west virginia university division of forestry 3 rd forest vegetation simulator conference february...
TRANSCRIPT
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
33rdrd Forest Vegetation Simulator Forest Vegetation Simulator ConferenceConference
February 13-15, 2007February 13-15, 2007
Fort Collins, ColoradoFort Collins, Colorado
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Preliminary Results of the FVS Gypsy Moth Preliminary Results of the FVS Gypsy Moth Event Monitor Using Remeasurement Plot Event Monitor Using Remeasurement Plot
Data from Northern West Virginia. Data from Northern West Virginia.
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Matthew PerkowskiMatthew PerkowskiWest Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
John R. BrooksJohn R. BrooksWest Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
andand
Kurt W. GottschalkKurt W. Gottschalk
USDA Forest Service, Northern Research StationUSDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Brief Overview of Gypsy Moth Brief Overview of Gypsy Moth Event MonitorEvent Monitor
Program calculates susceptible, resistant, and immune basal area.
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Brief Overview of Gypsy Moth Brief Overview of Gypsy Moth Event MonitorEvent Monitor
Program calculates susceptible, resistant, and immune basal area.
Classifies stand susceptibility level, which impacts the severity of damage if an outbreak occurs.
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Brief Overview of Gypsy Moth Brief Overview of Gypsy Moth Event MonitorEvent Monitor
Program calculates susceptible, resistant, and immune basal area.
Classifies stand susceptibility level, which impacts the severity of damage if an outbreak occurs.
Assigns outbreak occurrence based on probability and random number generation. Probability of 0.10 for a 1-year cycle.
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Brief Overview of Gypsy Moth Brief Overview of Gypsy Moth Event MonitorEvent Monitor
Program calculates susceptible, resistant, and immune basal area.
Classifies stand susceptibility level, which impacts the severity of damage if an outbreak occurs.
Assigns outbreak occurrence based on probability and random number generation. Probability of 0.10 for a 1-year cycle.
Mortality and growth reductions are applied based on outbreak severity.
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Wild Wonderful West VirginiaWild Wonderful West Virginia
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
West Virginia University Research ForestWest Virginia University Research Forest
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
A Look at the Study AreaA Look at the Study Area
Stand 14 Relative DensityStand 14 Relative Density
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Perc
ent
BG SB CT SS SO BO WO CO RM BC RO
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Cove Hardwood SiteCove Hardwood Site
Stand 5 Relative DensityStand 5 Relative Density
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Perc
ent
BC BO BG SO WO DW HI RO CO SS BT YP RM
Gypsy Moth DamageGypsy Moth Damage
Stand 14 Stand 15West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
MethodsMethods
Gypsy moth introduction was set to 1985.Gypsy moth introduction was set to 1985.
Each stand was simulated 20 times in FVS using the Northeastern key Each stand was simulated 20 times in FVS using the Northeastern key component file. component file.
Outbreaks were stochastically determined for each simulation.Outbreaks were stochastically determined for each simulation.
Stands were simulated on a 1-year cycle over the fifteen year period.Stands were simulated on a 1-year cycle over the fifteen year period.
Mean values and standard errors of simulations are based on the Mean values and standard errors of simulations are based on the multiple trials.multiple trials.
In-growth was removed from the actual measurement data.In-growth was removed from the actual measurement data.
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Sanitation Thinning Stands and Paired ControlsSanitation Thinning Stands and Paired Controls
Residual TPA (Predicted-Actual)Residual TPA (Predicted-Actual)
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
Res
idu
al
TP
A
Stand 1
Stand 2
Stand 4
Stand 5
Stand 6
Stand 7
Stand 8
Presalvage Thinning Stands and Paired Controls Presalvage Thinning Stands and Paired Controls
Residual TPA (Predicted-Actual)Residual TPA (Predicted-Actual)
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
Res
idua
l T
PA
Stand 9
Stand 10
Stand 11
Stand 12
Stand 13
Stand 14
Stand 15
Stand 16
Sanitation Thinning Stands and Paired Controls Sanitation Thinning Stands and Paired Controls
ResidualResidual Basal Area Per Acre (Predicted-Actual)Basal Area Per Acre (Predicted-Actual)
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
Res
idua
l B
AA
C
Stand 1
Stand 2
Stand 4
Stand 5
Stand 6
Stand 7
Stand 8
Presalvage Thinning Stands and Paired ControlsPresalvage Thinning Stands and Paired Controls
Residual Basal Area Per Acre (Predicted-Actual)Residual Basal Area Per Acre (Predicted-Actual)
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
Res
idua
l B
AA
C
Stand 9
Stand 10
Stand 11
Stand 12
Stand 13
Stand 14
Stand 15
Stand 16
Stand 7 TPA vs. TimeStand 7 TPA vs. Time
0
50
100
150
200
250
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
TP
A
Measured Predicted
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Stand 8 TPA vs. TimeStand 8 TPA vs. Time
0
50
100
150
200
250
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
TP
A
Measured Predicted
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Stand 7 Basal Area Per Acre vs. TimeStand 7 Basal Area Per Acre vs. Time
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
BA
AC
(ft
2 )
Measured Predicted
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
Stand 8 Basal Area Per Acre vs. TimeStand 8 Basal Area Per Acre vs. Time
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
BA
AC
(ft
2 )
Measured Predicted
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
ConclusionsConclusionsTrees Per Acre
Lower mortality prediction by the model resulted in an overestimation of TPA throughout the projection period.
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
ConclusionsConclusionsTrees Per Acre
Lower mortality prediction by the model resulted in an overestimation of TPA throughout the projection period.
Presalvage Thinning and Control Stands
Prediction error was greater for control stands.
The model overestimated TPA at the time of mortality, this prediction error decreased over the simulation period.
Trees Per AcreLower mortality prediction by the model resulted in an overestimation of TPA throughout the projection period.
Presalvage Thinning and Control Stands
Prediction error was greater for control stands.
The model overestimated TPA at the time of mortality, this prediction error decreased over the simulation period.
Sanitation Thinning and Control Stands
Stands exhibiting low mortality had increasing TPA error over the projection period.
Stands experiencing the highest actual mortality exhibited an early increase in TPA estimation error, but unlike the response noted for the Presalvage treatment, this prediction error did not exhibit a major decrease over time.
ConclusionsConclusions
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
ConclusionsConclusions
Basal Area The model overestimated BA at the time of mortality and gradually began to
underestimate at the end of the projection period.
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry
ConclusionsConclusions
Basal Area The model overestimated BA at the time of mortality and gradually began to
underestimate at the end of the projection period.
Stands exhibiting low mortality were underestimated at an increasing rate over the simulation period.
Questions?
West Virginia UniversityWest Virginia University
Division of ForestryDivision of Forestry