蒙古栎林分直径Weibull分布参数估计和预测方法比较

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20161008

摘要/Abstract

摘要： [目的] 比较Weibull直径分布参数估计和预测的不同方法在蒙古栎次生林经营中的适用性和精确性，为更好开展蒙古栎林经营提供理论依据和技术参数。[方法] 以吉林省157块蒙古栎纯林为研究对象，运用Kolmogorov-Smirnov（K-S）检验和误差指数比较最大似然法、矩法和百分位法估计和预测蒙古栎纯林分Weibull三参数的优劣。首先分析评价最大似然法、矩法和百分位法3种参数估计方法；然后为预测林分分布变化，建立参数预测法、参数回收法和参数百分位法的估计参数与林分年龄、平均高、优势高和林分密度等林分因子之间的回归模型；最后将回归方程计算得出的各参数代入Weibull分布，以预测直径分布变化趋势。[结果] 最大似然法、矩法和百分位法均较好地估计了蒙古栎纯林的直径分布，K-S检验的接受率在82.80%~96.18%之间，其中最大似然法的接受率最高；通过配对t检验比较3种估计方法，最大似然法的误差指数平均数在显著水平为0.05时显著性地小于其他2种方法。在预测蒙古栎林分直径分布时，通过K-S检验可知，百分位法的接受率为64.45%，均高于其他2种方法；通过配对t检验比较3种预测方法，参数百分位法在显著水平为0.1时比参数预测法和参数回收法更加精确。[结论] 在估计蒙古栎林分直径分布时，最大似然法较矩法和百分位法效果好；在预测蒙古栎林分直径分布时，参数百分位法较参数预测法和参数回收法效果好。

关键词: Weibull分布, 最大似然估计, 参数预测法, 参数回收法, 百分位法, 蒙古栎

Abstract: [Objective] In order to provide the references for forest management and tabulation,this paper evaluated maximum likelihood estimation method(MLE), moments method(MOM)and percentile method(PM)in estimating diameter distribution frequency of Quercus mongolica, and evaluated the direct parameter prediction method(PPM), moment-based parameter recovery method(PRM)and percentile-based parameter recovery method(PCT)in predicting diameter distribution frequency of Quercus mongolica.[Method] 157 plots of pure Quercus mongolica were taken as the research object. The differences of methods to estimate and predict diameter distribution of Quercus mongolica were valuated based on Kolmogorov-Smirnov(K-S) test and error index. Firstly,MLE,MOM and PM were analyzed and evaluated. Then the regression model were built by multiple regression method between parameters of three methods and stand variables including stand age, stand average height, dominant height and stand density. Finally, by regression model, Weibull parameters were calculated to predict diameter distribution.[Result] K-S test and error index were compared for three methods to estimate and predict three Weibull parameters. From the results, we can find that all three methods estimate diameter distribution of Quercus mongolica well and the acceptance rates of K-S test are from 82.80% to 96.18%, of which MLE is the highest. By t test, average error index of MLE is less than that of MOM and PM at the significant level of 0.05. When comparing three methods to predict distribution, we find that the acceptance rate of K-S test of PCT is 64.45% and highest in three methods. By t test, PCT predict is better than PPM and PRM at the significant level of 0.1.[Conclusion] MLE is better to estimate diameter distribution frequency than MOM and PM. Meanwhile, PCT is better to predict diameter distribution frequency than PPM and PRM.

Key words: Weibull distribution, maximum likelihood estimation, parameter prediction method, parameter recovery method, percentile method, Quercus mongolica

中图分类号:

S757

国红, 雷渊才. 蒙古栎林分直径Weibull分布参数估计和预测方法比较[J]. 林业科学, 2016, 52(10): 64-71.

Guo Hong, Lei Yuancai. Method Comparison of Weibull Function for Estimating and Predicting Diameter Distribution of Quercus mongolica Stands[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2016, 52(10): 64-71.

参考文献

陈昌雄, 黄宝龙, 林立法. 2014. 南平市延平区天然阔叶林直径分布的研究. 福建林业科技, 31(1):1-4.
(Chen C X, Huang B L, Lin L F. 2014. A study on diameter-distribution in natural broad-leaved forests in Yanping District of Nanping City. Journal of Fujian Forestry Science and Technology, 31(1):1-4.[in Chinese])
陈新美, 张会儒, 武纪成, 等. 2008. 柞树林直径分布模拟研究. 林业资源管理, (1):39-43.
(Chen X M, Zhang H R, Wu J C, et al. 2008. Study on diameter distribution simulation of Quercus mongolica stands. Forest Resources Management, (1):39-43.[in Chinese])
方精云, 菅诚. 1987. 利用Weibull分布函数预测林木的直径分布. 北京林业大学学报, 9(3):261-269.
(Fang J Y, Jian C. 1987. Estimating diameter distribution with the Weibull distribution function. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 9(3):261-269.[in Chinese])
方子兴. 1993. 韦布尔分布及其参数估计. 林业科学研究, 6(4):423-430.
(Fang Z X. 1993. Weibull distribution and the methods of its parameter estimation. Forest Research, 6(4):423-430.[in Chinese])
李荣伟, 覃志刚, 潘攀, 等. 2000. 杜仲人工林林分直径分布研究. 四川林业科技, 22(1):84-90.
(Li R W, Qin Z G, Pan P, et al. 2000. Diameter distribution of plantations of Eucommia uimoides. Journal of Sichuan Forestry Science and Technology, 22(1):84-90.[in Chinese])
孟宪宇. 1985. 使用Weibull分布对人工油松林直径分布的研究. 北京林学院学报, (1):30-40
(Meng X Y. 1985. A Study on diameter distribution of some artificial Pinus tabulaeformis stands by using the Weibull function. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, (1):30-40.[in Chinese])
孟宪宇, 邱水文. 1991. 长白落叶松直径分布收获模型的研究. 北京林业大学学报, 15(4):9-16.
(Meng X Y, Qiu S W. 1991. A study on the diameter distribution yield model of Changbai Larch. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 15(4):9-16.[in Chinese])
魏柏松, 邱水文. 1995. 湿地松人工林直径分布收获模型的研究. 江西林业科技, (6):1-3.
(Wei B S, Qiu S W. 1995. A study on the diameter distribution yield model of Pinus elliottii. Jiangxi Forestry Science and Technology, (6):1-3.[in Chinese]).
吴可, 殷鸣放, 周永斌, 等. 2010. 白石砬子自然保护区林木直径分布及其动态变化. 东北林业大学学报, 38(5):20-23.
(Wu K, Yin M F, Zhou Y B, et al. 2010. Diameter distribution and dynamic changes of trees in Baishilazi National Nature Reserve. Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 38(5):20-23.[in Chinese])
于顺利, 马克平, 陈灵芝. 2000. 中国北方蒙古栎林起源和发展的初步探讨. 广西植物, 5(2):131-137.
(Yu S L, Ma K P, Chen L Z. 2000. Preliminary discussion on the origin of Quercus mongolica forest in north China. Guihaia, 20 (2):131-137.[in Chinese]).
周国模, 徐土根. 1992. 杉木人工林直径分布的研究. 福建林学院学报, 12(4):399-405.
(Zhou G M, Xu T G. 1992. Studies on diameter distribution of Chinese Fir forest plantation in Kaihua County Zhejiang Province. Journal of Fujian College of Forestry, 12(4):399-405.[in Chinese])
张雄清, 雷渊才. 2009. 北京山区天然栎林直径分布的研究. 西北林学院学报, 24(6):1-5.
(Zhang X Q, Lei Y C. 2009. Studies on diameter distribution of Oak plants in Beijing. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 24(6):1-5.[in Chinese]).
Bailey R L, Dell T R. 1973. Quantifying diameter distributions with the Weibull function. Forest Science, 19(2):97-104.
Baldwin V C Jr, Feduccia D P. 1987. Loblolly pine growth and yield prediction for managed West Gulf plantations. USDA Forest Service Research Paper SO-236.
Borders B E, Souter R A, Bailey R L, et al. 1987. Percentile-based distributions characterize forest stand tables. Forest Science, 33(2):570-576.
Bowling E H, Burkhart H E, Burk T E, et al. 1989. A stand-level multispecies growth model for Appalachian hardwoods. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 19(4):405-412.
Burk T E, Burkhart H E. 1984. Diameter distributions and yields of natural stands of loblolly pine. School of Forestry and Wildlife Resources, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Va. Publ. FWS-1-84.
Burkhart H E, Strub M R. 1974. A model for simulation of planted loblolly pine stands//Fries J. Growth models for tree and stand simulation. Royal College of Forestry, Stockholm, Sweden, 128-135.
Cao Q V, Burkhart H, EandLemin R C Jr. 1982. Diameter distributions and yields of thinned loblolly pine plantations. School of Forestry and Wildlife Resources, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Va. Publ. FWS-1-82.
Clutter J L, Harms R W, Brister G H, et al. 1984. Stand structure and yields of site-prepared loblolly pine plantations in the lower coastal plain of the Carolinas, Georgia, and north Florida. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report SE-27.
Feduccia D P, Dell T R, Mann W F Jr, et al. 1979. Yields of unthinned loblolly pine plantations on cutover sites in the West Gulf region. USDA Forest Service Research Paper SO-148.
Hafley W L, Schreuder H T. 1977. Statistical distributions for fitting diameter and height data in even-aged stands. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 7(3):481-487.
Kilkki P, Maltamo M, Mykkanen R, et al. 1989. Use of the Weibull function in estimating the basal area DBH-distribution. Silva Fennica, 23(4):311-318.
Knoebel B R, Burkhart H E, Beck D E. 1986. A growth and yield model for thinned stands of yellow-poplar. Forest Science Monograph, 27(2):a0001-z0002.
Knowe S A. 1992. Basal area and diameter distribution models for loblolly pine plantations with hardwood competition in the piedmont and upper coastal plain. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, 16(2):93-98.
Leduc D J, Matney T G, Belli K L, et al. 2001. Predicting diameter distributions of longleaf pine plantations:a comparison between artificial neural networks and other accepted methodologies. USDA Forest Service Research Paper SRS-25.
Lei Y C. 2008. Evaluation of three methods for estimating the Weibull distribution parameters of Chinese pine (Pinus tabulaeformis), Journal of Forest Science, 54(12):566-571.
Little S N. 1983. Weibull diameter distributions for mixed stands of western conifers. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 13(1):85-88.
Liu C M, Zhang S Y, Lei Y C, et al. 2004. Evaluation of three methods for predicting diameter distributions of black spruce (Picea mariana) plantations in central Canada. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 34(12):2424-2432.
Lohrey R E, Bailey R L. 1976. Yield tables and stand structure for unthinned longleaf pine plantations in Louisiana and Texas. USDA Forest Service Research Paper SO-133.
Matney T G, Sullivan A D. 1982. Compatible stand and stock tables for thinned and unthinned loblolly pine stands. Forest Science, 28(1):161-171.
Matney T G, Ledbetter J R, Sullivan A D. 1987. Diameter distribution yield systems for unthinned cutover site-prepared slash pine plantations in southern Mississippi. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, 11(1):32-36.
Rennolls K, Geary D N, Rollinson T J D. 1985. Characterizing diameter distributions by the use of the Weibull distribution. Forestry, 58(1):58-66.
Siipilehto J. 1999. Improving the accuracy of predicted basal-area diameter distribution in advanced stands by determining stem number. Silva Fennica, 33(2):281-301.
Smalley G W, Bailey R L. 1974. Yield tables and stand structure for shortleaf pine plantations in Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia highlands. USDA Forest Service Research Paper SO-97.
Zarnoch S J, Feduccia D P, Baldwin J R, et al. 1991. Growth and yield predictions for thinned and unthinned slash pine plantations on cutover sites in the West Gulf region. USDA Forest Service Research Paper SO-264.

[1]	吕振刚, 李文博, 黄选瑞, 张志东. 气候变化情景下河北省3个优势树种适宜分布区预测[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(3): 13-21.
[2]	冯琦雅, 陈超凡, 覃林, 何亚婷, 王鹏, 段艺璇, 王雅菲, 何友均. 不同经营模式对蒙古栎天然次生林林分结构和植物多样性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(1): 12-21.
[3]	朱凯月, 王庆成, 吴文娟. 林隙大小对蒙古栎和水曲柳人工更新幼树生长和形态的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(4): 150-157.
[4]	赵洪刚, 孙耀星, 高金贵, 刘明利, 乐磊, 赵洪波, 刘彦龙. 激光切割蒙古栎合理技术参数组合优化[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(12): 112-119.
[5]	董晓璐, 孙耀星, 杜洪双, 赵雪, 蒋涛. 辊压预处理条件对蒙古栎干燥速率及纹孔结构的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(1): 103-111.
[6]	郑雅楠, 唐艳龙, 杨忠岐, 唐桦. 栗山天牛成虫补充营养方式及所取食的寄主树液中的主要化学成分[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(12): 156-160.
[7]	张超男, 赵西平, 梁芳, 刘高均, 吴珍, 李伟丽. 蒙古栎树冠不同部位树枝的导管特征的变化[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(10): 152-157.
[8]	黄秦军, 黄国伟, 苏晓华, 张新叶. 蒙古栎生长及生理特征的种源间差异[J]. 林业科学, 2013, 49(9): 72-78.
[9]	周国模;刘恩斌;施拥军;刘安兴;周宇峰. 基于最小尺度的浙江省毛竹生物量精确估算[J]. 林业科学, 2011, 47(1): 1-5.
[10]	江京辉吕建雄. 红锥和西南桦人工林木材应用于家具装饰材的初步研究*[J]. 林业科学, 2008, 44(7): 136-140.
[11]	江京辉吕建雄. 红椎和西南桦人工林木材的机械加工性能[J]. 林业科学, 2008, 44(10): 120-126.
[12]	李文英顾万春. 蒙古栎天然群体表型多样性研究[J]. 林业科学, 2005, 41(1): 49-56.
[13]	崔建国崔文山白瑞兴李德民兰显臻. 辽西半干旱地区栎树人工造林技术的研究[J]. 林业科学, 2003, 39(6): 68-76.
[14]	李文英顾万春周世良. 蒙古栎天然群体遗传多样性的AFLP分析[J]. 林业科学, 2003, 39(5): 29-36.
[15]	夏铭周晓峰赵士洞. 天然蒙古栎群体遗传多样性的RAPD分析[J]. 林业科学, 2001, 37(5): 126-133.