Ed, Will, all;

The first solution that comes to mind for the area dependency of the
Rucker Index is to produce Rucker Index-Area curves.  I'm borrowing
this idea from the ecology literature where a analogous problem occurs
with species richness, the total number of species.  Species richness
for a site is dependent on the size of the site, and the number of
species found, even for a small site, is dependent on the sampling
effort, especially where species are often cryptic such as with fungi.
 To address those problems, plots are constructed with species
richness on the y-axis and either area or sampling effort, which could
be number of days sampled, time spent sampling, or number of samples,
on the x-axis.  A curve is then fit to the data, so the species
richness for different sized sites or different sampling intensities
can be interpolated or extrapolated.  The curve usually takes a
logarithmic form, increasing rapidly at first but then appearing to
approach an asymptote.

We could apply that same strategy to Rucker Indices by first
calculating the Rucker Index for the core of the site, then expanding
the area until new trees enter the Rucker Index and recalculating, and
repeating that process until the entire site was included.  The
results would be plotted with RI on the y-axis and area on the x-axis
a curve fit to that data.  When comparing sites, we could then
interpolate the RI of the large site at the area of the smaller site,
or give an estimated RI for all sites at some standard area.

Jess

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Edward Forrest Frank
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Will,
>
> I have thought and thought about the acreage issue.  That is one reason I
> encouraged you and Jess to look at subdivisions of GSMNP to reduce the size
> of the block that is considered a site. Thus you can have RI for subsites
> more comparable in size with other locations and still have a combined RI
> for the entire park.   Even within a defined site, you would need to know
> where all the trees were located because if the site was looked at in terms
> of acreage, you would want to define the least amount of acreage that would
> include the greatest Rucker Index - sort of a balance.  Then there is the
> question of shape.  In an ideal forest the area could be defined by a circle
> as a minimum edge, maximum area shape, but in practice, the boundaries we
> consider are irregular.  They may follow a narrow valley, or a drainage
> basin, or a square patch of remnant forest.  If people have ideas of how to
> do it, it certainly is worth talking about.  As it is, I would suggest that
> the "site" be defined as a discrete area whose boundaries are established by
> the person or group involved in the measurement (The boundaries should be
> described as best possible).  This would include both productive and less
> productive areas.  More productive areas could be defined as a subsite, or a
> separate site.  Then along with the Rucker Index an acreage for the "site"
> could be listed to provide a good context for the size of the area versus
> the rucker index numbers.  It is information that can added and is useful,
> but on the other hand some of the best locations may have a high Rucker
> Index in a relatively small area - I am not really convinced that a Rucker
> Index per size of an area would be informative.
>
> Ed
>
>
> Join me in the Eastern Native Tree Society at
> http://www.nativetreesociety.org
> and in the Primal Forests - Ancient Trees Community at:
> http://primalforests.ning.com/
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Will Blozan
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 12:27 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Rucker Index Thoughts
>
> Ed,
>
>
>
> Great thoughts. I support the reasoning for the R5 and R20 indices. If only
> there was some way to incorporate the area needed to obtain a certain Rucker
> Value. An R5 acre, R10 acre, R20 acre index?

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org

You are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENTSTrees" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to