   Google Scholar
• Teimouri M, Cao VC. 2020. Statistical inference for Birnbaum–Saunders and Weibull distributions fitted to grouped and ungrouped data. Environ Resour Res. 8:97–108.
   Google Scholar
• Teimouri M, Doser JW, Finley AO. 2020a. ForestFit: An R package for modeling plant size distributions. Environ Model Softw. 131(2):104668.
   Google Scholar
• Teimouri M, Podlaski R. 2020. Modelling tree's diameter using mixture of skewed Student's related distributions. Can J For Res. 50(10):1039–1049.
   Web of Science ®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(7):1340–1347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Packard KC, Zhang Q, Xiao X, Braswell B, Linder E, Baret F, Moore III B. 2005. Estimating light absorption by chlorophyll, leaf and canopy in a deciduous broadleaf forest using MODIS data and a radiative transfer model. Remote Sens Environ. 99(3):357–371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang X, Lei Y, Cao QV. 2010. Compatibility of stand basal area predictions based on forecast combination. For Sci. 56:552–557.
   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(6):928–935.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar