Bob, I guess everything boils down to one general observation. It seems to me that looking at all the numbers and formulas you have generated, a remarkable accomplishment that I could not have done, the biggest factor contributing noise to your results is the variation in the amount and height of the basal flare of the trunk. Without the basal flare, I believe the results from your equations would demonstrate a much cleaner pattern of shape characteristics related to the age and growing conditions of the tree. So I think that incorporating the girth at the root collar into your formulas will serve to only add more noise to the overall results. I understand that your goal is to find physical parameters that can be measured with a tape to remove variations in interpretations between different observers of the overall tree trunk shape. You want objective measurements, rather than subjective assessments. I think the process of using the girth at the root collar creates more problems than is gained by it being an objective measurement. I am not sure how to generate a protocol that would allow different observers to assess the overall shape of a tree trunk and obtain the same results, but this is what I think is a better option than using the girth at the root collar. I hope you and everyone else realizes that the vehemence of my arguments is simply meant to persuade and not meant otherwise.
Ed "Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry I could not travel both. " Robert Frost (1874–1963). Mountain Interval. 1920. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
