欢迎访问林业科学,今天是

林业科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 61 ›› Issue (12): 219-223.doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20250189

• 研究简报 • 上一篇    

森林连续清查中大径级保留木胸径测量数据偏差检验与分析

温雪香,杨学云,曾伟生*()   

  1. 国家林业和草原局林草调查规划院 北京 100714
  • 收稿日期:2025-04-02 出版日期:2025-12-25 发布日期:2026-01-21
  • 通讯作者: 曾伟生 E-mail:zengweisheng0928@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    中央财政专项“森林资源清查与动态监测”(2130208)。

Test and Analysis of Bias in DBH Measurement Data of Large Survivor Trees in Continuous Forest Inventory

Xuexiang Wen,Xueyun Yang,Weisheng Zeng*()   

  1. Academy of Inventory and Planning, National Forest and Grassland Administration Beijing 100714
  • Received:2025-04-02 Online:2025-12-25 Published:2026-01-21
  • Contact: Weisheng Zeng E-mail:zengweisheng0928@126.com

摘要:

目的: 检验森林连续清查中大径级保留木胸径测量数据是否存在偏差,为改进测量方法提供科学依据。方法: 基于北京市2020—2024年森林连续清查乔木林样地的2501株大径级保留木胸径测量数据,利用林木生长率模型和差异显著性检验方法,检验测量胸径生长量与预期胸径生长量之间的差异显著性,判定是否存在偏差并分析其偏差大小与间隔期长度(1~8年)的关系,再利用河北省的数据进行验证。结果: 北京市2020—2024年调查的大径级保留木胸径测量数据存在显著偏差,胸径生长量的总体偏差为38.0%,其中8年间隔期的偏差为21.9%,1年间隔期的偏差高达88.7%。河北省2020—2024年调查的大径级保留木胸径测量数据也证实,胸径生长量的总体偏差达50.0%,5组样地的偏差在32.8%~86.6%之间。结论: 大径级保留木的胸径测量数据均存在一定程度的正偏差,偏差大小与间隔期长度高度相关,间隔期越短,胸径测量偏差就越大。建议利用历次清查数据构建林木胸径生长率模型,根据模型预估生长量合理设定预警上限;对超过一定大小(如50 cm)的特大径级保留木,可直接用模型预估值作为胸径测量值。

关键词: 森林连续清查, 大径级保留木, 胸径, 偏差

Abstract:

Objective: The aim of this study is to test whether there is any bias in the DBH measurement data of large survivor trees in continuous forest inventory, and to provide scientific basis for improving the measurement method. Method: Based on the DBH measurement data of 2501 large survivor trees in forest sample plots from the continuous forest inventory in Beijing from 2020 to 2024, the tree growth rate models and difference significance test method were used to test whether the difference between measured and estimated DBH growth was significant and there was bias in DBH measurement data, and the relationship between the bias size and interval length (1–8 years) was analyzed, and the data in Hebei Province was employed for verification. Result: The results showed that there was a significant bias in the DBH measurement data of large survivor trees from the inventories in Beijing from 2020 to 2024. The total bias of measured DBH growth was 38.0%, among which the bias of 8-year interval data was 21.9%, and that of 1-year interval data was 88.7%. The DBH measurement data of large survivor trees in Hebei Province from 2020 to 2024 also confirmed that the total bias of measured DBH growth was 50.0%, and the bias of five sets of plots ranged from 32.8% to 86.6%. Conclusion: There are positive biases in the DBH measurement data of large-diameter survivor trees in some extent, and the size of bias is highly correlated with the interval length. The shorter the interval length, the greater the bias in DBH measurement data. It is suggested to develop tree DBH growth rate models based on previous inventory data, and reasonably set the upper limit for warning according to the predicted DBH growth. For very large survivor trees over a certain size (e.g. 50 cm), the predicted estimates from models can be directly used as the measured DBH.

Key words: continuous forest inventory, large survivor tree, diameter at breast height (DBH), bias

中图分类号: