论文部分内容阅读
按照我国现行树干解析技术,解析木各龄阶树高一般是根据断面高度以及相邻两个断面的年轮数之差推定的,我们将这种方法暂称为“传统法”。成子纯(1981)讨论过用此法推定树高之误差的性质和大小,提出了修正方法(以下简称“修正法”)。司洪生等(1984)探讨过樟子松解析木龄阶树高误差,建立了回归修正式。Dyer(1987)等试验了估计解析木树高的6种方法,认为Carmean(1972)的方法最准确。何智英(1988)对成子纯的修正法持否定态度,以为“图解法”最佳。鉴于树干解析是研究树木生长的基本方法,在生产和科研中经常采用,深入探讨推定各龄阶树高的方法是很有必要的。
According to the current trunk analysis technology in our country, the analysis of tree ages of all ages is generally estimated based on the height of the section and the difference between the annual rings of two adjacent sections. We will temporarily refer to this method as the “traditional method.” Cheng Zi-Chun (1981) discussed the nature and magnitude of the errors in tree height estimation using this method, and proposed a correction method (hereinafter referred to as “correction method”). Secretary Hongsheng (1984) discussed the Pinus sylvestris wood tree height error analysis, the establishment of the regression formula. Dyer (1987) tested the six methods of estimating wood height and concluded that Carmean (1972) is the most accurate method. He Zhiying (1988) held a negative attitude towards Cheng Chun’s amendment law, thinking that the “graphic method” is the best. Since tree trunking is the basic method to study the growth of trees, it is necessary to study the method of estimating the height of trees at various ages in the production and scientific research.