Ways to estimate a tree species' DBH at a certain age

[daltontrees]

It occurs to me that the Commission has spent decades, possibly aslmost a century, experimenting with various species and situations to get the optimum yield for timber. The end goal is maximum dried wood per area. As already said, dried wood and carbon content might be in proportion to each other. I'd be amazed if there isn't published research into this. The focus of tree planting may be changing from timber to carbon sequestration but the research would still be valid.

[AHPP]

It's for an environmental science project assignment, from the angle of carbon sequestration for climate change purposes.

And what conclusion will you be coming to?

[BotanyGem]

Thanks daltontrees - that's a good point about dried wood, I'll have a look into research on that angle too.

 

As for my conclusion, I'm not sure until I've looked into it more but I presume some tree species will store more carbon than others.

 

 

[Big J]

12 minutes ago, BotanyGem said:

As for my conclusion, I'm not sure until I've looked into it more but I presume some tree species will store more carbon than others.

 

 

 

That is very much the case. As others have said, looking into yield class is most important. 

 

An open grown tree will thicken (at chest height) far quicker than a plantation tree, but the density of the stems in a plantation will mean that it's a more effective and efficient carbon sequestration model. 

 

There are all sorts of factors that will seriously affect growth rate of a plantation. So for example, you might have a site at 100m above sea level, south facing, gently sloping. It might have shallow soil (reduce crop yield by 20%), it might be waterlogged (reduce crop yield by 20%), it might be subject to prevailing winds (reduce crop yield by 20% along windward edge), the saplings may be from poor genetic stock (reduce crop yield by 20%), soil pH and macro nutrients may be incorrect for the species planted (reduce crop yield by 20%). The list goes on.

 

On that last point, a local example is a primarily spruce woodland we worked in two years ago. It was planted 20 years ago, has grown terribly and is running along at about yield class 9. The ground was found to be seriously acidic (as well as too dry for sitka) and on the adjacent arable land has required 5t/acre of lime to balance it. All species planted on this ground have grown awfully. Larch, oak, ash, maple - the lot. 

 

My point is that you can only ever give a spectrum of growth rates for any given species, and it's basely on yield class, not DBH. 

[AHPP]

As for my conclusion, I'm not sure until I've looked into it more but I presume some tree species will store more carbon than others.

 

 

 

Refreshing but sadly uncommon academic rigour.

 

[Andrew McEwan]

Sounds like you need a copy of the carbon lookup tables/spreadsheet for the woodland carbon code.

https://woodlandcarboncode.org.uk/standard-and-guidance/3-carbon-sequestration/3-3-project-carbon-sequestration

Edited February 28, 2021 by Andrew McEwan

[BotanyGem]

Thanks for the info Big J and Andrew. I'll keep in mind the variations on growth due to site etc. The link to the carbon code web page is really useful 👍

[[email protected]]

Dear BotanyGem,

 

I have exactly the same requirement. Did you find the Forestry Commission document containing the relevant details? Can you post the URL please?

 

Thanks in advance