Characterising the diameter distribution of Sal plantations by comparing normal, lognormal and Weibull distributions at Tilagarh Eco-park, Bangladesh

References

• Al-Fawzan MA. 2000. Methods for estimating the parameters of the Weibull distribution. InterStat October 2000. Available at http://interstat.statjournals.net/YEAR/2000/articles/0010001.pdf [accessed 18 July 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Bahauddin M. 2008. Assessment of tree diversity of Tilagarh Eco-park, Sylhet. BSc(Hons) dissertation, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Sylhet, Bangladesh.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey RL, Dell TR. 1973. Quantifying diameter distributions with the Weibull function. Forest Science 19: 97–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bliss CL, Reinker KA. 1964. A lognormal approach to diameter distributions in even-aged stands. Forest Science 10: 350–360.
   Google Scholar
• Borders BE, Patterson WD. 1990. Projecting stand tables: a comparison of the Weibull diameter distribution method, a percentile-based projection method and a basal area growth projection method. Forest Science 36: 413–424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borders BE, Souter RA, Bailey RL, Ware KD. 1987. Percentile-based distributions characterize forest stand tables. Forest Science 33: 570–576.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooks JR, Borders BE, Bailey RL. 1992. Predicting diameter distributions for site prepared loblolly and slash pine plantations. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 16: 130–133.
   Google Scholar
• Bullock BP, Boone EL. 2007. Deriving tree diameter distributions using Bayesian model averaging. Forest Ecology and Management 242: 127–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cao QV, Burkhart HE. 1984. A segmented distribution approach for modeling diameter frequency data. Forest Science 30: 129–137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clutter JL, Bennett FA. 1965. Diameter distributions in old-field slash pine plantations. Report no. 13. n.p.: Georgia Forest Research Council.
   Google Scholar
• Clutter JL, Fortson JC, Piennar LV, Brister GH, Bailey RL. 1983. Timber management: a quantitative approach. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen AC. 1965. Maximum likelihood estimation in the Weibull distribution based on complete and on censored sample. Technometrics 7: 579–588.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Das S, Rahman MF, Reza NA, Latif MA. 1992. Tree volume tables for Sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn. F.) plantations of Bangladesh. Forest Inventory Series Bulletin no. 7. Chittagong: Bangladesh Forest Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Eerikainen 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. Forest Ecology and Management 172: 109–124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2010. Global forest resources assessment. Country report: Bangladesh. Rome: FAO.
   Google Scholar
• Garcia O. 1981. Simplified method of moments estimation for the Weibull distribution. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science 11: 304–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorgoso JJ, Gonzalez JGA, Rojo A, Arias JA. 2007. Modelling diameter distributions of Betula alba L. stands in northwestern Spain with two parameter Weibull function. Investigacin Agraria: Sistemas y Recursos Forestales 16: 113–123.
   Google Scholar
• Hafley WL, Schreuder HT. 1977. Statistical distributions for fitting diameter and height data in even-aged stands. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 7: 481–487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyink DM, Moser JW. 1983. A generalized framework for projecting forest yield and stand structure using diameter distributions. Forest Science 29: 85–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kayes I, Deb JC, Comeau P, Das S. 2012. Comparing normal, lognormal and Weibull distributions for fitting diameter data from Akashmoni plantations in the north-eastern region of Bangladesh. Southern Forests 74: 175–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leak WB. 1964. An expression of diameter distribution for unbalanced, uneven-aged stands and forests. Forest Science 10: 39–50.
   Google Scholar
• Lei Y. 2008. Evaluation of three methods for estimating the Weibull distribution parameters of Chinese pine (Pinus tabulaeformis). Journal of Forest Science 54: 566–571.
   Google Scholar
• Lenhart JD, Clutter JL. 1971. Cubic-foot yield tables for old-field loblolly pine plantations in the Georgia Piedmont. Report no. 22 - Series 3. n.p.: Georgia Forest Research Council.
   Google Scholar
• Lindsay SR, Wood GR, Woollons RC. 1996. Stand table modeling through the Weibull distribution and usage of skewness information. Forest Ecology and Management 81: 19–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu C, Beaulieu J, Pregent G, Zang SY. 2009. Application and comparison of six methods for predicting parameters of the Weibull function in unthinned Piecea glauca plantations. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 24: 67–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltamo M, Kangas A, Uttera J, Torniainen T, Saramaki J. 2000. Comparison of percentile based prediction methods and the weibull distribution in describing the diameter distribution in heterogeneous Scots pine stands. Forest Ecology and Management 133: 263–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nanang DM. 1998. Suitability of normal, Log-normal and Weibull distributions for fitting diameter distributions of neem plantations in northern Ghana. Forest Ecology and Management 103: 1–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neeff T, Dutra LV, Santos JRD, Freitas CDC, Araujo LS. 2003. Tropical forest stand table modeling from SAR data. Forest Ecology and Management 186: 159–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson TC. 1964. Diameter distribution and growth of loblolly pine. Forest Science 10: 105–115.
   Google Scholar
• Newton PF, Lei Y, Zhang SY. 2005. Stand-level diameter distribution yield model for black spruce plantations. Forest Ecology and Management 209: 181–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nord-Larsen T, Cao QV. 2006. A diameter distribution model for even-aged beech in Denmark. Forest Ecology and Management 231: 218–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pandey SK, Shukla RP. 2001. Regeneration strategy and plant diversity status in degraded Sal forests. Current Science 81: 95–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podlaski R. 2006. Suitability of the selected statistical distributions for fitting diameter data in distinguished development stages and phases of near natural mixed forest in the Swietorzyski National park (Poland). Forest Ecology and Management 236: 393–402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Razali NM, Wah YB. 2011. Power comparisons of Shapiro-Wilk, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson-Darling tests. Journal of Statistical Modeling and Analytics 2(1): 21–33.
   Google Scholar
• Rennolls K, Geary DN, Rollinson TJD. 1985. Characterizing diameter distributions by the use of the Weibull distribution. Forestry 58: 57–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouvinen S, Kuuluvainen T. 2005. Tree diameter distributions in natural and managed old Pinus sylvestris-dominated forests. Forest Ecology and Management 208: 45–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sagar R, Raghubanshi AS, Singh JS. 2003. Tree species composition, dispersion and diversity along a disturbance gradient in a dry tropical forest region of India. Forest Ecology and Management 186: 61–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sapkota IP, Tigabu M, Oden PC. 2009. Spatial distribution, advanced regeneration and stand structure of Nepalese Sal forests subject to disturbances of different intensities. Forest Ecology and Management 257: 1966–1975.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiver BD. 1988. Sample sizes and estimation methods for the Weibull distribution for unthinned slash pine plantations diameter distributions. Forest Science 34: 809–814.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Timilsina N, Ross MS, Heinen JT. 2007. A community analysis of Sal forests in the western Terai of Nepal. Forest Ecology and Management 241: 223–234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb EL, Sah RN. 2003. Structure and diversity of natural and managed Sal (Gaertn.f.) forest in the Terai of Nepal. Forest Ecology and Management 176: 337–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zasada M, Cieszewski CJ. 2005. A finite mixture distribution approach for characterizing tree diameter distributions by natural social class in pure even-aged Scots pine stands in Poland. Forest Ecology and Management 204: 145–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar