Evaluation of non-destructive Meyer method for determination of bark volume of beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) in different geographical aspects

Authors

1 S. Mohammadi Limaei*, S. Namdari, A. E. Bonyad, R. Naghdi

2 A. E. Bonyad1*, , , H. Dadras 3 1- Dept. of Forestry, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Guilan, Iran. 2- Natural Resources and Watershed Management Organization, Guilan, Iran. 3-Faculty of Geography, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Campus, Tehran, Iran. * Corresponding author?s E-mail: bonyad@guilan.ac.ir

3 A. E. Bonyad1*, A. Sima1, , 3 1- Dept. of Forestry, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Guilan, Iran. 2- Natural Resources and Watershed Management Organization, Guilan, Iran. 3-Faculty of Geography, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Campus, Tehran, Iran. * Corresponding author?s E-mail: bonyad@guilan.ac.ir

4 A. E. Bonyad1*, A. Sima1, A. Bakhshandeh2, 1- Dept. of Forestry, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Guilan, Iran. 2- Natural Resources and Watershed Management Organization, Guilan, Iran. 3-Faculty of Geography, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Campus, Tehran, Iran. * Corresponding author?s E-mail: bonyad@guilan.ac.ir

Abstract

The non-destructive Meyer method was evaluated to determine the bark volume of beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) stands in north of Iran. The sample size was 185 standing trees collected from 4 geographical aspects (north, south, west and east) aspects. The constant k values and bark thickness (2e mm) of 185 standing trees were used to calculate the bark volume by the Meyer method. In this study, 40 trees were randomly selected from among the felled trees and analyzed for evolution of non-destructive Meyer method. As a result, 668 diameters and 1236 bark thicknesses were measured out of 40 felled trees. The bark volumes were calculated by non-destructive Meyer and sums of integration methods. The results indicated no significant differences in volume estimates based on two methods (P = 0.816, two-tailed test), There were no significant differences in Levene?s test for equality of variances between the two methods (P=0.576, two-tailed test). The bark volume variations were significantly different in the geographical aspects. Results of this study can be important for silvicultural planning and natural forest management.

Keywords