Jon, The figures I mentioned are for the old-growth portion. From the description of the study area in the reference # 1 (see above): "An old stand of very large trees on alluvial flats within this biogeographic section was selected for study." That study finds the volume of coarse woody debris (inlcuding standing and fallen dead logs) to be 797 m3/ha and biomass 262 t/ha. Thus, dead aboveground material increases total volume and biomass values only 5.6-6.8%.
Regarding the sign (if it really was 7 times higher), my guess is that they consider all the western coniferous forests belong to the same biome, and they simply have not had figures for big forests outside North America. - Kouta > I may have paraphrased the sign incorrectly, but it may have also been > referring to all of the dead trees on the ground as well. Also I > believe it specifically meant the contiguous old-growth portion of > Rockefeller Forest, if that matters. Nevertheless, agreed that even > 2-3.7 is amazing. > Cheers, > Jon > > 2009/9/19 Kouta Räsänen <[email protected]>: > > > > > Jon, > > > I agree, Rockefeller Forest is a truly amazing place. However, the > > sign you saw: > > >> I read a sign in the park that said Rockefeller Forest(the contiguous > >> old-growth portion of the park) contains seven times the biomass per acre, > >> living and dead, of any other biome on earth. > > > seems to be overstated. Some figures: > > > - a plot in Rockefeller Forest: total tree biomass 3857-4642 metric > > tons per hectare, Sequoia stem biomass 3442-4143 t/ha (1) > > - a plot in Goat Marsh RNA, Washington (mostly Noble Fir): stem > > biomass 1687 t/ha (2) > > > In terms of wood volume: > > > - Rockefeller Forest: Sequoia stem volume 9059 - 10903 cubic meters > > per hectare (1) or 8071 m3/ha (3) > > - a plot in Giant Forest (mostly Giant Sequoia): stem volume 3331 m3/ > > ha (3) > > - the plot in Goat Marsh RNA: stem volume 3120 m3/ha (3) > > - Wallaby Creek stand in Kinglake National Park, Victoria, Australia > > (mostly Eucalyptus regnans): total volume 3270 m3/ha, main trunk > > volume 2973 m3/ha (4) > > > The Wallaby Creek stand is mentioned to have highest measured total > > wood volume outside western North America (4). Unfortunately it burned > > earlier this year (5). > > > Thus, biomass per acre in Rockefeller forest seems to be 2-3 times > > (not 7 times) higher than any other biome. Or if they consider all the > > western coniferous forests belong to the same biome, then 2.7-3.7 > > times higher than any other biome. Of course, 2-3.7 time higher is > > incredible too. > > > Hopefully BVP is reading this thread and provide corrections and > > updates. > > > Sources: > > (1)http://www.springerlink.com/content/r4718838620l2713/fulltext.pdf > > (2)http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/publications/pnw_1972_franklin001/Supplement... > > (3)http://article.pubs.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/RPAS/rpv?hm=HInit&afpf=x00-050.pdf... > > (4) Van Pelt, Sillett & Nadkarni (2004): Quantifying and Visualizing > > Canopy Structure in Tall Forests: Methods and a Case Study. In Lowman > > & Rinker (eds.): Forest Canopies, second edition. Elsevier. > > (5)http://www.parkweb.vic.gov.au/1park_display.cfm?park=121 > > > - Kouta --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
