Next Article in Journal
Ecological Stoichiometric Characteristics of Two Typical Plantations in the Karst Ecosystem of Southwestern China
Previous Article in Journal
Natural Regeneration Dynamics of Mora paraensis (Ducke) Ducke in Estuarine Floodplain Forests of the Amazon River
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Growth and Yield Models for Teak Planted as Living Fences in Coastal Ecuador

1
Carrera de Ingeniería Agropecuaria, Universidad Laica Eloy Alfaro (ULEAM), ULEAM-Extensión Chone, Av. Eloy Alfaro, 130356 Chone, Ecuador
2
Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, Extensión Experimental Tropical Pichilingue Km 5 vía Quevedo—El Empalme, 120501 Cantón Mocache, Ecuador
3
Centro de Investigación de Carreras ESPAM MFL, Escuela Superior Politécnica Agropecuaria de Manabí, Campus Politécnico Calceta, Sitio El Limón, 130250 Calceta, Ecuador
4
Graduate School of Management (ESPAE), Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL), Campus Las Peñas, 09014519 Guayaquil, Ecuador
5
Posgrado en Ciencias Forestales, Colegio de Postgraduados, Montecillo, 56230 Texcoco, Mexico
6
Instituto de Silvilcultura e Industria de la Madera, Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Boulevard Guadiana #501, Ciudad Universitaria, Torre de Investigación, 34120 Durango, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2018, 9(2), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020055
Submission received: 15 November 2017 / Revised: 8 January 2018 / Accepted: 17 January 2018 / Published: 24 January 2018
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Inventory, Modeling and Remote Sensing)

Abstract

:
Teak plantations cover a total area of about 4.35 million ha worldwide. The species is currently being planted in silvopastoral systems in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador. However, there are no growth and yield models for teak grown in silvopastoral systems, especially as living fences, in this region. The aim of the present study was to develop volume and yield models for teak grown as living fences in silvopastoral systems. For teak planted as living fences, the biological rotation age was estimated to vary between 15 and 26 years. The final yield in the silvopastoral system varied from 49 m3 ha−1 at 26 years in the least productive sites to 225 m3 ha−1 at 15 years in the most productive sites in the study area. The mean annual yield for the highest quality site was 15.3 m3 ha−1 year−1 at age 15 years, for a density of 160 trees ha−1. For a base age of 10 years, height-based site indexes of nine to 23 m were established. The growth and yield model obtained may be useful to define the biological (optimal) rotation age and estimate the productivity of teak living fences in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador.

1. Introduction

Silvopastoral systems (SPS) represent a type of agroforestry system adapted to the conditions of small and medium landowners (i.e., usually less than 20 ha) [1]. This type of agroforestry combines fodder plants with shrubs and trees for animal nutrition and complementary uses [2]. In SPS, farmers thus obtain multiple products from the same area of land whilst increasing soil and phytomass carbon sequestration [3].
Living fences, which comprise an important type of SPS, are defined as linear dividing elements that separate pasture areas, cropped areas and some forest patches. This type of SPS is generally a conspicuous element in agricultural landscapes in tropical and subtropical regions. Growing commercially important timber species as living fences may help to increase land productivity while protecting natural resources, favouring diversity and storing additional amounts of carbon, thus also helping to offset CO2 emissions from agricultural activities [4]. However, information about the abundance, distribution and functioning of these systems is scarce, and growth and yield models have not been significantly developed because the ecological and productive roles of living fences have generally been overlooked and poorly valued [5].
Little is known about the growth and yield of teak (Tectona grandis L.) planted as living fences in SPS or about the local ecological conditions required for use of this species as an SPS component. The growth equations generated in Costa Rica by Pérez and Kanninen [6] are used in Ecuador to estimate total volume of trees in teak plantations, despite being developed for regions with different edaphic, climatic and silvicultural conditions from those prevailing in Ecuador and not generally applicable to SPS because of differences in stand density and tree spacing, etc. As stands become denser, tree taper decreases and the height–diameter ratio increases because of the cumulative effects of competition from neighbouring trees [7]. Moreover, site index (SI) models for teak, especially when planted as living fences in SPS, are scarce in Ecuador. To our knowledge, SI models generated for an area of 600 ha in the lowlands of western Ecuador have only been published in conference proceedings [8].
Site index relates tree height or diameter to tree age and is used to evaluate tree growth and yield potential and to point out limits of usage of living fences. However, height growth is sensitive to incidents in the history of tree stands, such as origin (e.g., sprout or seed), initial suppression, changes in density, and interferences in the normal growth of the stand, e.g., animal, insect, frost damage, cutting, fire, and grazing. Moreover, the SI determination on the basis of height growth predicates nothing about these incidents [9,10].
SI curves should display certain properties [11,12], e.g., polymorphism, a sigmoid growth pattern with an inflection point, the capacity to reach a horizontal asymptote at advanced ages, a logical response (e.g., the dominant height should be zero at age zero and the curve must always increase), path invariance and base–age invariance [13,14,15]. Different methods are used to estimate SI, e.g., guide curve models and the generalized algebraic difference approach (GADA) [12]. The guide curve method assumes proportionality among curves of different SI. First, an average curve is modelled. A set of anamorphic or polymorphic SI curves can then be created [16]. However, GADA generates the best models because the base model has the above-mentioned curve properties, so that the families of curves obtained are more flexible than would otherwise occur [12,14,17,18,19,20].
The main objective of the present study was to develop provisional growth and yield models, including SI curves and volume models, for teak planted as living fences in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador. The null hypothesis assumes that there is no significant difference between the observed and the expected values in our models. Such models could be used as the basis for developing further silvicultural and economic studies for teak, as well as for identifying sites with suitable ecological conditions to improve the wood production of teak as living fences in the region.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Teak (Tectona grandis L.) occurs naturally in India, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand [21]. The total area planted with this commercially very important tropical hardwood is about 4.35 million ha, distributed across at least 43 different countries [22]. Teak was first introduced to Ecuador more than 50 years ago. The province of Los Ríos was one of the niches where the species adapted and grew best and has therefore become the main source of seeds for establishing commercial plantations of this exotic timber species in the country [23]. In 2013, the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Aquaculture and Fisheries (MAGAP) recommended the establishment of pure teak plantations in coastal and Amazonian Ecuador within a governmental programme of incentives for commercial purposes. However, progress in the suggested goals expressed as reforested area has been modest [24].
The study was carried out in the provinces of Santa Elena, Guayas Manabí, Los Ríos and Esmeraldas, on the west coast of Ecuador. Sampling plots were distributed in eleven SPS clusters (Figure 1). The SPS was characterised by living fences of teak planted in lines, with a spacing of 2.5 m, and the dominant forage species was Megathyrsus maximus (Jacq.) B. K. Simon & S. W. L. Jacobs a tufted perennial grass. Total annual precipitation in the study area ranges from 651 to 2646 mm and the mean annual temperature from 24 to 28 °C. The elevation ranges from 0 to about 500 m above sea level. The number of plots varied from 50–150 per province depending on the size of the living fences (Table 1).

2.2. Data Collection

The field data were collected in a total of 360 plots (50–300 m × 50–300 m size, Figure 2) in the five provinces under study in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador, in 2009, 2012 and 2016. Sixteen teak trees were randomly sampled in the rows in each SPS, thus providing data on a total of 64 trees per plot. The plot coordinates were recorded, along with establishment age, diameter at breast height (DBH) and total height (H) of each tree. DBH was measured with calliper and H was measured with a Haga hypsometer.

2.3. Site Index

In order to determine the SI, tree age was determined by consulting the property records. The mean dominant height (Hd) and diameter (Dd) was calculated as the mean value of 30% of the tallest trees (i.e., 19 trees) for each sampling plot [25]. Three different models were used to develop the SI equations: the guide curve models developed by Chapman-Richards [26] (Equation (1)), by Hossfeld [27] (Equation (2)), and the generalized algebraic difference approach (GADA) [17] (Equations (3) and (4)) implemented in the R software (version 3.3.3) (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria):
H d = a ( 1 exp ( b t ) ) c
H d = t 2 a + b t + c t 2
where Hd = dominant height (m); t = age (year); a, b, c = equation parameters.
The whole series of height–age data, with no differences between zones, was used to produce an equation describing the average pattern (i.e., the guide curve). Anamorphic curves were extracted from the guide curve, using the maximum height reached at 10 years as the reference age [28] for this study.
Models developed using the guide curve method were compared with the model obtained using the generalized algebraic difference approach (GADA) [12]. The GADA uses the Chapman-Richards equation (Equation (1)) as the base function for determining the site index. The parameters of the function selected are expressed as site functions defined by a variable X. X is a non-observable and independent variable that describes site productivity as the sum of different factors, including management, soil conditions, ecological and climatic factors and new parameters [19]. The initial bidimensional equation (Hd = f(t)) is expanded into an explicit tridimensional SI equation (Hd = f(t, X)), where X cannot be measured or defined. The GADA procedure involves determining the value of X from the initial site conditions, i.e., from the initial values of age and dominant height, t0 and H0 (Hd = f(t, t0, H0)). Thus, the model is implicitly defined and applicable in practice [18].
Hd represents the dominant height (m), t is the age in years, and a1, a2 and a3 are the base model parameters; b1, b2, …, bm are used as global parameters in subsequent GADA formulations. All GADA models have the general implicit form Hd = f(t, t0, H0, b1, b2, …, bm), where Y is the value of the age function t and Y0 is the reference variable defined by the value of the age function t0. In order to derive the polymorphic model with multiple asymptotes from the Chapman-Richards model (Equation (1)), the parameters should be related to site productivity [18].
The following dynamic equation (Equation (3)) is obtained with GADA and provides polymorphic curves with multiple asymptotes.
H 1 = H 0 [ 1 e b 1 t 1 1 e b 1 t 0 ] ( b 2 + b 3 / X 0 )
where H0 is the dominant height at the initial age, t0, and H1 is the dominant height at age t1. X0 is derived from Equation (4).
X 0 = 1 2 { ln H 0 b 2 L 0 ± [ ln H 0 b 2 L 0 ] 2 4 b 3 L 0 }
where L 0 = ln [ 1 e b 1 t 0 ] . Fitting this equation to real dominant height–age data enables estimation of the values of the global parameters b1, b2 and b3. All of the families of curves obtained with the method of algebraic difference equations or their generalization are invariant in relation to the reference age and the simulation path [17,18,29].
Simultaneous fitting of the mean structure (given by the growth equation) and of the error structure (given by the autoregressive model) was carried out by GADA, implemented in the R software (version 3.3.3) (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) [30]. The procedure was also used for DBH to generate the three mean dominant DBH—age models (Equations (1)–(4)).
Analysis of the model fitting performance for both H and DBH was based on comparison of graphs. The bias, the root mean square errors (RMSE) were calculated from the residuals obtained during the fitting stage. Graphical analysis was carried out to show that the curves fit the data across the whole range, by (1) overlaying the fitted curves on the trajectories of observed heights over time; (2) plotting the residuals against the values predicted by the model; and (3) analyzing the changes in bias and RMSE for the different age classes.

2.4. Tree Volume Assessment

A total of 760 dominant trees in the above-mentioned 360 sample plots of living fences (2–3 trees per plot) were randomly chosen for sampling. The DBH (mean 37.4 cm; range 5.0–76.4 cm) was measured before and H (mean 24.9 m; range 5.0–33.3 m) was measured after felling the trees. A diameter tape was used to measure over bark diameter (di) at ground level and at different heights: 0.3 m, 2.3 m, and every 2.0 m along the stem up to the top. The total tree volume overbark of every tree (V, m3) was computed by measuring the diameter at each end of the section (di and di+1) and the length of sections (l) of felled specimens, by applying the following formula for the frustum:
V = l π 3 ( ( d i 2 ) 2 + ( d i d i + 1 ) 4 + ( d i + 1 2 ) 2 )
Several commonly used volume estimation models [31] were tested in the study to find the best regression model between V and BHD and H (Table 2); a, b, c and d are the parameters to be determined. The models were fitted using the generalized method of moments (GMM) implemented in SAS/ETS® which accurately estimates parameters under heteroscedastic conditions [32]. The mean squared error (MSE), standard error (SE) and adjusted determination coefficient (R2Adj) were used to estimate the goodness of fit of the volume models. The model with the smallest Akaike information criterion (AIC) was considered as the most appropriate [33].

2.5. Teak Production in SPS

The data used to determine wood production for teak grown as living fences corresponded to the results obtained in the previous steps. Volume per hectare (Vha) was calculated as the product of the number of trees per hectare (N) and the modelled mean volume of tree per age and SI (Vi):
V h a = N V i
The model of mean annual increment (MAI) in Vha was established as Vha at harvesting divided by the stand age (t) at rotation length:
M A I = V h a t
The model of periodic annual increment (PAI) was defined as the change in V between the beginning and end of a growth period, divided by the number of years. V1 is the volume per hectare (Vha,1) at time one, and Vha,2 the volume per hectare at time two and t1 corresponds to the year starting the growth period, and t2 to the end year.
P A I = V h a , 2 V h a , 1 t 2 t 1
The values of MAI and PAI were used to estimate the biological (optimal) rotation age (when PAI and MAI are equal and MAI is maximal).

3. Results

3.1. Site Index

The p values for all SI models indicate significant relationships between dominant height and diameter, but the RMSE was higher for the GADA model (Equations (3) and (4)) than for the models derived from the Chapman-Richards (Equation (1)) and Hossfeld function (Equation (2); Table 3). The bias and the RMSE of the GADA model residuals for height varied less than those of the Chapman-Richards and Hossfeld models for all age classes included in the sample, but were similar for DBH (Figure 3).
The Hossfeld and Chapman-Richards models of SI maintained the same height proportion at different ages, and therefore the curves appear to have the same form. This led to underestimation of tree height at young ages and overestimation at older ages. On the other hand, the dynamic GADA method always shows a skewed distribution around the zero line and a more stable RMSE for both height and diameter.
The GADA models developed for diameter and height estimation provided good fits. Both models explained approximately 99% of the total variance and residuals were randomly distributed around zero, with homogeneous variance and no obvious trends.
In the GADA formulation of the Chapman-Richards base model (Equation (1)), parameters a1 and a3 are assumed to depend on site productivity, and the error structure is included by an interactive procedure:
Height
H 1 = H 0 [ 1 e 0.122334 t 1 1 e 0.122334 t 0 ] ( 18.428972 + 67.262380 / X )
Diameter
D B H 1 = D B H 0 [ 1 e 0.114811 t 1 1 e 0.114811 t 0 ] ( 16.17381 + 65.85742 / X )
where H1 is the predicted height (m) at age t1 (years), and H0 and t0 represent the initial dominant height and age.
Height
X = 1 2 { ln H 0 + 18.42897   L 0 ± [ ln H 0 + 18.42897   L 0 ] 2 269.04952   L 0 } L 0 = ln [ 1 e ( 0.12233   t 0 ) ]
Diameter
X = 1 2 { ln D B H 0 + 16.17381   L 0 ± [ ln D B H 0 + 16.17381   L 0 ] 2 263.42968   L 0 } L 0 = ln [ 1 e ( 0.11481   t 0 ) ]
The GADA model was used to fit SI curves for H (from 8.7 to 22.7 m) and DBH (from 10.0 to 35.0 cm) at a reference age of 10 years. The fitted curves follow the same trends (Figure 4).

3.2. Volume Models

All volume models tested showed good fits to the data, with adjusted R2 above 0.989 (Table 4). The tested models for volume estimation are ordered from the lowest to highest AIC values. Using this criterion, the best model was the Newnham model (Equation (13)) (Table 4), expressed as follows:
V = 0.02444 + 0.000054 D B H 1.886436 H 0.996266
where V is the total tree volume of teak in m3, for DBH over bark of 5 cm or more, and H is the total height (m). The variation in this parameter is due to the diverse ages of living fence plantations, as well as to competition, growth conditions, crown size and other factors.

3.3. Mean Annual Increment in Volume

The curve for mean annual increment over time can be constructed for each SI obtained for the total volume within the study area (Figure 5), considering 160 trees per hectare within the SPS under study. The maximum MAI varied from 3 m3 for an SI of 14.7 m, to 15 m3 for an SI of 22.7 m. The age at which the maximum MAI occurs varies with site index, reaching higher values at early ages. In the most productive sites, the maximum MAI in volume occurred at 15 years, whereas in the least productive sites, the rotation age extended to 26 years for teak in these SPS.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

4.1. Height Projection Function and SI Classes

Several authors have used linear and log–log models to determine site indexes (SI) for teak grown in different parts of the world [40,41]. In these studies, height growth estimates did not show any limits (i.e., the SI models were asymptotic). The tree height growth at young ages in Costa Rica was higher than observed in the other studies [42,43,44]. Bermejo et al. [42] reported that the anamorphic form of the Hossfeld function was the best model for describing SI for teak growing in Costa Rica. Pérez and Kanninen [45] constructed anamorphic forms of the Richards function for diameter and height growth in teak plantations as a solution to the lack of sufficient data for stratification of soil, land and climate factors, which prevented construction of polymorphic curves.
The asymptotic value for height growth rate at young ages was fairly high, although this did not appear to have serious consequences for the quality of the GADA-derived predictions. Moreover, the curves appear reliable beyond the rotation age, as indicated by the site basal area values estimated from the trajectories of values observed over time (Figure 4). The main advantage of the GADA, introduced by Cieszewski and Bailey [12], is that the base equation can be expanded in accordance with the growth rate and the asymptote, so that more than one parameter in each model will depend on site quality, and the corresponding family of curves will therefore be more flexible [17,18,19]. This generalization enables families of curves that are both polymorphic and have multiple asymptotes to be generated [18,46].
In this study, the SI ranged from 15 m to 23 m in the most productive sites (Los Ríos province of Ecuador) at the reference age of 10 years. Bermejo et al. [42] reported SI from 19 to 23 m at a base age of 10 years for conventional teak plantations in the province of Guanacaste in Costa Rica, while Pérez and Kanninen [45] established an SI of 23 m at 20 years for teak in Costa Rica. Somarriba et al. [47] reported an SI of 23 m at nine years in teak planted in lines. Thus, the locations with SI for height below 17 m in our study may be considered as having marginal ecological conditions for growing teak for economic purposes.

4.2. Volume Equations for Teak in SPS

It has been suggested that when tree crowns compete for light, tree growth tends to focus on height, whereas crown growth and stem diameter increment appear to be more important in isolated trees [25]. Compared with conventional forestry, SPS are characterized by a low density of trees. The concept of a dominant crown is therefore not applicable, as the spacing reduces competition, generally resulting in a single layer of dominant and codominant trees [48]. Under these conditions, the stem form is more strongly influenced by low tree density than by the dominant height.
The volume equation developed in the present study for teak was fitted using a generalized method of moments to obtain good parameter estimates under heteroscedastic conditions, even without estimating the variances of the heteroscedastic errors. Tewari et al. [20] obtained similar results for calculating volumes of teak grown in India. Consideration of heteroscedastic conditions provided superior results to those obtained for teak in earlier studies [8,44,45,49,50]. These authors used polynomial methods (classic minimum squares methods) and non-linear regression techniques (Marquard’s method) to establish the volume of teak and selected the best fit volume models (Schumacher-Hall) in accordance with statistics such as the coefficient of determination (R2) and the statistical significance of the estimated parameters, without considering heteroscedastic conditions.

4.3. Teak Production in SPS

The rotation length for teak grown as living fences in Ecuador has not yet been defined, and trees are generally felled according to demand. In the present study, the biological rotation age was estimated to be 15 years for the most productive sites and 26 years for the least productive sites, for teak grown as living fences. These results show lower growth rates and productivity than those obtained by Somarriba et al. [47] in Costa Rica and Panama, establishing a 9-year harvesting cycle for line-planted teak for sites of intermediate to high productivity and an 11-year cycle for sites with low productivity potential. The maximum values of PAI and MAI for height were reached at a younger age (5 years) and the maximum value of the PAI for volume was reached at 8 years. Similar results have been reported by Bermejo et al. [42] for conventional teak plantations in Costa Rica under conditions of annual mean temperature 26–29 °C and precipitation of 1800–2450 mm year−1. However, the teak trees in the study area are usually felled at H 30 m and DBH 50 cm, i.e., an approximate age of 30 years in the best SPS sites in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
The final production in the SPS sites under study in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador was 225 m3 ha−1 at 15 years in the most productive sites and 35 m3 ha−1 at 26 years in the least productive sites. Somarriba et al. [47] established a rotation length of 9 years with a yield of 215 m3 ha−1 for teak grown by the line-planting method in Panama and Costa Rica. The results of the present study and those obtained by Somarriba et al. [47] can be compared with reference values established for teak grown in Panama, taking into account the prevailing conditions, i.e., mean annual precipitation of 3000–3500 mm year−1, mean annual temperature of 26.7 °C and a dry period of 3–4 months (January–April). Griess and Knoke [51] calculated a yield of 250 m3 ha−1 at 30 years. Quintero et al. [52] reported volume yields between 193 – 337 m3 ha−1 for teak in Colombia at 60 years, and Stefanski et al. [50] presented yields of 67.5–88.6 m3 ha−1 at 30 years. The MAI for the best SI in the study area was 15.3 m3 ha−1 year−1 at an age of 15 years for the SPS and a density of 160 trees ha−1. For 6 years old teak plantations, growth rates of 27.8 m3 ha−1 year−1 have been recorded in Colombia [53] and between 3.4 and 11.5 m3 ha−1 year−1 in Ivory Coast [54].
The information obtained in the present study regarding silviculture of the forest component of SPS in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador highlights the need to improve the management of these systems by creating local opportunities and strengthening silvicultural practices on small farms. For example, Midgley et al. [55] recommended carrying out field demonstrations to show small farmers the benefits of various different silvicultural practices, and Newby et al. [56] and Roshetko et al. [57] highlighted the need to support small farmers to encourage the adoption of silvopastoral systems for growing teak.
After model verification by independent samples, the site index model presented in the present study may contribute to the management of teak plantations in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador. For a base age of 10 years, height-based SI of 9 to 23 m, and diameter-based SI of 10 to 35 cm were established. De Sousa et al. [58] noted that the net value of the timber sold represents between 11% and 49% of the total income in agroforestry systems. However, this amount could be increased to 58% if the farmers were able to improve management of the forest component of agrosilvopastoral systems [5].
In summary, landowners can gain economic benefits from teak timber production, thereby also contributing to the economic status of farmers in the study area. Teak trees in areas with higher SI can be used as saw wood, whereas trees from SPS with lowest SI (9 m at 10 years) found in this study may still provide poles and fire wood for local use. MAGAP has not included planting trees in SPS in their development plans. However, public agencies and non-governmental organizations recognise that the production of merchantable timber may also provide multiple benefits associated with the intensification of land use, as in farming within SPS. Despite the good model fits to our data, we speculate that these models could get more resolution with dendroecological data using individual tree models based in other studies [10,15]. We recommend using more variables in the future that could help to better understand tree growth in response to competition or spatial position [10].

Author Contributions

Á.C.-L. carried out the field data compilation and analysis, and designed the Tables and Figures. J.A.-C., J.M.D.-A., C.M.-H., and O.S.-D. reviewed drafts of the paper. J.J.V.-H. generated some models and reviewed drafts of the paper. C.W. generated most of the models, wrote most of the text and reviewed drafts of the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ministerio de Agricultura Ganadería Acuacultura y Pesca, MAGAP. Legalización Masiva de Tierra, Quito, Ecuador. 2015. Available online: http://www.agricultura.gob.ec/legalizacion-masiva-de-tierra/ (accessed on 20 July 2017).
  2. Murgueitio, E. Silvopastoral systems in the neotropics. In International Silvopastoral and Sustainable Land Management; CAB: Lugo, Spain, 2005; pp. 24–29. [Google Scholar]
  3. Pagiola, S.; Ramírez, E.; Gobbi, J.; de Haan, C.; Ibrahim, I.; Murgueitio, E.; Ruiz, J.P. Paying for the environmental services of silvpostoral practices in Nicaragua. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 64, 374–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Andrade, H.J.; Brook, R.; Ibrahim, M. Growth, production and carbon sequestration of silvopastoral systems with native timber species in the dry lowlands of Costa Rica. Plant Soil. 2008, 308, 11–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Harvey, C.A.; Villanueva, C.; Villacís, J.; Chacón, M.; Muñoz, D.; López, M.; Ibrahim, M.; Gómez, R.; Taylor, R.; Martínez, J.; et al. Contribution of live fences to the ecological integrity of agricultural landscapes. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2005, 111, 200–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pérez, C.L.D.; Kanninen, M. Provisional equations for estimating total merchantable volume for Tectona grandis trees in Costa Rica. For. Trees Livelihoods 2003, 13, 345–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Hasenauer, H. Dimensional relationships of open-grown trees in Austria. For. Ecol. Manag. 1997, 96, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Cañadas, A.; Arce, L.; Molina, C. Growth, Yield and Performance of Teak in Silvopstoril System in Lowland Western Ecuador. In World Food System—A Contribution from Europe; Tielkes, E., Ed.; ETH Zurich: Zurich, Switzerland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  9. Vincent, A.B. Is height/age a reliable index of site? For. Chron. 1961, 37, 144–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Montoro Girona, M.; Morin, H.; Lussier, J.-M.; Walsh, D. Radial growth response of black spruce stands ten years after experimental shelterwoods and seed-tree cuttings in boreal forest. Forests 2016, 7, 240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bailey, R.L.; Clutter, J.L. Base-age invariant polymorphic site curves. For. Sci. 1974, 20, 155–159. [Google Scholar]
  12. Cieszewski, C.J.; Bailey, R.L. Generalized algebraic difference approach: Theory based derivation of dynamic equations with polymorphism and variance asymptotes. For. Sci. 2000, 46, 116–126. [Google Scholar]
  13. García, O. Building a dynamic growth model for trembling aspen in western Canada without age data. Can. J. For. Res. 2013, 43, 256–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. García, O.; Burkhart, H.E.; Amateis, R.L. A biologically-consistent stand growth model for loblolly pine in the piedmont physiographic region, USA. For. Ecol. Manag. 2011, 262, 2035–2041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Montoro Girona, M.; Rossi, S.; Lussier, J.M.; Walsh, D.; Morin, H. Understanding tree growth responses after partial cuttings: A new approach. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0172653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Palahı, M.; Tomé, M.; Pukkala, T.; Trasobares, A.; Montero, G. Site index model for Pinus sylvestris in north-east Spain. For. Ecol. Manag. 2004, 187, 35–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Cieszewski, C.J. Three methods of deriving advanced dynamic site equations demonstrated on inland Douglas-fir site curves. Can. J. For. Res. 2001, 31, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cieszewski, C.J. Comparing fixed- and variable-base-age site equations having single versus multiple asymptotes. For. Sci. 2002, 48, 7–23. [Google Scholar]
  19. Cieszewski, C.J. Developing a well-behaved dynamic site equation using a modified Hossfeld IV function Y3 = (axm)/(c + xm−1), a simplified mixed-model and scant subapline fir data. For. Sci. 2003, 49, 539–554. [Google Scholar]
  20. Tewari, P.V.; Álvarez-González, J.G.; García, O. Developing a dynamic growth model for teak plantation in India. For. Ecosyst. 2014, 1, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Moya, R.; Brian, B.; Henry, Q. A review of heartwood properties of Tectona grandis trees from fast-growth plantations. Wood Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 411–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kollert, W.; Cherubini, L. Teak Resources and Market Assessment 2010; Planted Forests and Trees Working Paper FP/47/E; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2012; Available online: http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/an537e/an537e00.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2017).
  23. Cañadas, A.; Rade, D.; Zambrano, C.; Molina, C.; Arce, L. Evaluación y manejo de fuentes semilleras de Teca en la Estación Experimental Tropical Pichilingue-Ecuador. Av. USFQ 2013, 5, 64–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Cañadas, A.; Rade, D.; Domínguez, J.M.; Murillo, I.; Molina, C. Modelación Forestal como Innovación Tecnológica para el Manejo Silvicultural y Aprovechamiento Económico de la Balsa, Región Costa-Ecuador; Abya-Yala: Quito, Ecuador, 2016; pp. 5–30. [Google Scholar]
  25. Ares, A.; Brauer, D. Growth and nut production of black walnut in relation to site, tree type and stand conditions in south-central United States. Agrofor. Syst. 2004, 63, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Richards, F.J. A flexible growth function for empirical use. J. Exp. Bot. 1959, 10, 290–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zeide, B. Analysis of growth equations. For. Sci. 1993, 39, 594–616. [Google Scholar]
  28. Shater, Z.; de-Miguel, S.; Kraid, B.; Pukala, T.; Palahi, M. A growth and yield model for eveng-aged Pinus brutia Ten. stands in Syria. Ann. For. Sci. 2011, 68, 149–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cieszewski, C.J. GADA Derivation of Dynamic Site Equations with Polymorphism and Variable Asymptotes from Richards, Weibull, and Other Exponential Functions; PMRC-Technical Report 2004-5; Daniel N. Warnell School of Forest Resources, University of Georgia: Athens, GA, USA, 2004; p. 16. [Google Scholar]
  30. Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2017; Available online: http://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 22 July 2017).
  31. Navar, J.D.; Domínguez, P.A. Ajuste de modelos de volumen y funciones que describen el perfil diamétrico de cuatro especies de pino plantadas en el Nordeste de México. For. Syst. 1997, 6, 147–162. [Google Scholar]
  32. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/ETS® 9.2 User’s Guide, SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 2008.
  33. Akaike, H. Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle. In Selected Papers of Hirotugu Akaike; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1998; pp. 199–213. [Google Scholar]
  34. Schumacher, F.X.; Hall, F.S. Logarithmic expression of timber-tree volume. J. Agric. Res. 1933, 47, 719–734. [Google Scholar]
  35. Spurr, S.H. Forest Inventory; Ronald Press Co.: New York, NY, USA, 1952; p. 476. [Google Scholar]
  36. Avery, T.E.; Burkhart, H.E. Forest Measurements, 5th ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2002; p. 456. ISBN 1478629088. [Google Scholar]
  37. Ruiz, R.M.; Martínez, G.E.R.; Mata, J.J. Análisis del crecimiento y producción de látex en plantaciones forestales comerciales de hule (Hevea brasiliensis Muell Arg.) en el estado de Oaxaca, México. Ra Ximhai 2007, 3, 565–578. [Google Scholar]
  38. Honer, T.G. A new total cubic foot volume function. For. Chron. 1965, 41, 476–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Newnham, R.M. Variable-form taper functions for four Alberta tree species. Can. J. For. Res. 1992, 22, 210–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Nwoboshi, L.C.H. Growth and nutrient requirements in a teak plantation age series in Nigeria. I. Linear growth and biomass production. For. Sci. 1983, 29, 159–165. [Google Scholar]
  41. Murugesh, M.; Srinivasan, V.M.; Rai, R.S.V.; Balaji, S. Growth and yield of teak (Tectona grandis L.f.) under irrigated condition. Indian J. For. 1997, 20, 373–376. [Google Scholar]
  42. Bermejo, I.; Cañellas, I.; San Miguel, A. Growth and yield models for teak plantations in Costa Rica. For. Ecol. Manag. 2004, 189, 97–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Nunifu, T.K.; Murchison, H.G. Provisional yield models of teak (Tectona grandis Linn F.) plantations in northern Ghana. For. Ecol. Manag. 1999, 120, 171–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Malende, Y.H.; Temu, A.B. Site-index curves and growth of teak (Tectona grandis) at Mtibwa, Tanzania. For. Ecol. Manag. 1990, 31, 91–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Pérez, D.; Kanninen, M. Heartwood, sapwood and bark content, and wood dry density of young and mature teak (Tectona grandis) trees grown in Costa Rica. Silva Fenn. 2005, 37, 425–441. [Google Scholar]
  46. Castedo-Dorado, F.; Diéguez-Aranda, U.; Barrio-Anta, M.; Álvarez-González, J. Modelling stand basal area growth for radiata pine plantations in Northwestern Spain using the GADA. Ann. For. Sci. 2007, 64, 609–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Somarriba, E.; Beer, J.; Morataya, R.; Calvo, G. Linderos de Tectona grandis, en el Trópico húmedo de Costa Rica y Panamá. Rev. For. Centroam. 1999, 18, 15–21. [Google Scholar]
  48. Gea-Izquierdo, G.; Cañellas, I.; Montero, G. Site index in agroforestry systems: Age-dependent and age-independent dynamic diameter growth models for Quercus ilex in Iberian open oak woodlands. Can. J. For. Res. 2008, 38, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Pérez, D.; Kanninem, M. Stand growth scenarios for Tectona grandis plantations in Costa Rica. For. Ecol. Manag. 2005, 210, 425–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Stefanski, S.; Shi, X.; Hall, J.S.; Hernández, A.; Fenichel, E. Teak-cattle production tradeoffs for Panama Canal Watershed small scale producer. For. Policy. Econ. 2015, 56, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Griess, V.C.; Knoke, T. Can native tree species plantations in Panama compete with teak plantations? An economic estimation. New For. 2011, 41, 13–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Quintero, M.A.; Jerez, M.; Flores, J. Modelo de crecimiento y rendimiento para plantaciones de teca (Tecntona grandis L.) usando el enfoque de espacio de estados. Cienc. Ing. 2012, 33, 33–42. [Google Scholar]
  53. Restrepo, H.; Orrego, S. A comprehensive analysis of teak plantation investment in Colombia. For. Policy Econ. 2015, 57, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Dupuy, B.; Verhaegen, D. Le teck de plantation Tectona grandis Tectona grandis en Côte d’Ivoire. Bois For. Trop. 1993, 235, 9–14. [Google Scholar]
  55. Midgley, S.; Blyth, M.; Mounlamai, K.; Midgley, D.; Brown, A. Towards Improving Profitability of Teak in Integrated Smallholder Farming Systems in Northern Laos; Technical Reports No 64; Australian Center for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR): Camberra, Australia, 2007.
  56. Newby, J.C.; Cramb, R.A.; Sakanphet, S.; McNamara, S. Smallholder teak and agrarian change in Northern Laos. Small-Scale For. 2012, 11, 27–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Roshetko, J.M.; Rohadi, D.; Perdana, A.; Sabastian, G.; Nuryartono, N.; Pramono, A.A.; Widyani, N.; Manula, P.; Fauzi, M.; Sumardamto, P.; et al. Teak agroforestry systems for livelihood enhancement, industrial timber production, and environmental rehabilitation. For. Trees Livelihoods 2013, 22, 241–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. De Sousa, K.; Detlefsen, G.; de Melo, E.; Tobar, D.; Casanoves, F. Timber from smallholder agroforestry systems in Nicaragua and Honduras. Agrofor. Syst. 2016, 90, 207–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Geographic distribution of silvopastoral systems (SPS) and location of sampling plots for the use of teak as living fences in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
Figure 1. Geographic distribution of silvopastoral systems (SPS) and location of sampling plots for the use of teak as living fences in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
Forests 09 00055 g001
Figure 2. Experimental design of the sampling plots of living fences of teak planted in lines, with a spacing of 2.5 m, and the dominant forage species was Megathyrsus maximus (Jacq.) B. K. Simon & S. W. L. Jacobs in silvopastoral systems (SPS) in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador. Sixty-four teak trees per plot were randomly sampled.
Figure 2. Experimental design of the sampling plots of living fences of teak planted in lines, with a spacing of 2.5 m, and the dominant forage species was Megathyrsus maximus (Jacq.) B. K. Simon & S. W. L. Jacobs in silvopastoral systems (SPS) in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador. Sixty-four teak trees per plot were randomly sampled.
Forests 09 00055 g002
Figure 3. Bias and root mean square error (RMSE) for the mean dominant height and diameter at breast height (DBH) predictions yielded by the GADA (generalized algebraic difference approach) formulation (of the Chapman-Richards model) and by the Chapman-Richards and Hossfeld models ((A,C) for height and (B,D) for DBH).
Figure 3. Bias and root mean square error (RMSE) for the mean dominant height and diameter at breast height (DBH) predictions yielded by the GADA (generalized algebraic difference approach) formulation (of the Chapman-Richards model) and by the Chapman-Richards and Hossfeld models ((A,C) for height and (B,D) for DBH).
Forests 09 00055 g003
Figure 4. Curves fitted with the GADA model for the relationship between age and mean dominant total height and mean dominant diameter at breast height during development of growth models for Tectona grandis in living fences in coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
Figure 4. Curves fitted with the GADA model for the relationship between age and mean dominant total height and mean dominant diameter at breast height during development of growth models for Tectona grandis in living fences in coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
Forests 09 00055 g004
Figure 5. Mean annual increment (MAI) per hectare for different site indices considering a density of 160 teak trees ha−1 planted as living fences in SPS. The dashed line represents the periodic annual increment (PAI) per hectare. The solid line indicates the MAI. The local maximum MAI can be considered the optimal biological rotation age for each SI class.
Figure 5. Mean annual increment (MAI) per hectare for different site indices considering a density of 160 teak trees ha−1 planted as living fences in SPS. The dashed line represents the periodic annual increment (PAI) per hectare. The solid line indicates the MAI. The local maximum MAI can be considered the optimal biological rotation age for each SI class.
Forests 09 00055 g005
Table 1. Geographic location and general conditions of the silvopastoral systems under study in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
Table 1. Geographic location and general conditions of the silvopastoral systems under study in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
ProvinceTotal Annual Precipitation (mm)Mean Annual Temperature (°C)Elevation (m a.s.l.)Number of Plots
Manabí79824.620–30050
Santa Elena75024.10–500150
Guayas119825.730–10050
Los Ríos200025.230–30060
Esmeraldas264625.6190–30050
Table 2. Models tested for fitting volume equations to diameter at breast height (DBH, cm) and total tree height (H, m) data of teak trees in the study.
Table 2. Models tested for fitting volume equations to diameter at breast height (DBH, cm) and total tree height (H, m) data of teak trees in the study.
ModelExpression
Schumacher-Hall (allometric) [34] V = a D B H b H c (6)
Spurr [35] V = a D B H 2 H (7)
Spurr potential [35] V = a ( D B H H ) b (8)
Spurr with independent term [35] V = a + b D B H 2 H (9)
Incomplete generalized combined variable [36] V = a + b H + c D B H 2 H (10)
Australian formula [37] V = a + b D B H 2 + c H + d D B H 2 H (11)
Honer [38] V = D B H 2 / ( a + b / H ) (12)
Newnham [39] V = a + b D B H c H d (13)
Table 3. Estimated values of parameters, p values and goodness-of-fit statistics for the three mean dominant height (m)—age and diameter at breast height (DBH, cm)—age models for teak planted as living fences.
Table 3. Estimated values of parameters, p values and goodness-of-fit statistics for the three mean dominant height (m)—age and diameter at breast height (DBH, cm)—age models for teak planted as living fences.
VariablesBase ModelVariableEstimated ValueStandard Error (SE)p ValueRoot Mean Square Error
Height–ageEquation (1)a134.9124.916<0.00013.64
a20.0440.0160.0049
a30.8870.102<0.0001
Equation (2)a1−1.0750.094<0.00013.95
a20.7480.038<0.0001
a30.0120.002<0.0001
Equation (3)b10.1220.004<0.00016.09
b2−18.4290.757<0.0001
b367.2622.55<0.0001
DBH–ageEquation (1)a153.65710.522<0.00016.88
a20.0430.0190.028
a30.9560.141<0.0001
Equation (2)a1−0.7780.085<0.00017.18
a20.5560.034<0.0001
a30.0060.002<0.0001
Equation (3)b10.1150.012<0.00019.75
b2−16.1730.812<0.0001
b365.8553.121<0.0001
Table 4. Goodness of fit of the models developed for determining the volume of teak in living fences in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
Table 4. Goodness of fit of the models developed for determining the volume of teak in living fences in the coastal lowlands of Ecuador.
ModelMSER2AdjParameterValueSEAIC
Newnham0.002890.9987a−0.0240.00361−1921
b0<0.0001
c1.8860.008
d0.9960.0148
Schumacher-Hall (allometric)0.003070.9986a0<0.0001−1902
b1.9120.006
c1.0400.014
Australian formula0.003330.9985a−0.1140.012−1873
b00
c0.0070.001
d0<0.0001
Incomplete generalized combined variable0.003490.9984a−0.0830.009−1859
b0.0060.001
c0<0.0001
Spurr with independent term0.004070.9982a0.0440.004−1811
b0<0.0001
Honer0.004850.9978a125.85313.329−1753
b25,812.210375.400
Spurr0.006240.9972a0<0.0001−1672
Spurr potential0.024200.9892a0<0.0001−1222
b1.6620.009
MSE = mean squared error; R2Adj = adjusted determination coefficient; SE = standard error; AIC = Akaike information criterion.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cañadas-L, Á.; Andrade-Candell, J.; Domínguez-A, J.M.; Molina-H, C.; Schnabel-D, O.; Vargas-Hernández, J.J.; Wehenkel, C. Growth and Yield Models for Teak Planted as Living Fences in Coastal Ecuador. Forests 2018, 9, 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020055

AMA Style

Cañadas-L Á, Andrade-Candell J, Domínguez-A JM, Molina-H C, Schnabel-D O, Vargas-Hernández JJ, Wehenkel C. Growth and Yield Models for Teak Planted as Living Fences in Coastal Ecuador. Forests. 2018; 9(2):55. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020055

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cañadas-L, Álvaro, Joffre Andrade-Candell, Juan Manuel Domínguez-A, Carlos Molina-H, Odilón Schnabel-D, J. Jesús Vargas-Hernández, and Christian Wehenkel. 2018. "Growth and Yield Models for Teak Planted as Living Fences in Coastal Ecuador" Forests 9, no. 2: 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020055

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop