Content uploaded by Jerome K Vanclay
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jerome K Vanclay on Apr 16, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Indian Forester, 143 (9) : 852-855, 2017
http://www.indianforester.co.in ISSN No. 0019-4816 (Print)
ISSN No. 2321-094X (Online)
ABSTRACT
Forest management faces a contradiction: superb decision support systems are available, but only for few forests because
the necessary requisites (data, computers, advisors) often remain elusive. Thus many forests and managers are hampered
by a lack of information to guide management, and this handicap falls particularly heavily on community and smallholder
forests. Whilst the best decision support requires detailed and reliable data, useful advice can nonetheless be provided
with simple models that are easily calibrated and have been shown to be robust in diverse situations. This paper presents
the underlying framework for a set of simple models that are easily calibrated and reliable under plantation scenarios. It
illustrates the calibration and use of these models for several tropical plantation species, demonstrates the implications
that can be inferred, and discusses the data required to calibrate these models for new situations.
Key words: Robust models, Data, Framework, Smallholder forest, Plantation scenarios.
This paper presents the underlying framework for a set of simple models that are easily calibrated and
reliable under plantation scenarios.
Introduction
Many forest owners need better information and
advice about their management options, especially for
small private forests where private research is impractical.
Experienced silviculturalists can often formulate good
advice by subjectively appraising the size and variation of
trees within a stand, but many small holders and their
advisors lack that experience, and may be reluctant to thin
trees to waste without compelling evidence.
One problem is that these smallholders and their
advisors don't have access to good models to assist them
to explore options. Worldwide, the availability of
plantation growth models is unequal – there are
thousands of models for a few select species (such as
Pinusradiata), but thousands of species for which there
are no models. This lack of advice is particularly severe for
smallholder forests and for plantings of native species.
A few models (such as 3PG, Sands, 2001, 2010) can
be adjusted for any species in any location – but this is not
simple, requires an experienced specialist, and in the case
of 3PG involves estimating some 50 parameters. That's too
complicated for most smallholders and their advisors, who
need something easier and more efficient.
Growth models do not need to be so complicated.
The bare essentials involve just three trends…
1. The underlying rate at which trees grow – the height
growth pattern with age is a long-established reliable
measure.
2. The effect of competition – one useful measure is the
response of tree diameter to crowding, and
3. An indication of self-thinning, or the death rate due to
crowding.
If a model can estimate of these three trends, it's
well on the way towards useful growth estimates.
Robust Growth Patterns
Several packages are available to facilitate curve-
fitting, and some of these constrain curves to biologically-
relevant patterns (Hyams, 2005), but often require
substantial amounts of data and rarely ensure a reliable fit
when data are scarce. However, Vanclay (2010) has
demonstrated a series of relationships, applicable to the
three trends mentioned above, that remain reliable even
when data are scarce.
The height-age curve is a well-established basis for
estimating site index, and there are many equations
available to describe these curves – but most are too
complicated for practical use when data are scarce.
However, the relationship between height and the square
root of age is quite close to a straight line, and gives a
consistent, if approximate, fit for a wide range of species
and sites over long periods (Vanclay, 2010). Transforming
plantation age to the square root of (age-0.5) often results
in a straight line through the origin that can be
characterized with a single parameter, and can thus be
estimated with few data. Fig. 1 illustrates the 50-year trend
of this relationship calibrated using age 5 data from a
national database of eucalypt growth data (West and
Mattay, 1993; Mattay and West, 1994). Whilst this
relationship (the dashed line in Fig. 1) is not exact, it does
provide a good approximation over long periods.
ROBUST MODELS FOR SMALLHOLDER FORESTS
JEROME K. VANCLAY
Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW 2480, Australia
Another simple relationship quantifies the relationship
between diameter, height and stocking. The graph of
Diameter against (Height-1.3)/Log (Stocking) tends to
result in a straight line through the origin, and can describe
the pattern of stand development for decades (Vanclay,
2009). Thinning operations can cause a temporary
perturbation to this relationship, but it quickly reverts to
the long-term trend. Figure 2 shows the pattern of mean
diameter in 97 plots of Eucalyptus pilularis, all measured
more than 8 times, and illustrates that this pattern remains
close to a straight line for long periods of time.
It is a little more difficult to estimate mortality, but if
the limiting stand basal area can be identified, then the
self-thinning pattern can be modelled. If independent
estimates of the limiting basal area are unavailable, then it
can be estimated from just three items – the initial
stocking (N ), the current stocking (N ), and the current
0 t
basal area (G). These three data enable the limiting basal
t3 -1/3
area Gmax, to be estimated as G[1-(N /N ) ] which in
t 0
turn, can describe the whole-of-life pattern of self
thinning. This has been tested empirically and applies to
many species in many locations (Vanclay and Sands, 2009).
It seems audacious to predict long-term stand
growth from just 3 parameters, namely the height-age
gradient, the diameter-height gradient, and the maximum
basal area, but it has been shown empirically that these
parameters can provide consistent approximations of tree
growth over decades. Vanclay (2010) has shown that these
parameters may provide 80-year predictions with a bias of
only about 5%. This may not be sufficient precision to
manage a multi-million dollar industrial plantation
program, but it is sufficient to provide a useful tool for
smallholders, for whom this simplicity and ease of use may
be very helpful.These three key parameters can be
inserted into a freely-available spreadsheet (cheekily
called 1PG, available from the author), to enable useful
projections that encourage thoughtful evaluation of
management options (Grant et al., 2012).
Testing the model
So how well does it work in practice? The current
version of 1PG was trialed first in small plantation of
whitewood (Endospermum medullosum) in Vanuatu
established as part of a development assistance project.
The planting included a sufficient range of age, stocking,
and tree sizes, that we could be confident of the results
(Grant et al., 2012). The model offered some unexpected
insights – for instance, many project staff favoured wide
spacings, but financial analyses using the 1PG model
suggested that a stocking of 600/ha would be a good
compromise (Grant et al., 2012).
Word of the Vanuatu study soon spread, and there
was a request to try the approach with African mahogany
(Khaya sensgalensis) plantations in northern Australia.
Although the database was restricted to 37 plots all aged
less than 12 years, the approach provided useful estimate
well received by the grower.
This success with modest databases begged the
question: what is the smallest amount of data that will
nonetheless provide an adequate model for plantation
management decisions? An innovative spacing (Vanclay,
2006) in the Philippines provided an opportunity to test
the model with the indigenous species known as Mayapis
(Shorea palosapis, Gregorio et al., 2012). These
experimental data indicated a good estimate of the size-
density trend, but estimation of the height-age pattern
0.5
Fig. 1: Long-term trend in height versus (Age-0.5)
Fig. 2: Long-term trend of the relationship between Diameter and
(H-1.3)/Ln(N).
2017] 853
Robust models for smallholder forests
Indian Forester, 143 (9) : 852-855, 2017
http://www.indianforester.co.in ISSN No. 0019-4816 (Print)
ISSN No. 2321-094X (Online)
ABSTRACT
Forest management faces a contradiction: superb decision support systems are available, but only for few forests because
the necessary requisites (data, computers, advisors) often remain elusive. Thus many forests and managers are hampered
by a lack of information to guide management, and this handicap falls particularly heavily on community and smallholder
forests. Whilst the best decision support requires detailed and reliable data, useful advice can nonetheless be provided
with simple models that are easily calibrated and have been shown to be robust in diverse situations. This paper presents
the underlying framework for a set of simple models that are easily calibrated and reliable under plantation scenarios. It
illustrates the calibration and use of these models for several tropical plantation species, demonstrates the implications
that can be inferred, and discusses the data required to calibrate these models for new situations.
Key words: Robust models, Data, Framework, Smallholder forest, Plantation scenarios.
This paper presents the underlying framework for a set of simple models that are easily calibrated and
reliable under plantation scenarios.
Introduction
Many forest owners need better information and
advice about their management options, especially for
small private forests where private research is impractical.
Experienced silviculturalists can often formulate good
advice by subjectively appraising the size and variation of
trees within a stand, but many small holders and their
advisors lack that experience, and may be reluctant to thin
trees to waste without compelling evidence.
One problem is that these smallholders and their
advisors don't have access to good models to assist them
to explore options. Worldwide, the availability of
plantation growth models is unequal – there are
thousands of models for a few select species (such as
Pinusradiata), but thousands of species for which there
are no models. This lack of advice is particularly severe for
smallholder forests and for plantings of native species.
A few models (such as 3PG, Sands, 2001, 2010) can
be adjusted for any species in any location – but this is not
simple, requires an experienced specialist, and in the case
of 3PG involves estimating some 50 parameters. That's too
complicated for most smallholders and their advisors, who
need something easier and more efficient.
Growth models do not need to be so complicated.
The bare essentials involve just three trends…
1. The underlying rate at which trees grow – the height
growth pattern with age is a long-established reliable
measure.
2. The effect of competition – one useful measure is the
response of tree diameter to crowding, and
3. An indication of self-thinning, or the death rate due to
crowding.
If a model can estimate of these three trends, it's
well on the way towards useful growth estimates.
Robust Growth Patterns
Several packages are available to facilitate curve-
fitting, and some of these constrain curves to biologically-
relevant patterns (Hyams, 2005), but often require
substantial amounts of data and rarely ensure a reliable fit
when data are scarce. However, Vanclay (2010) has
demonstrated a series of relationships, applicable to the
three trends mentioned above, that remain reliable even
when data are scarce.
The height-age curve is a well-established basis for
estimating site index, and there are many equations
available to describe these curves – but most are too
complicated for practical use when data are scarce.
However, the relationship between height and the square
root of age is quite close to a straight line, and gives a
consistent, if approximate, fit for a wide range of species
and sites over long periods (Vanclay, 2010). Transforming
plantation age to the square root of (age-0.5) often results
in a straight line through the origin that can be
characterized with a single parameter, and can thus be
estimated with few data. Fig. 1 illustrates the 50-year trend
of this relationship calibrated using age 5 data from a
national database of eucalypt growth data (West and
Mattay, 1993; Mattay and West, 1994). Whilst this
relationship (the dashed line in Fig. 1) is not exact, it does
provide a good approximation over long periods.
ROBUST MODELS FOR SMALLHOLDER FORESTS
JEROME K. VANCLAY
Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW 2480, Australia
Another simple relationship quantifies the relationship
between diameter, height and stocking. The graph of
Diameter against (Height-1.3)/Log (Stocking) tends to
result in a straight line through the origin, and can describe
the pattern of stand development for decades (Vanclay,
2009). Thinning operations can cause a temporary
perturbation to this relationship, but it quickly reverts to
the long-term trend. Figure 2 shows the pattern of mean
diameter in 97 plots of Eucalyptus pilularis, all measured
more than 8 times, and illustrates that this pattern remains
close to a straight line for long periods of time.
It is a little more difficult to estimate mortality, but if
the limiting stand basal area can be identified, then the
self-thinning pattern can be modelled. If independent
estimates of the limiting basal area are unavailable, then it
can be estimated from just three items – the initial
stocking (N ), the current stocking (N ), and the current
0 t
basal area (G). These three data enable the limiting basal
t3 -1/3
area Gmax, to be estimated as G[1-(N /N ) ] which in
t 0
turn, can describe the whole-of-life pattern of self
thinning. This has been tested empirically and applies to
many species in many locations (Vanclay and Sands, 2009).
It seems audacious to predict long-term stand
growth from just 3 parameters, namely the height-age
gradient, the diameter-height gradient, and the maximum
basal area, but it has been shown empirically that these
parameters can provide consistent approximations of tree
growth over decades. Vanclay (2010) has shown that these
parameters may provide 80-year predictions with a bias of
only about 5%. This may not be sufficient precision to
manage a multi-million dollar industrial plantation
program, but it is sufficient to provide a useful tool for
smallholders, for whom this simplicity and ease of use may
be very helpful.These three key parameters can be
inserted into a freely-available spreadsheet (cheekily
called 1PG, available from the author), to enable useful
projections that encourage thoughtful evaluation of
management options (Grant et al., 2012).
Testing the model
So how well does it work in practice? The current
version of 1PG was trialed first in small plantation of
whitewood (Endospermum medullosum) in Vanuatu
established as part of a development assistance project.
The planting included a sufficient range of age, stocking,
and tree sizes, that we could be confident of the results
(Grant et al., 2012). The model offered some unexpected
insights – for instance, many project staff favoured wide
spacings, but financial analyses using the 1PG model
suggested that a stocking of 600/ha would be a good
compromise (Grant et al., 2012).
Word of the Vanuatu study soon spread, and there
was a request to try the approach with African mahogany
(Khaya sensgalensis) plantations in northern Australia.
Although the database was restricted to 37 plots all aged
less than 12 years, the approach provided useful estimate
well received by the grower.
This success with modest databases begged the
question: what is the smallest amount of data that will
nonetheless provide an adequate model for plantation
management decisions? An innovative spacing (Vanclay,
2006) in the Philippines provided an opportunity to test
the model with the indigenous species known as Mayapis
(Shorea palosapis, Gregorio et al., 2012). These
experimental data indicated a good estimate of the size-
density trend, but estimation of the height-age pattern
0.5
Fig. 1: Long-term trend in height versus (Age-0.5)
Fig. 2: Long-term trend of the relationship between Diameter and
(H-1.3)/Ln(N).
2017] 853
Robust models for smallholder forests
was hampered by poor early growth of the plantings.
Nonetheless, height measures at ages 3.9, 4.5 and 5.5
years gave parameters consistent with other estimates.
Thus it appears that the model can be calibrated
sufficiently with scant data, although it appears desirable
to have data from stands older than 4 years.
A final challenge came when the Philippine NGO
Genesyssought assistance with biomass forecasts from
bioenergy trials. Their data were drawn from small plots,
planted at 1x1m and measured bimonthly for only 22
months, and they sought guidance about future growth
rates and effective management regimes. Despite these
modest data, estimates obtained in this way were
consistent, if slightly higher, than comparable estimates
from larger, longer-term smallholder plantings.
Smallholders tend to plant this species on poor sites with
minimal management, so it is not surprising that the well-
tended Genesys trial exhibited higher growth, especially
for the height-age pattern – and it was reassuring to see
the close correspondence between these estimates.
Clearly, these are not strong empirical tests, but
such testing has been examined elsewhere (Vanclay, 2010)
and the paragraphs above report user acceptance of the
approach. Evidently this method can be applied to a wide
range of situations, even with minimal data. More
sophisticated models retain an important role in research
and industrial management, but simple approaches such
as the one illustrated here can make a useful contribution
in situations where data are scarce, funds are limited,
modelling skills are elementary, or plantings involve small
areas or lesser-known species.
Conclusion
This series of studies with the 1PG model leads to
several conclusions. Firstly, a strength of this approach is
that it is objective - it does not depend on an advisor 'liking'
a species (or not); rather, it offers a way to make an
impartial assessment of a species performance and its
potential.
Predictions can be tested easily, by comparing with
other data, or by gathering data from the same plot at a
later occasion – and it is easy to adjust the model on
receipt of updated estimates. It is parsimonious and
requires just three trends, with one parameter for each
trend.The estimates can be made, and the model run, with
few data and modest computing resources – any
spreadsheet software will suffice, and only beginner skills
in spreadsheet use are needed.The approach supports
adaptive forest management (Sayer et al., 1997) – if a
manager has just one plot that is a little older than the bulk
of the plantings, then the model and that “head-start” plot
can be used to investigate options and fine-tune the
management of the main estate.
Acknowledgements
This work has drawn inspiration from, and relied on contributions from many colleagues involved in several
projects. Important contributions were made by colleagues at Southern Cross University (Doland Nichols and others),
University of the Sunshine Coast (John Herbohn and others), and Visayas State University (Nestor Gregorio and others).
The work was funded in part by ACIAR projects ASEM/2010/050, ASEM/2006/091, ASEM/2003/052, and FST/2005/089
y?kq/kjd ouksa ds fy, lUrqfyr ekWMy
thjkse ds- okuDys
lkjka'k
ou izca/u ,d fojks/kHkkl dk lkeuk djrs gS% mRd`"V fu.kZ; lgk;rk iz.kkfy;ka miyC/ gSa] fdUrq dqN ouksa ds fy, D;ksafd vko';d
lkefxz;ka (vk¡dM+k] dEI;wVlZ] lykgdkj) izk;% nqxzkZg; jgrh gSaA bl izdkj izca/u esa ekxZn'kZu gsrq lwpuk ds vHkko dh otg ls vusdksa ouksa ,oa
izca/dksa dks ck/k igqaprh gS vkSj ;g vM+pu fo'ks"kdj leqnk; vkSj y?kq/kjd ouksa ij Hkkjh iM+rh gSA tcfd loksZÙke fu.kZ; lgk;rk dks fo'oLr ,oa
fo'olhu; vk¡dM+ksa dh vko';drk gksrh gS] fiQj Hkh mu lk/kj.k ekWMyksa ds lkFk mi;ksxh lykg miyC/ djkbZ tk ldrh gS ftUgsa vklkuh ls
va'k'kksf/r djrs gSa vkSj fofo/ fLFkfr;ksa esa lUrqfyr n'kkZ;k x;k gSA bl 'kks/i=k esa mu lk/kj.k ekWMyksa ds ,d lSV ds fy, :ijs[kk izLrqr dh xbZ gS]
ftUgsa vklkuh ls va'k'kksf/r dj ldrs gSa vkSj jksi.k ifjn`';ksa ds rgr fo'oluh; gSaA ;g vusdksa m".kdfVca/h; jksi.k iztkfr;ksa ds fy, bu ekWMyksa
ds va'k'kks/u ,oa mi;ksx ij izdk'k Mkyrk gS] mu tfVyrkvksa dk izn'kZu djrk gS ftUgsa vuqekfur dj ldrs gSa] vkSj u;h fLFkfr;ksa ds fy, bu
ekWMyksa ds va'k'kks/u gsrq okafNr vk¡dM+ksa ij fopkj&foe'kZ djrk gSA
References
Grant J., Glencross K., Nichols D., Palmer G., Sethy M. and Vanclay J. (2012). Silvicultural implications arising from a simple simulation model for
Endospermummedullosum in Vanuatu. International Forestry Review, 14(4): 452-462.
Gregorio N.O., Herbohn J.L. and Vanclay J.K. (2012). Developing establishment guidelines for Shoreapalosapis in smallholder plantings in the
Philippines. International Forestry Review, 14(4): 492-501 https://www.curveexpert.net/
Mattay J.P. and West P.W. (1994). A collection of growth and yield data from eight eucalypt species growing in even-aged, monoculture forest.
CSIRO Forestry and Forest Products, User Series 18.
Sands P.J. (2001). 3PGPJS—a user-friendly interface to 3-PG, the Landsberg and Waring model of forest productivity. Cooperative Research
Centre for Sustainable Production Forestry and CSIRO Forestry and Forest Products Technical Report, (29).
Sands P.G. (2010). 3PG PJS user manual.
st
Sayer J.A., Vanclay J.K. and Byron N. (1997). Technologies for sustainable forest management: Challenges for the 21 century. Commonwealth
Forestry Review, 76:162-170.
Vanclay J.K. (2006). Experiment designs to evaluate inter- and intra-specific interactions in mixed plantings of forest trees. Forest Ecology and
Management, 233:366-374.
Vanclay J.K. (2009). Tree diameter, height and stocking in even-aged forests. Annals of Forest Science, 66:702.
Vanclay J.K. (2010). Robust relationships for simple plantation growth models based on sparse data. Forest Ecology and Management,
259:1050–1054.
Vanclay J.K. and Sands P.J. (2009). Calibrating the self-thinning frontier. Forest Ecology and Management, 259:81-85.
West P.W. and Mattay J.P. (1993). Yield prediction models and comparative growth rates for six eucalypt species. Australian Forestry, 56: 211-
225.
Hyams D. (2005). Curve Expert Version 1.37. A comprehensive curve fitting package for Windows.
854 The Indian Forester [September 2017] 855
Robust models for smallholder forests
was hampered by poor early growth of the plantings.
Nonetheless, height measures at ages 3.9, 4.5 and 5.5
years gave parameters consistent with other estimates.
Thus it appears that the model can be calibrated
sufficiently with scant data, although it appears desirable
to have data from stands older than 4 years.
A final challenge came when the Philippine NGO
Genesyssought assistance with biomass forecasts from
bioenergy trials. Their data were drawn from small plots,
planted at 1x1m and measured bimonthly for only 22
months, and they sought guidance about future growth
rates and effective management regimes. Despite these
modest data, estimates obtained in this way were
consistent, if slightly higher, than comparable estimates
from larger, longer-term smallholder plantings.
Smallholders tend to plant this species on poor sites with
minimal management, so it is not surprising that the well-
tended Genesys trial exhibited higher growth, especially
for the height-age pattern – and it was reassuring to see
the close correspondence between these estimates.
Clearly, these are not strong empirical tests, but
such testing has been examined elsewhere (Vanclay, 2010)
and the paragraphs above report user acceptance of the
approach. Evidently this method can be applied to a wide
range of situations, even with minimal data. More
sophisticated models retain an important role in research
and industrial management, but simple approaches such
as the one illustrated here can make a useful contribution
in situations where data are scarce, funds are limited,
modelling skills are elementary, or plantings involve small
areas or lesser-known species.
Conclusion
This series of studies with the 1PG model leads to
several conclusions. Firstly, a strength of this approach is
that it is objective - it does not depend on an advisor 'liking'
a species (or not); rather, it offers a way to make an
impartial assessment of a species performance and its
potential.
Predictions can be tested easily, by comparing with
other data, or by gathering data from the same plot at a
later occasion – and it is easy to adjust the model on
receipt of updated estimates. It is parsimonious and
requires just three trends, with one parameter for each
trend.The estimates can be made, and the model run, with
few data and modest computing resources – any
spreadsheet software will suffice, and only beginner skills
in spreadsheet use are needed.The approach supports
adaptive forest management (Sayer et al., 1997) – if a
manager has just one plot that is a little older than the bulk
of the plantings, then the model and that “head-start” plot
can be used to investigate options and fine-tune the
management of the main estate.
Acknowledgements
This work has drawn inspiration from, and relied on contributions from many colleagues involved in several
projects. Important contributions were made by colleagues at Southern Cross University (Doland Nichols and others),
University of the Sunshine Coast (John Herbohn and others), and Visayas State University (Nestor Gregorio and others).
The work was funded in part by ACIAR projects ASEM/2010/050, ASEM/2006/091, ASEM/2003/052, and FST/2005/089
y?kq/kjd ouksa ds fy, lUrqfyr ekWMy
thjkse ds- okuDys
lkjka'k
ou izca/u ,d fojks/kHkkl dk lkeuk djrs gS% mRd`"V fu.kZ; lgk;rk iz.kkfy;ka miyC/ gSa] fdUrq dqN ouksa ds fy, D;ksafd vko';d
lkefxz;ka (vk¡dM+k] dEI;wVlZ] lykgdkj) izk;% nqxzkZg; jgrh gSaA bl izdkj izca/u esa ekxZn'kZu gsrq lwpuk ds vHkko dh otg ls vusdksa ouksa ,oa
izca/dksa dks ck/k igqaprh gS vkSj ;g vM+pu fo'ks"kdj leqnk; vkSj y?kq/kjd ouksa ij Hkkjh iM+rh gSA tcfd loksZÙke fu.kZ; lgk;rk dks fo'oLr ,oa
fo'olhu; vk¡dM+ksa dh vko';drk gksrh gS] fiQj Hkh mu lk/kj.k ekWMyksa ds lkFk mi;ksxh lykg miyC/ djkbZ tk ldrh gS ftUgsa vklkuh ls
va'k'kksf/r djrs gSa vkSj fofo/ fLFkfr;ksa esa lUrqfyr n'kkZ;k x;k gSA bl 'kks/i=k esa mu lk/kj.k ekWMyksa ds ,d lSV ds fy, :ijs[kk izLrqr dh xbZ gS]
ftUgsa vklkuh ls va'k'kksf/r dj ldrs gSa vkSj jksi.k ifjn`';ksa ds rgr fo'oluh; gSaA ;g vusdksa m".kdfVca/h; jksi.k iztkfr;ksa ds fy, bu ekWMyksa
ds va'k'kks/u ,oa mi;ksx ij izdk'k Mkyrk gS] mu tfVyrkvksa dk izn'kZu djrk gS ftUgsa vuqekfur dj ldrs gSa] vkSj u;h fLFkfr;ksa ds fy, bu
ekWMyksa ds va'k'kks/u gsrq okafNr vk¡dM+ksa ij fopkj&foe'kZ djrk gSA
References
Grant J., Glencross K., Nichols D., Palmer G., Sethy M. and Vanclay J. (2012). Silvicultural implications arising from a simple simulation model for
Endospermummedullosum in Vanuatu. International Forestry Review, 14(4): 452-462.
Gregorio N.O., Herbohn J.L. and Vanclay J.K. (2012). Developing establishment guidelines for Shoreapalosapis in smallholder plantings in the
Philippines. International Forestry Review, 14(4): 492-501 https://www.curveexpert.net/
Mattay J.P. and West P.W. (1994). A collection of growth and yield data from eight eucalypt species growing in even-aged, monoculture forest.
CSIRO Forestry and Forest Products, User Series 18.
Sands P.J. (2001). 3PGPJS—a user-friendly interface to 3-PG, the Landsberg and Waring model of forest productivity. Cooperative Research
Centre for Sustainable Production Forestry and CSIRO Forestry and Forest Products Technical Report, (29).
Sands P.G. (2010). 3PG PJS user manual.
st
Sayer J.A., Vanclay J.K. and Byron N. (1997). Technologies for sustainable forest management: Challenges for the 21 century. Commonwealth
Forestry Review, 76:162-170.
Vanclay J.K. (2006). Experiment designs to evaluate inter- and intra-specific interactions in mixed plantings of forest trees. Forest Ecology and
Management, 233:366-374.
Vanclay J.K. (2009). Tree diameter, height and stocking in even-aged forests. Annals of Forest Science, 66:702.
Vanclay J.K. (2010). Robust relationships for simple plantation growth models based on sparse data. Forest Ecology and Management,
259:1050–1054.
Vanclay J.K. and Sands P.J. (2009). Calibrating the self-thinning frontier. Forest Ecology and Management, 259:81-85.
West P.W. and Mattay J.P. (1993). Yield prediction models and comparative growth rates for six eucalypt species. Australian Forestry, 56: 211-
225.
Hyams D. (2005). Curve Expert Version 1.37. A comprehensive curve fitting package for Windows.
854 The Indian Forester [September 2017] 855
Robust models for smallholder forests