old-growth structure and timber volume growth trends in maturing Douglas-fir stands.
Forest Ecology and Management 104: 265-280.
Allen, R., Platt, K., and Wiser, S. 1995. Biodiversity in New Zealand plantation. New Zealand Forest 39: 26-29.
Begon, M., Harper, J. L., and Townsend, C. R. 1986. Ecology. Individuals, Populations, and Communities. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.
Carey, A. B. 2003. Biocomplexity and restoration of biodiversity in temperate coniferous forest：inducing spatial heterogeneity with variable density thinning.
Forestry 762: 127-136.
Choi, J., Lorimer, C. G., and Vanderwerker, J. M. 2007. A simulation of the development and restoration of old-growth structural features in northern hardwoods. Forest
Ecology and Management 249: 204-220.
Clark, F. J. and Evans, F. C. 1954. Distance to the nearest neighbour as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology 35: 445-453.
Crow, T. R., Haney, A., and Wailer, D. M. 1994. Report on the scientific round table on biological diversity convened by the Chequamegon and Nicolet National Forests.
United States Forest Service General Technical Report NC-166, Saint Paul, MN.
Donald,P. F., Haycock, D., and Fuller, R. J. 1997. Winter bird communities in forest plantations in western England and their response to vegetation, growth stage and
grazing. Bird Study 44: 206-219.
Ferris-Kaan, R., Peace, A. J., and Humphrey, J. W. 1998. Assessing structural diversity in managed forests. In: Bachmann, P., Köhl, M., and Päivinen, R. (eds.), Assessment of biodiversity for improved forest planning. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht Pages 331-342.
Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT), 1993a. Forest Ecosystem Management: An ecological, economic, and social assessment. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT), 1993b. Draft supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and old-growth forest related species within the range of the northern spotted owl. US Government Printing Office, Washing, DC.
Foster, D. R., Orwig, D. A., and McLachlan, J. S. 1996. Ecological and conservation insights from reconstructive studies of temperate old-growth forests. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11: 419-424.
Franklin, J. F., Berg, D. R., Thornburgh, D. A., and Tappeiner, J. C. 1997. Alternative silvicultural approaches to timber harvesting: variable retention harvest systems. In:
Kohm, K. A. and Franklin, J. F. (eds.), Creating a Forestry for the 21st Century: The Science of Ecosystem Management. Island Press, Washington, D. C. Pages 111-139.
Goff, F. G. and West, D. 1975. Canopy-understory interaction effects on forest population structure. Forest Science 21: 98-108.
Hansen, A. J., Spies, T. A., Swanson, F. J., and Ohmann, J. L. 1991. Conserving biodiversity in managed forests. Bioscience 41: 382-292.
Hagar, J., Howlin, S., and Ganio, L. 2004. Short-term response of songbirds to experimental thinning of young Douglas-fir forests in the Oregon Cascades. Forest
Hartly, M. J. 2002. Rationale and methods for conserving biodiversity in plantation forest. Forest Ecology and Management 155: 81-95.
Holdridge, L. R., 1967. Life Zone Ecology. Tropical Science Center, San Josá, Costa Rica.
Kannel, M. 1998. Biodiversity: A diversity in definition. In: Bachmann, P., Köhl, M., and Päivinen, R. (eds.), Assessment of Biodiversity for Improved Forest Planning.
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht Pages 71-81.
Kerr, G. 1999. The use of silvicultural systems to enhance the biological diversity of plantation forest in Britain. Forestry 72: 191-205.
Koskela, L., Nummi, L., Wenzel, S., and Kivinen V.-P. 2006. On the analysis of cubic smoothing spline-based stem curve prediction for forest harvesters. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 36: 2909-2919.
Macot, B. G., Holthausen, R. S., Teply, J., and Carrier, W. D. 1991. Old-growth
inventories: status, definitions, and visions for the future. In: Ruggerio, L. E., Aubry, B., Varey, A. B., and Huff, M. H. (eds.), Wildlife and vegetation of unmanaged Douglas-fir forests. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-285. Pages 47-60.
Magurran, A. E. 1988. Ecological Diversity and its Measurement. Princeton University Press, New Jersey.
Mäkinen, H. and Isomäki, A. 2004. Thinning intensity and long-term changes in increment and stem form of Norway spruce trees. Forest Ecology and Management 201: 295-309.
Neumann, M. and Starlinger, F. 2001. The significance of different indices for stand structure and diversity in forests. Forest Ecology and Management 145: 91-106.
Norton, D. A. 1998. Indigenous biodiversity conservation and plantation forest: options for the future. New Zealand Forest 39: 3-12.
Old Growth Definition Task Group (OGDTG), 1986. Interim definitions for old-growth Douglas-fir and mixed conifer forests in the Pacific Northwest and California. USDA Forest Service Research Note PNW-447.
Pickett, S. T. A. 1989. Space-for-time substitution as an alternative to long-term studies.
In: Likens. G. E. (eds.), Long-term Studies in Ecology. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Pages 110-135.
Pielou, E. C. 1959. The use of point to plant distances in the study of the pattern of plant populations. The Journal of Ecology 47: 607-613.
Pommerening, A. 2002. Approaches to quantifying forest structure. Forestry 75:
305-324.
Renka R. J. 1996. Algorithm 751: TRIPACK: a constrained two-dimensional Delaunay triangulation package. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software. 22: 1-8.
Rosenvald R. and Lõhmus, A. 2008. For what, when, and where is green-tree retention better than clear-cutting? A review of the biodiversity aspects. Forest Ecology and Management 255: 1-15.
Rubin, B. D., Manion, P. D., and Faber-Langendoen, D. 2006. Diameter distributions and structural sustainability in forests. Forest Ecology and Management 222:
427-438.
Schuler, A. 1998. Sustainability and biodiversity forest historical notes on two main concerns of environmental utilization. In:Bachmann, P., Kohl, M., and Paivinen, R (eds.), Assessment of Biodiversity for Improved Forest Planning. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht Pages 353-360.
Shannon, G. E. 1948. The mathematical theory of communication. In: Shannon, C. E.
and Weaver, W. (eds.). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Pages 29-125.
Ecology and Management 155: 101-111.
Simpson, E. H. 1949. Measurement of Diversity. Nature 163: 688.
Smith, D. M. 1986. Practice of Silviculture. 8th edition. Wiley, New York, USA.
Smitinand, T. 1995. Overview of the status of biodiversity in tropical and temperate forests. In: Boyle, T.J.B. and Boontawee, B. (eds.), Measuring and Monitoring Biodiversity in Tropical and Temperate Forests. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia.
Spies, T. A. and Franklin, J. F. 1991. The structure of natural young, mature, and old-growth Douglas-fir forests in Oregon and Washington. In: Ruggiero, L. (eds), Wildlife and Vegetation of Unmanaged Douglas-fir Forests. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR-285. Portland, OR: Pacific Northwest Research Station. Pages 91-110.
Spies, T. A. and Franklin, J. F. 1988. Old growth and forest dynamics in the Douglas-fir region of western Oregon and Washington. Natural Areas 8: 190-201.
State of the World’s Forests. 1999. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.
State of the World’s Forests. 2007. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.
Tyrrell, L. E., Nowacki, G. J., Crow, T. R., Buckley, D. S., Nauertz, E. A., Niese, J. N., Rollinger, J. L., and Zasada, J. C. 1998. Information about old growth for selected forest type groups in the eastern United States. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NC-197.
Von Gadow, K., Hui, G. 1999. Modelling Forest Development. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Zenner, E. K. 1998. A new index for describing the structural complexity of forests.
Ph.D. Disseration, Oregon State University, USA.
Zenner, E. K. and Hibbs, D. E. 2000. A new method for modeling the heterogeneity of forest structure. Forest Ecology and Management 129: 75-87.
Zenner, E. K. 2004. Does old-growth condition imply high live-tree structure complexity? Forest Ecology and Management 195: 243-258.
附錄一、25 林班附近天然林及造林失敗地喬木層分布
第一樣區(造林失敗地) 第二樣區(上坡天然林) 第三樣區(下坡天然林)
樹名 科名 株數 胸高斷面積cm2 平均DBH(cm) 樹名 科名 株數 胸高斷面積cm2平均DBH(cm) 樹名 科名 株數 胸高斷面積cm2平均DBH(cm) 長葉木薑子 樟科 13 224.51 3.08長葉木薑子 樟科 8 17.27 1.5長葉木薑子 樟科 46 738.685 3.37
瓊楠 樟科 6 28.26 2瓊楠 樟科 3 4.71 1.33瓊楠 樟科 9 211.95 4.67
紅楠 樟科 13 2879.38 11.38紅楠 樟科 44 609.945 2.87紅楠 樟科 19 1271.7 6.84
香桂 樟科 5 45.53 3.2香桂 樟科 20 868.995 4.05屏東木薑子 樟科 2 13.345 2.5
牛樟 樟科 2 230.005 9.5樟樹 樟科 1 415.265 23短尾葉石櫟 殼斗科 14 1440.475 7.93
短尾葉石櫟 殼斗科 11 1679.9 7.8短尾葉石櫟 殼斗科 19 2507.29 10.53錐果櫟 殼斗科 1 3.14 2
長尾柯 殼斗科 3 126.385 6.33長尾柯 殼斗科 13 10448.35 27.23大葉校栗 殼斗科 4 186.83 6
火燒柯 殼斗科 2 1.57 1錐果櫟 殼斗科 33 4041.18 9.03 江某 五加科 20 4230.365 12.55
錐果櫟 殼斗科 3 754.385 13.67 江某 五加科 26 1820.415 8.04 大頭茶 茶科 7 2324.385 12.43
江某 五加科 42 865.855 2.69 銳葉柃木 茶科 2 1.57 1 柃木 茶科 2 3.925 1.5
銳葉柃木 茶科 31 110.685 1.9 木荷 茶科 10 1044.835 9.7 杜英 杜英科 1 19.625 5
木荷 茶科 4 1235.59 19.5 大頭茶 茶科 4 193.895 5.75 牛奶榕 桑科 1 0.785 1
大頭茶 茶科 6 43.96 2.67 厚皮香 茶科 1 3.14 4 小葉桑 桑科 6 11.775 1.5
柃木 茶科 7 44.745 2.43 杜英 杜英科 3 25.905 3 台灣天仙果 桑科 4 5.495 1.25
杜英 杜英科 4 280.245 7.75 薯豆 杜英科 5 887.835 12.2 台灣山香圓 省沽油科 10 137.375 3.3
薯豆 杜英科 2 257.48 10 山紅柿 柿樹科 8 208.025 3.63 山紅柿 柿樹科 3 51.81 3.33
牛奶榕 桑科 13 62.8 2 台灣黃杞 胡桃科 25 5896.135 15.32 台灣黃杞 胡桃科 18 4861.505 15.28
第一樣區(造林失敗地) 第二樣區(上坡天然林) 第三樣區(下坡天然林)
樹名 科名 株數 胸高斷面積cm2 平均DBH(cm) 樹名 科名 株數 胸高斷面積cm2平均DBH(cm) 樹名 科名 株數 胸高斷面積cm2平均DBH(cm)
小葉桑 桑科 3 4.71 1.33 大葉木犀 木犀科 2 20.41 3 白匏子 大戟科 1 0.785 1
台灣天仙果 桑科 3 2.355 1 狗骨仔 茜草科 10 142.085 2.3 細葉饅頭果 大戟科 2 26.69 4
台灣山香圓 省沽油科 9 56.52 2.44 玉山灰木 灰木科 2 88.705 7.5 野桐 大戟科 1 12.56 4
山紅柿 柿樹科 6 149.935 4.83 烏心石 木蘭科 22 783.43 4.18 狗骨仔 茜草科 19 364.24 4.42
台灣黃杞 胡桃科 3 51.8 4.67 忍冬葉冬青 冬青科 19 183.69 2.84 玉葉金花 茜草科 1 0.785 1
大葉木犀 木犀科 5 14.915 1.8 糊樗 冬青科 1 50.24 8 山枇杷 薔薇科 7 478.85 7.14
白匏子 大戟科 4 54.95 3 全緣葉莢迷 忍冬科 2 1.57 1 烏心石 木蘭科 20 657.83 4.2
細葉饅頭果 大戟科 1 0.785 1 忍冬葉冬青 冬青科 4 9.42 1.5
狗骨仔 茜草科 3 4.71 1.33 樟葉槭 槭樹科 8 4458.8 22.5
玉山灰木 灰木科 5 10.99 1.6 小花鼠刺 虎耳草科 3 27.475 3
山枇杷 薔薇科 3 2.355 1 臭辣樹 芸香科 2 744.965 21.5
山櫻花 薔薇科 1 0.785 1 長梗紫苧麻 蕁麻科 7 21.195 1.86
杉木 杉科 3 4.71 1.33 山豆葉月橘 芸香科 1 19.625 5
烏心石 木蘭科 2 66.725 6.5 華八仙 虎耳草科 2 3.925 1.5
忍冬葉冬青 冬青科 1 7.065 3 雨傘仔 紫金牛科 1 0.785 1
台灣櫸 榆科 1 346.185 21
鯽魚膽 爵床科 1 3.14 2
山槭 槭樹科 1 615.44 28
長梗紫苧麻 蕁麻科 1 0.785 1
附錄二、和社25 林班內 10 公頃樣區各分區資料
區號 面積(平方公尺) 全部株數 密度(株/公頃) 平均DBH 最大DBH 柳杉株數 柳杉DBH 杉木株數 杉木DBH
A 4608 563 1222 23.02 52 446 25.2 117 14.69
B 6660 638 958 25.29 51 581 26.15 57 16.54
C 5864 726 1238 23.40 50 468 26.50 258 17.8
D 5000 693 1386 24.27 51 593 25.61 100 16.35
E 5000 694 1388 25.51 50 645 26.13 49 17.39
F 5000 641 1282 25.06 55 613 25.53 28 14.5
G 5000 653 1306 25.64 56 608 26.22 45 17.78
H 1865 186 997 28.42 57 177 28.5 9 26.78
I 5000 744 1488 25.13 49 671 26.12 73 16.07
J 3559 468 1315 25.46 49 419 26.45 49 14.80
K 3977 493 1240 23.93 47 433 24.95 60 16.53
L 6284 596 948 27.4 57 494 29.35 102 17.99
M 5000 657 1314 27.21 63 490 30.42 167 17.87
N 5000 615 1210 27.43 53 545 28.61 70 18.29
O 7748 823 1062 26.34 59 745 27.26 78 17.53
P 7687 896 1166 27.05 58 788 28.6 108 15.72
Q 5000 550 1100 27.22 57 501 28.34 49 15.78
R 7801 1021 1309 25.60 53 932 26.6 89 15.15
S 6547 478 730 28.42 63 421 29.83 57 17.98
備註102600 12135 1183 25.77 63 10570 27.09 1565 16.87
附錄三、R 統計軟體指令