Kane Experimental Forest: Overstory tree data from a thinning study in Allegheny hardwoods

Metadata:
Identification_Information:
Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Rhinehart, Tessa A.
Originator: Weldon, Corinne A.
Originator: Stout, Susan L.
Publication_Date: 2016
Title:
Kane Experimental Forest: Overstory tree data from a thinning study in Allegheny hardwoods
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: tabular digital data
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Fort Collins, CO
Publisher: Forest Service Research Data Archive
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2016-0002
Description:
Abstract:
This data publication contains individual tree diameter data collected from 1972 to 2012 under the study plan 4110-FS-NE-1152-76 "Study Plan: Thinning study in Allegheny hardwoods" on the Kane Experimental Forest in Pennsylvania. This study provides data about tree growth and survival as affected by stand structure parameters and thinning regimes from 30% to 100% residual density.
Purpose:
To correlate growth and mortality by species and diameter class with relative density and structure in the residual stand.
Supplemental_Information:
The raw data publication available represents several study areas of an ongoing, long-term study. Data collected in additional treatment areas through revisions to this study will be made available at a later time. We recommend that users review the documentation provided with the full data publication download before proceeding with data summary or analysis.

Several papers using data collected through this study are available in the Cross Reference section.

Original metadata date was 1/12/2016. Minor metadata updates on 12/19/2016.
Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Range_of_Dates/Times:
Beginning_Date: 1972
Ending_Date: 2012
Currentness_Reference:
ground condition
Status:
Progress: In work
Maintenance_and_Update_Frequency: As needed
Spatial_Domain:
Description_of_Geographic_Extent:
Even-aged stands ranging in age from 55 to 100 years in the cherry-maple type growing on the Allegheny Plateau of northwestern Pennsylvania.
Bounding_Coordinates:
West_Bounding_Coordinate: -78.79828
East_Bounding_Coordinate: -78.77761
North_Bounding_Coordinate: 41.60411
South_Bounding_Coordinate: 41.59866
Keywords:
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: ISO 19115 Topic Category
Theme_Keyword: biota
Theme_Keyword: environment
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: National Research & Development Taxonomy
Theme_Keyword: Forest Products
Theme_Keyword: Forest products industry
Theme_Keyword: Inventory, Monitoring, & Analysis
Theme_Keyword: Assessments
Theme_Keyword: Natural Resource Management & Use
Theme_Keyword: Conservation
Theme_Keyword: Ecosystem services
Theme_Keyword: Forest management
Theme_Keyword: Restoration
Theme_Keyword: Timber
Theme_Keyword: Climate change
Theme_Keyword: Carbon
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: None
Theme_Keyword: silviculture
Theme_Keyword: species composition
Theme_Keyword: forest stand dynamics
Theme_Keyword: tree and stand growth
Theme_Keyword: carbon sequestration
Theme_Keyword: relative density
Theme_Keyword: stocking
Place:
Place_Keyword_Thesaurus: None
Place_Keyword: Kane Experimental Forest
Place_Keyword: Pennsylvania
Taxonomy:
Keywords/Taxon:
Taxonomic_Keyword_Thesaurus:
None
Taxonomic_Keywords: multiple species
Taxonomic_Keywords: plants
Taxonomic_Keywords: vegetation
Taxonomic_System:
Classification_System/Authority:
Classification_System_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: ITIS
Publication_Date: 2015
Title:
Integrated Taxonomic Information System
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: database
Other_Citation_Details:
Retrieved [June, 25, 2015]
Online_Linkage: https://www.itis.gov
Taxonomic_Procedures:
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Kingdom
Taxon_Rank_Value: Plantae
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Subkingdom
Taxon_Rank_Value: Viridiplantae
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Infrakingdom
Taxon_Rank_Value: Streptophyta
Applicable_Common_Name: land plants
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Superdivision
Taxon_Rank_Value: Embryophyta
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Division
Taxon_Rank_Value: Tracheophyta
Applicable_Common_Name: vascular plants, tracheophytes
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Subdivision
Taxon_Rank_Value: Spermatophytina
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Class
Taxon_Rank_Value: Magnoliopsida
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Superorder
Taxon_Rank_Value: Rosanae
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Order
Taxon_Rank_Value: Rosales
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Family
Taxon_Rank_Value: Rosaceae
Applicable_Common_Name: roses
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Prunus L.
Applicable_Common_Name: chokecherry, plum
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Prunus serotina Ehrh.
Applicable_Common_Name: black cherry, black chokecherry
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Prunus pensylvanica L. f.
Applicable_Common_Name: pin cherry
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Amelanchier Medik.
Applicable_Common_Name: serviceberry
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Order
Taxon_Rank_Value: Sapindales
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Family
Taxon_Rank_Value: Sapindaceae
Applicable_Common_Name: soapberries
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Acer L.
Applicable_Common_Name: maples
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Acer pensylvanicum L.
Applicable_Common_Name: striped maple
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Acer rubrum L.
Applicable_Common_Name: red maple
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Acer saccharum Marsh.
Applicable_Common_Name: sugar maple
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Order
Taxon_Rank_Value: Fagales
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Family
Taxon_Rank_Value: Betulaceae
Applicable_Common_Name: alder, birch
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Betula L.
Applicable_Common_Name: birch
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Betula alleghaniensis Britton
Applicable_Common_Name: yellow birch
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Betula lenta L.
Applicable_Common_Name: sweet birch, black birch
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Carpinus L.
Applicable_Common_Name: hornbeam
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Carpinus caroliniana Walter
Applicable_Common_Name: American hornbeam, blue beech, musclewood
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Ostrya Scop.
Applicable_Common_Name: hophornbeam
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Ostrya virginiana (Mill.) K. Koch
Applicable_Common_Name: ironwood, eastern hophornbeam
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Family
Taxon_Rank_Value: Fagaceae
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Fagus L.
Applicable_Common_Name: beech
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.
Applicable_Common_Name: American beech
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Superorder
Taxon_Rank_Value: Asteranae
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Order
Taxon_Rank_Value: Lamiales
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Family
Taxon_Rank_Value: Oleaceae
Applicable_Common_Name: olives
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Fraxinus L.
Applicable_Common_Name: ash
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Fraxinus americana L.
Applicable_Common_Name: white ash
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Order
Taxon_Rank_Value: Apiales
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Family
Taxon_Rank_Value: Araliaceae
Applicable_Common_Name: ginseng
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Aralia L.
Applicable_Common_Name: spikenard
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Aralia spinosa L.
Applicable_Common_Name: devils walkingstick
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Superorder
Taxon_Rank_Value: Magnolianae
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Order
Taxon_Rank_Value: Magnoliales
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Family
Taxon_Rank_Value: Magnoliaceae
Applicable_Common_Name: magnolias
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Liriodendron L.
Applicable_Common_Name: tuliptree
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Liriodendron tulipifera L.
Applicable_Common_Name: yellow poplar, tulip poplar, yellow-poplar
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Magnolia L.
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Magnolia acuminata (L.) L.
Applicable_Common_Name: cucumbertree
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Class
Taxon_Rank_Value: Pinopsida
Applicable_Common_Name: conifers
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Subclass
Taxon_Rank_Value: Pinidae
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Order
Taxon_Rank_Value: Pinales
Applicable_Common_Name: pines
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Family
Taxon_Rank_Value: Pinaceae
Applicable_Common_Name: pines
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Picea A. Dietr.
Applicable_Common_Name: spruce
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns & Poggenb.
Applicable_Common_Name: black spruce
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Genus
Taxon_Rank_Value: Tsuga Carrière
Applicable_Common_Name: hemlock
Taxonomic_Classification:
Taxon_Rank_Name: Species
Taxon_Rank_Value: Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carrière
Applicable_Common_Name: eastern hemlock
Access_Constraints: None
Use_Constraints:
These data were collected using funding from the U.S. Government and can be used without additional permissions or fees. If you use these data in a publication, presentation, or other research product please use the following citation:

Rhinehart, Tessa A.; Weldon, Corinne A.; Stout, Susan L. 2016. Kane Experimental Forest: Overstory tree data from a thinning study in Allegheny hardwoods. Fort Collins, CO: Forest Service Research Data Archive. https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2016-0002
Data_Set_Credit:
This project was funded by the USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station.
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Ernst, Richard L.
Originator: Nyland, Ralph D. (Ed.)
Publication_Date: 1987
Title:
Growth and yield following thinning in mixed-species Allegheny hardwood stands
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: conference proceedings
Series_Information:
Series_Name: State University of New York Faculty of Forestry Miscellaneous Publication
Issue_Identification: 13
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Syracuse, NY
Publisher: State University of New York
Other_Citation_Details:
pages 211-222
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Hoover, Coeli M.
Publication_Date: 2010
Title:
Using existing thinning studies to investigate the carbon consequences of thinning: learning from the past to craft the future
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: conference proceedings
Other_Citation_Details:
In: Adams, M.B.; McNeel, J.; Rodriguez-Franco, C., comps. 2010. Meeting current and future conservation challenges through the synthesis of long-term silviculture and range management research. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-84. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 25-35.
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/47083
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Hoover, Coeli
Originator: Stout, Susan
Publication_Date: 2007
Title:
The carbon consequences of thinning techniques: stand structure makes a difference
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: journal article
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Journal of Forestry
Issue_Identification: 105(5): July/August 2007
Other_Citation_Details:
pages 266-270
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/12575
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Marquis, David A.
Originator: Ernst, Richard L.
Publication_Date: 1991
Title:
The effects of stand structure after thinning on the growth of an Allegheny hardwood stand
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: journal article
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Forest Science
Issue_Identification: 37(4)
Other_Citation_Details:
pages 1182-1200
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/12893
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Marquis, D.A.
Publication_Date: 199103
Title:
Independent effects and interactions of stand diameter, tree diameter, crown class, and age on tree growth in mixed-species, even-aged hardwood stands
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: conference proceedings
Other_Citation_Details:
In: McCormick, Larry H.; Gottschalk, Kurt W., eds. Proceedings, 8th Central Hardwood Forest Conference; 1991 March 4-6; University Park, PA. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-148. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station: 442-458.
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/13521
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Nowak, Christopher A.
Publication_Date: 1996
Title:
Wood volume increment in thinned, 50- to 55-year-old, mixed-species Allegheny hardwoods
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: journal article
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Canadian Journal of Forest Research
Issue_Identification: 26(5)
Other_Citation_Details:
pages 819-835
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/12892
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Nowak, Christopher A.
Originator: Marquis, David A.
Publication_Date: 1997
Title:
Distribution-of-cut guides for thinning in Allegheny hardwoods: a review
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Res. Notes
Issue_Identification: NE-362
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Radnor, PA
Publisher: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station
Other_Citation_Details:
7 pages
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/3972
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Roach, Benjamin A.
Publication_Date: 1977
Title:
A stocking guide for Allegheny hardwoods and its use in controlling intermediate cuttings
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Res. Pap.
Issue_Identification: NE-373
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Upper Darby, PA
Publisher: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station
Other_Citation_Details:
30 pages
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/14498
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Schuler, Thomas M.
Originator: Marquis, David A.
Originator: Ernst, Richard L.
Originator: Simpson, Brian T.
Publication_Date: 1993
Title:
Test of four stand growth simulators for the northeastern United States
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Res. Pap.
Issue_Identification: NE-676
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Radnor, PA
Publisher: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station
Other_Citation_Details:
14 pages
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/20778
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Stout, Susan L.
Originator: Marquis, David A.
Originator: Ernst, Richard L.
Publication_Date: 1987
Title:
A relative density measure for mixed species stands
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: journal article
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Journal of Forestry
Issue_Identification: 85(7)
Other_Citation_Details:
pages 45-47
Cross_Reference:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Stout, Susan Laurane
Originator: Nyland, Ralph D.
Publication_Date: 1986
Title:
Role of species composition in relative density measurement in Allegheny hardwoods
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: journal article
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Canadian Journal of Forest Research
Issue_Identification: 16(3)
Other_Citation_Details:
pages 574-579
Online_Linkage: https://doi.org/10.1139/x86-099
Back to Top
Data_Quality_Information:
Attribute_Accuracy:
Attribute_Accuracy_Report:
No measurement quality objectives exist for this study.

Tree species were identified by experienced forestry technicians working in crews of at least two who checked each other's identification.

Diameter at breast height (DBH) data were collected in a similar way.

Occasionally, field data were inconsistent: measured diameter of a tree would decrease between inventories, or a tree marked dead in a previous inventory would be marked as alive in a later inventory. Decreasing tree diameter could be caused by measurement taken in slightly different position on tree or incorrectly reading or recording a measurement. Decreases in DBH were also common in trees which were near death or had deformities, e.g. loss of bark.

Inconsistencies in whether or not a tree was recorded as dead could have occurred if a field crew incorrectly recorded a tree as dead, or failed to notice it was dead and measured it as if it were alive.

Please see the Processing Steps in the Lineage for further interpretation of these inconsistencies and information about how they are documented or modified in the data. A record of individual inconsistencies or changes in measurements is available in "Additional Info" spreadsheets of the full data publication download. Data in this archive report all inconsistencies and changes to the extent known at the time of archiving.
Logical_Consistency_Report:
In field, new data measurements were compared with measurements from last inventory to ensure agreement with previous measurements.

After collection in the field, data were entered digitally and proofed to ensure tree diameters were consistent over several years. We searched for two types of inconsistency: tree diameter decreasing over time, and trees previously marked dead measured in a later inventory as if alive. See Lineage section for additional information about these data processing events.

Data from 1992 to present were reproofed to find instances of changed entries because the relevant field personnel were still available to answer questions about collection methods, and because the format leant itself better to reproofing. Most data before 1992 were not reproofed.

Data proofing and commenting are incomplete for some years due to missing field data sheets. Data in 1988 (Block 1) and 1989 (Blocks 2 and 3) tallies were collected with an early field data recorder. There are no hardcopy printouts of the collected data, and at the time, Forest Service personnel involved with the study decided that the risks of data loss were too high, and we reverted to paper and pencil data collection after 1989. Field data in 2010 were missing for Block 1 only.
Completeness_Report:
Missing and blank codes:
A code of "-1000" means that data should have been recorded but either weren't, or weren't recorded correctly. A blank entry indicates that data collection was unnecessary. More information about these codes is available in the Entity & Attribute section of this metadata.

Plot versus stand numbering:
This study included three blocks, each containing 10 or 11 two-acre study plots. In these data, each study plot has two separate identifiers: a plot number, and a stand number. Plot numbers are not unique between blocks; the plots in each block are identified by plot numbers 1-10, and Blocks 2 and 3 each have a plot 11 as well. So, the identifier "plot 5" is meaningless when not in context of a block number. Each study plot is also identified by a unique "stand" number from 27 to 58. For instance, plot 5 in Block 1 is interchangeably numbered Stand 31. Both identifiers are included in these data to suit the preference of the user.

Measurement labeling in data set:
Each inventory (a complete set of diameter measurements of all trees in a block) was conducted in the dormant season. Inventories taken in the same season as a part of the same inventory were often recorded across two different years, e.g. in December of 2011 and January of 2012. To reduce confusion, measurements are dated with the year that the dormant season began; for example, both December 2011 and January 2012 measurements would belong to a "2011" inventory.

Measurement dates:
The initial study plan provided for plots to be measured once yearly for the first 5 years after the initial cut, and then once every five years after. Each block's initial cut occurred in a different year. Due to time and funding constraints, data were not always collected as prescribed.

For block 1, between 1972 and 1985, measurements followed the prescribed pattern with the following exceptions. The second inventory, which should have occurred in the winter of 1973, occurred in the autumn of 1974. This delayed the remaining three yearly inventories by one year, such that they occurred in 1975, 1976, and 1977. After 1985, a second thinning in 1988 interrupted the prescribed pattern. Measurements resumed every five years between 1988 and 2003, with the exception of an early inventory in 1992. Seven years spanned the 2003 measurement and the 2010 measurement instead of five. The block was thinned in 2011 and another inventory occurred in 2012.

In block 2, measurements followed the prescribed pattern between 1974 and 1986 with the following exceptions. The fifth inventory and final yearly inventory, which should have occurred in 1978, occurred in 1979 instead. This delayed the first five-year inventory such that it was taken in 1984. However, surveying for cherry scallop shell moth tree defoliation (see below) allowed for an additional inventory in 1982. A thinning in 1990 interrupted the pattern. After the thinning, measurements were taken every five years from 1990 to 2011 with the exception of a measurement one year late in 2006 instead of 2005. The block was thinned in 2011 and another inventory occurred in 2012.

In block 3, measurements followed the prescribed pattern between 1975 and 1990 with the following exceptions. The fourth yearly inventory, which should have occurred in 1978, was taken in 1979, delaying the fifth inventory to 1980. Surveying for cherry scallop shell moth tree defoliation allowed for an additional inventory in 1982. The first five-year measurement occurred in 1985 as anticipated, but due to a thinning planned in 1990, the next measurement occurred in 1989. After the 1990 thinning, measurements were taken every five years between 1990 and 2010, with the exception of an inventory one year late, in 2006 instead of 2005. The block was thinned in 2011 and another inventory occurred in 2012.

Blocks 1 and 2 thinning:
In the third (2010-2011) thinning, one study plot in Block 1 and several in Block 2 had not regained enough residual density (RD) to perform a thinning. These were stand numbers 36, 40, 42, 45, and 46. More information about the decision not to thin these plots is available in the full data publication download (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Study_Plan_2015.pdf).

Block 3 thinning:
Treatment plots in Block 3 were initially intended to be thinned to 60% RD, but due to concerns about the loss of too many substantial trees from the plots thinned from above, four plots (one of the three plots thinned from below, two of three thinned from middle, and one of three thinned from above) were thinned only to 70% RD. The rest of the treatment plots were thinned to 60% as planned. Please see the Methodology for more information about thinning procedures.

Tree numbering:
Trees were numbered continuously by plot, but some tree numbers do not appear in this data set -- for example, block 1, plot 1 is missing tree number 1. This discrepancy occurred when a tree was given a number, but was cut or died before its first diameter measurement was taken. Rarely, a numbered tree in the measurement area was so close to the edge of the area that it grew out; these trees are removed from the data. Please see Methodology section for a more extensive description of tree numbering and indications of tree cut.

Commenting:
Field personnel recorded information about tree health and condition through notes written in the field. However, the detail and type of field comments recorded changed depending upon the year the data were collected and the person collecting the data. In the full data publication download, comments are provided in the "Additional Info" spreadsheets of the \Data folder. These comments are not presented as exhaustive; rather, they serve as an additional potential reference for those seeking to understand or interpret the data set.

Ingrowth:
A tree not measured in any previous period that has reached a set minimum diameter at breast height (DBH) to be recorded is considered ingrowth. When this study was initiated, the threshold for ingrowth was 0.5 inches DBH. In 1985, this threshold increased to 1.0 inches.

Tree health:
In the early 1980s, black cherry trees in the study were subject to severe defoliation due to cherry scallop shell moth Rheumaptera prunivorata. Trees were surveyed for damage, but due to a lack of documentation about survey methods, the data produced in these surveys were not included in this data publication.

In 1985 and 1986, surveys of Block 2 and 3 found notable mortality and decline in sugar maple populations. The Maple Decline Survey sought to describe the extent of the damage and its potential causes. The data produced by this survey are included in the data publication. A progress report which describes the methods and results of this survey is available in the full data publication download (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Maple_Decline_Report_1987.pdf).

In 1985, two pairs of plots in Block 1 were selected for an herbicide treatment study. The goal of this study was to understand what effect, if any, dense fern cover had on overstory growth. In the summer of 1985, plots 7 and 11 were sprayed with herbicide, paired respectively with unsprayed Plots 6 and 8. After visual inspection, remaining ferns in Plots 7 and 11 were spot treated in the summer of 1986. However, no data other than regular diameter measurements were collected in these plots and the diameter data were never analyzed in the context of the herbicide treatment study. Letters to the lab's record about these treatments are available in the full data publication download (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Herbicides_Record_1985-1987.pdf).

Dead codes and missing dead code data:
From 1972-1992, a dead tree in any condition received a diameter measurement of "-1" the first year it was found dead, and was not measured or given a code in subsequent years. After the development of more descriptive codes for the condition of dead trees in 1993, many of these trees that were previously marked "-1" were once again given codes in the data. After 1993, the code "-1" was assigned only to trees that were not only dead but were also completely gone. More information about these codes is available in the Entity & Attribute section of this metadata.

This change gave rise to two types of missing data about dead tree condition. First, in many instances, there are gaps in information for those trees that were marked "-1" before 1993 and were given more specific dead codes after 1993. Second, there is a complete lack of information about the condition of dead trees that were not given more specific dead codes by 1993.

After 1993, trees were occasionally marked as dead in one inventory but mistakenly measured as if alive in a later inventory. The resulting missing condition codes are coded as "-1000." For more information about methods used to process data where trees were misidentified as alive, please see the Process Step section of the Lineage.

Missing diameter data:
Some trees were missing DBH measurements for one or more years. This very rarely occurred when field personnel could not find a tree; otherwise, it occurred when trees were marked as dead in one inventory but discovered to be alive in a later inventory. All missing diameter measurements are coded as "-1000." For more information about methods used to process data where trees were misidentified as dead, please see the Process Step section of the Lineage.

Missing subplot data:
Some trees did not have their subplot number recorded. All missing subplots are coded as "-1000."
Lineage:
Methodology:
Methodology_Type: Lab
Methodology_Description:
Study design:
Three blocks, numbered 1-3, were established on various sites in second-growth, 50- to 55-year old stands on the Kane Experimental forest. Each block consisted of a set of 10-11 two acre plots in a uniform stand. In 1972, plots were randomly assigned thinning treatments that controlled stand density or stand structure. Two plots in each block were left unthinned to serve as control.

Block 1 was established in a 50-year-old stand with 30-60 percent of its basal area in black cherry, white ash, and yellow-poplar, species with different growing space requirements than other northern hardwood species (Roach 1977). In addition to two control plots assigned no thinning (100% residual density), Block 1 consisted of nine treated plots, with one plot each assigned thinning to 80%, 40%, and 30% residual density (RD), and two plots each assigned to 70%, 60%, and 50% RD. Block 2 served as a replicate of Block 1; it was established in conditions of the same age class and site conditions as Block 1, and consisted of two control and eight treated plots, with one plot each assigned to 80% and 70% RD treatments and two plots each assigned to 60%, 50%, and 40% RD treatments.

In both of these blocks, thinning to desired RD was accomplished by calculating the average stand diameter for each species group, and then removing 2/3 of the thinned basal area from below the diameter and 1/3 of the thinned basal area from above the diameter. Within that constraint, the person marking the stand for thinning made the decision on what trees to cut based on spacing to give crown openness and distribute the amount of thinning evenly across the plot within that constraint. Therefore, in Blocks 1 and 2, thinning treatments changed stand density while controlling for stand structure. Please see the Calculations entry of the lineage for information on how residual density and average diameter were calculated.

Block 3 consisted of two control plots thinned to 100% RD and nine treatment plots thinned to either 60% or 70% RD. Initially, all plots were intended to be thinned to 60% RD, but concerns about the loss of large trees in the plots thinned "from above" led to some plots being assigned 70% RD treatments instead. Thinning to desired RD was accomplished in three plots by thinning "from above," three by thinning "from below," and three by thinning "from middle." These thinning treatments changed stand structure through affecting size class distribution, while controlling for stand density, making Block 3 different from Blocks 1 and 2.

Details about the type of thinning treatments assigned to each plot and the dates of each treatment are available in the full data publication download (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Work_History.pdf).

Thinning in Block 3 was accomplished as follows. Each plot was divided into six 1/10th acre subplots and a before-cut inventory of tree species and diameters was taken. Trees were quantified by their relative density, a function of both their diameter at breast height (DBH) and their species. To thin from above, the tree largest in relative density was marked for cutting, and the RD in the stand was recalculated by subtracting the relative density of the marked tree from the current RD. This process continued iteratively for the next-largest tree until the desired RD was reached. Thinning from below proceeded in much the same way, but by marking the smallest trees first. Similarly, to thin from the middle, the first tree marked was the smallest in the 6 inch diameter class, i.e. 5.50 inches DBH and above, increasing in size until the desired RD was reached.

After initial thinning treatments in 1972 (Block 1), 1974 (Block 2), and 1975 (Block 3), residual trees 0.5 inches or greater in DBH on the interior 0.6 acre of each two acre plot were marked to serve as the measured plot, with the remaining 1.4 acres serving as an isolation strip. See remaining methodology descriptions for information about data collection methodology.
Methodology_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Roach, Benjamin A.
Publication_Date: 1977
Title:
A stocking guide for Allegheny hardwoods and its use in controlling intermediate cuttings
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Res. Pap.
Issue_Identification: NE-373
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Upper Darby, PA
Publisher: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station
Other_Citation_Details:
30 pages
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/14498
Methodology:
Methodology_Type: Lab
Methodology_Description:
Calculations:
The relative density of a stand and the contribution of a single tree to that density are functions of tree species and tree diameter at breast height. This relative density calculation conforms to the Ernst and Knapp (1985) definition of relative stand density derived from average maximum competition. See the full data publication download folder for the equations used in these calculations (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Stand_Density_Equations.pdf).

For the first thinning, the diameter used to determine which trees to remove was the quadratic stand diameter based on merchantable trees (see Roach and Gingrich (1968) for a description of this). For the first thinning, the relative density was calculated using the charts in Roach (1977). Also, in the first thinning, trees from all diameter classes were included as possible cut trees, even when they did not reach the threshold of merchantability (5.51 inches). In later thinnings, the medial stand diameter (Marquis et al. 1992) was used to distribute the cut among size classes, and the relative density equation from Stout (1983) (and in the supplementary materials) was used to calculate the relative density per tree. Except for thin from below treatments, trees selected for removal in later thinnings were those above the threshold of merchantability.
Methodology_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Roach, Benjamin A.
Originator: Gingrich, Samuel F.
Publication_Date: 1968
Title:
Even-aged silviculture for upland central hardwoods
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Agriculture Handbook
Issue_Identification: 355
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Washington, DC
Publisher: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station
Other_Citation_Details:
39 pages
Methodology_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Stout, Susan L.
Publication_Date: 1983
Title:
Relative stand density in Allegheny hardwoods
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: M.S. thesis
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Syracuse, NY
Publisher: State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
Other_Citation_Details:
163 pages
Methodology_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Marquis, David A.
Originator: Ernst, Richard L.
Originator: Stout, Susan L.
Publication_Date: 1992
Title:
Prescribing silvicultural treatments in hardwood stands of the Alleghenies (revised)
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Gen. Tech. Rep.
Issue_Identification: NE-96
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Broomall, PA
Publisher: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station
Other_Citation_Details:
101 pages
Online_Linkage: https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/4132
Methodology_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Ernst, Richard L.
Originator: Knapp, Walter H.
Publication_Date: 198504
Title:
Forest stand density and stocking: concepts, terms, and the use of stocking guides
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Gen. Tech. Rep.
Issue_Identification: WO-44
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Washington, DC
Publisher: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
Other_Citation_Details:
8 pages
Methodology:
Methodology_Type: Lab
Methodology_Description:
Tree numbering and ingrowth:
After the first thinning in each plot, remaining trees in the interior 0.6 acre plot with diameter at breast height (DBH) >= 0.5 inches were marked with unique numbers beginning at 1. For each measurement period after the initial thinning and measurement, when a tree not measured in any previous period reached the qualifying DBH of >= 0.5 inches, this tree was considered "ingrowth" to the overstory data set. Ingrowth trees were assigned unique numbers beginning at 999 and counting down to the final tree number recorded at the first measurement of the plot. If the final tree number used in the first inventory was reached, trees were numbered up from 1000 or 1001. No tree numbers were reused; if a tree died, no future ingrowth would be assigned its number. In 1982, the criterion for ingrowth changed, and only trees of DBH >= 1.0 inches were considered ingrowth. Occasionally, duplicate tree numbers were discovered upon entry of data; field personnel selected one of these trees and renumbered it with the next sequential number.

Trees with a DBH below 2.5 inches were numbered by stringing an aluminum wire around the tree and writing the number on a metal tag. This process was time-consuming; in 2002, the lab experimented with using paint markers for these smaller trees, but in 2007 decided against continuing use of the paint markers as the paint faded too quickly. In 2007 technicians resumed using tree tags, fastened to the tree either by aluminum wire or by plastic cable ties secured on the trees backwards such that the tie would expand with tree growth.

Trees with a DBH above 2.5 inches were initially marked and numbered using tube paint. These markings lasted from 5 to 10 years so were repainted at that interval. Shortly after 1984, numbering switched to a "pin and tag" method (Lamson and Rosier 1984). A 4-foot stick with a notch in one end was placed with its forked end near the base of the tree and its flat end on the DBH measurement line (see "Tree measurement" process step for more information). A metal pin was nailed into the tree between the fork of the stick. A metal mine check bearing the number of the tree was affixed to this pin.
Methodology_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Lamson, Neil I.
Originator: Rosier, Robert L.
Publication_Date: 198402
Title:
Wires for long-term identification
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: journal article
Series_Information:
Series_Name: Journal of Forestry
Issue_Identification: 82(2): 110-111
Methodology:
Methodology_Type: Field
Methodology_Description:
Tree measurement:
Trees in this study were measured by diameter at breast height (DBH), approximately 4.5 feet high on the tree's bole. Field personnel used metallic diameter tapes to find DBH to 0.01 inch. Some trees could not be accurately measured with tape measure due to growing together at breast height with another tree. The diameters of these trees were estimated using calipers: a system of two measurements was taken around the measurement area (primary 90 degrees from each other) and the two measurements were averaged to get the diameter.

At the first measurement, breast height was marked on the circumference of the bole using tube paint and measurements were taken either 1 inch above the line or where otherwise noted, e.g. in the case of a tree with an abnormal bulge. See the full data publication download for a description of these exceptions (the "Additional Info" documents in the \Data folder). After 1980, noted exceptions were resolved by repainting the white line 1 inch below the noted location, such that all study trees could be measured 1 inch above the line. Whenever the lines began to fade, they were repainted.

Starting shortly after 1984, the lab switched to a new method for measuring breast height (Lamson and Rosier 1984). A 4-foot stick with a notch in one end was placed against the tree with its top end on the painted line and its forked end near the base of the tree. A metal rod was nailed into the tree at the forked end such that if the measurement line wore away, the forked end of the stick could be rested on the rod and the previous position of the line could be determined.

The DBH of dead trees was not measured. Instead, from 1972-1995, dead trees in any condition were marked as "-1" in the first inventory they were determined to have died, and were not assessed in future inventories. Beginning in 1995, these procedures changed, and more specific codes based upon the size of remaining branches were used for dead trees, with "-1" used to represent a tree that was "dead and gone." See the Entity & Attribute section of this metadata and the Completeness Report for notes on how these changes affect the dataset.
Methodology:
Methodology_Type: Field
Methodology_Description:
Plot marking procedures:
Rectangular plots were laid out using a transit and steel chain tape, and marked using four 5-foot fiberglass fence posts numbered with stamped brass mine checks. These posts were replaced if damaged or missing; about half of them needed to be replaced post-thinning.

The boundaries of both the 2 acre plots and the 0.6 acre plots were painted for clarity. A line was painted on the boundary-facing side of trees directly inside and outside of the boundary.
Methodology:
Methodology_Type: Lab
Methodology_Description:
Thinning scheduling:
Initial study plan indicated that plots would be allowed to recover 10-15% stocking before retreatment, allowing for approximately 10 years between treatments. In practice, thinning treatments were applied approximately 15 years apart, with the goal of a 20% recovery of stand density in most plots before a thinning took place. Whenever a block was thinned, all treatment plots of each block were thinned in the same season. In the third (2010-2011) thinning, one plot in Block 1 and several in Block 2 had not regained enough RD to perform a thinning. These were plots with stand numbers 36, 40, 42, 45, and 46.
Methodology:
Methodology_Type: Field
Methodology_Description:
Decline measurements:
During measurements of Blocks 2 and 3, field personnel observed that in some plots, mortality and general decline of sugar maple populations was reaching serious proportions both in saplings, larger pole classes, and sawtimber. To assess the extent of this decline, a survey of each plot was made. Please see the full data publication download for more information about this study (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Maple_Decline_Report_1987.pdf). These measurements for Blocks 2 and 3 are found in the "Additional Info" files of the \Data folder available through the full data publication download.
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Ernst, Richard L.
Publication_Date: Unpublished material
Title:
Study plan for thinning study in Allegheny hardwoods
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Warren, PA
Publisher: Northeastern Forestry Sciences Laboratory
Other_Citation_Details:
Available through full data publication download (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Study_Plan_1979.pdf)
Type_of_Source_Media: paper
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 197909
Source_Currentness_Reference:
publication date
Source_Citation_Abbreviation:
Study 76, Study plan for thinning study in Allegheny hardwoods
Source_Contribution:
Provided information about the initial setup of the study, descriptions of data collection procedures including measurement and determination of ingrowth, and information about thinning procedures
Source_Information:
Source_Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Stout, Susan L.
Publication_Date: 2015
Title:
Study 76, supplement 2, study plan and establishment report
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: document
Other_Citation_Details:
Available through full data publication download (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Study_Plan_2015.pdf)
Type_of_Source_Media: paper
Source_Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 2015
Source_Currentness_Reference:
publication date
Source_Citation_Abbreviation:
Study 76, supplement 2, study plan and establishment report
Source_Contribution:
Information about the selection of plots to be treated in the 2011 thinning. Identifies the strategy used to select trees for removal in each treatment.
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
After collection in the field, data were entered digitally and proofed to ensure tree diameters increased logically. Shrinking tree diameters were rechecked in the field. If the field check showed that the tree diameter for the current year was correct, changes were sometimes made to the data so that tree diameters did not shrink.

In the process of preparing this study for archiving, entered data were checked to find any uncorrected shrink. Field data were also consulted to find notes where field team requested a shrinking tree's data be changed.

All discovered shrinking trees are noted in the data set. For those measurements that were changed, the data provide this information along with the original, uncorrected measurement. This information is available in the "Additional Info" spreadsheets in the \Data folder of the full data publication download. Notes about the format of this information and interpretation of corrections can be found in the Entity & Attribute section of this metadata.
Process_Date: Unknown
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
After data entry, data were checked to discover instances where trees recorded as "dead" in one inventory were measured as if alive in a later inventory. For trees with this inconsistency, field data were consulted; if field data did not correct the error, the data were changed based on later measurements:

If the tree was recorded as dead in one inventory, measured during the next inventory, and then measured as dead again in following inventory or inventories, the intervening diameter measurement was removed and replaced with a "missing data" code, -1000. This discrepancy could result from field personnel failing to notice that a tree was dead, measuring the tree's diameter as if it was alive. Field comments were consulted; if personnel specifically noted that the tree was alive, the initial dead record was removed instead.

If the tree was recorded as dead in one inventory but measured as if alive in several later inventories, the dead record was removed and replaced with a "missing data" code. This error could occur if field personnel falsely marked the tree as dead. This error was also found in Block 1 after the 1988 thinning. Several trees were marked in the after-thinning inventory as "dead - cut," but were discovered years later to be uncut.

The full data publication contains a record of all of these changes, found in the "Additional Info" spreadsheets of the \Data folder.
Process_Date: 2015
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Comments written on trees in the field were entered digitally. In some cases, comments were written in field using codes and abbreviations for faster recording; these coded comments were translated in digital documents for ease of use.
Process_Date: 201508
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
In some instances, missing or illogical subplot or tree numbers were discovered during data entry.

All subplots in this study were numbered from 1-6. Any missing or illogical subplot number entry was replaced with a "missing data" code, -1000. This happened most often for trees that died many years before the subplot system was instituted in the early 2000s, and were recorded with subplot numbers that seemed to indicate missing data: blank, 0, or -1.

Duplicate tree numbers were corrected by selecting one of the trees with a duplicate number and renumbering it with the next sequential number, as described in the Methodology.
Process_Date: Unknown
Back to Top
Entity_and_Attribute_Information:
Overview_Description:
Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:
DATA FILES:

There are six data files included in this download (found in the \Data folder).

*Important Note: Plot numbers and stand numbers represent different numbering systems used to describe the same study plots. Plot numbers are unique within a block, but not between blocks. Stand numbers are identifiers given to all plots on which this lab conducts research, and are unique regardless of block or study. While plot numbers are more logical in the context of this study, stand numbers are unique identifiers. Both identifiers are included in this dataset to suit the needs and preference of the data user.

\Data\KaneEF_S76_Block1_Diameter_Data.csv: Comma-delimited ASCII text files containing tree diameter measurements for trees in Block 1 of the Kane Experimental Forest (KEF) Thinning Study after various degrees of thinning treatment, ranging from 30 to 80% residual density.

\Data\KaneEF_S76_Block2_Diameter_Data.csv: Comma-delimited ASCII text files containing tree diameter measurements for trees in Block 2 of the Kane Experimental Forest (KEF) Thinning Study after various degrees of thinning treatment, ranging from 30 to 80% residual density.

\Data\KaneEF_S76_Block3_Diameter_Data.csv: Comma-delimited ASCII text file containing tree diameter measurements for trees in Block 3 of the KEF Thinning Study after various degrees and structures of thinning treatment, ranging from 60 to 70% residual density and thinned from above, middle, and below.

\Data\KaneEF_S76_Block1_Additional_Info.csv: Comma-delimited ASCII text files containing Maple Decline Survey ratings, field comments regarding individual tree condition, and data quality information for trees in Block 1 of the KEF Thinning Study.

\Data\KaneEF_S76_Block2_Additional_Info.csv: Comma-delimited ASCII text files containing Maple Decline Survey ratings, field comments regarding individual tree condition, and data quality information for trees in Block 2 of the KEF Thinning Study.

\Data\KaneEF_S76_Block3_Additional_Info.csv: Comma-delimited ASCII text files containing Maple Decline Survey ratings, field comments regarding individual tree condition, and data quality information for trees in Block 3 of the KEF Thinning Study.


The following variables are used in both the Diameter_Data and Additional_Info spreadsheets:

BLOCK = Block number (1, 2, or 3).

STAND = Stand number: identifier for a study plot (27-37 for block 1, 38-47 for block 2, 48-58 for block 3). Unique between blocks.

PLOT = Plot number: identifier for a study plot (1-11). Unique within block but not between blocks.

TREAT = Treatment type in this plot in % residual density (30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, or 100).
(In Blocks 1 and 2, plots were thinned by removing 2/3 of the basal area from below the average stand diameter and 1/3 above the average stand diameter. See Methodology for more details. In Block 3, plots were thinned either from below, middle, or above. Initially, all plots were intended to be thinned to 60%, but some plots were thinned to 70% due to concerns about loss of large trees in the “from above” thinnings.)

STRUC = In Block 3 only. Type of thinning: from below (BELOW), from middle (MID), from above (ABOVE), or control (CONT, which is no thinning applied).

SUBPLOT = Subplot number within plot (-1000, 1-6); each plot is divided into 0.1 acre subplots for purposes of measurement and consistent thinning.

REGEN = If tree is found on regeneration plot, REGEN is the number of the regeneration plot on which it is found. If tree is not found on regeneration plot, its REGEN entry is blank. (Regeneration data were collected; interested potential users should contact Susan Stout.)

TREE_NUM = Individual tree number; unique within a plot but not between plots. Trees in first inventory were numbered beginning with 1; trees in subsequent years were labeled down from 999 to the last number used in first inventory, then numbered up from 1000.

SPP = FIA species code (see \Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Species_Code_Key.pdf)


KaneEF_S76_Block{1/2/3}_Diameter_Data.csv files have the following additional variables:

DXXXX = Tree Diameter at breast height(DBH) in inches in year XXXX inventory (not associated with recent cut) or dead tree condition code.

DBCXXXX = Tree DBH in inches in year XXXX inventory directly preceding thinning cut, or dead tree condition code.

DACXXXX = Tree DBH in inches in year XXXX inventory directly following thinning cut, or dead tree condition code.

**Dead tree condition codes used in these variables:
-1 = (1972-1992) Tree is dead in any condition.
-1 = (1993-present) Tree is dead and gone—may be gone or "down" (no longer standing).
-11 = (1995-present) Tree just died that year. Tree has many fine twigs on its branches.
-12 = (1995-present) Tree is dead, missing most fine twigs but has all of its large and small diameter branches. Bole could be sound and/or showing signs of early decay and missing bark.
-13 = (1995-present) Tree is dead, missing all small diameter branches with only large diameter branches, small branch stubs, and large branch stubs present. Bole condition could show significant decay and missing bark.
-14 = (1995-present) Tree is dead, missing all branches. Only a trunk remains. The bole condition is severe; bird pecks and cavities could be present.
-15 = (2nd/3rd thinning) Tree was cut in thinning or in unauthorized cut; stump remains.


KaneEF_S76_Block{1/2/3}_Additional_Info.csv files have the following additional variables:

DCL = In Blocks 2 and 3 only – results of 1986 Maple Decline survey. For more information, see \Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Maple_Decline_Report.pdf. (-1=Tree dead; 0=No evidence of decline present; 1=Slight evidence of decline - a few upper branches dying, foliage may be discolored; 2=Moderate decline - any tree not fitting into other categories; generally less than ½ of crown affected; 3=Severe decline)

Comments XXXX = Any comments made in year XXXX about tree characteristics. Comments were not made consistently between plots and year-to-year but are included for reference.

SHRINK_ERR = If a tree shrunk between inventories, notes the year in which the tree shrunk, whether or not the shrink was changed upon entry of the field data, and if it was changed, the original year and value of the changed measurement. This column provides only an incomplete record of the changes made to the data due to shrink, as letters to the record detailing modified measurements were not completed consistently. Shrinking measurements were changed because trees do not naturally grow smaller, so shrinkage may have been interpreted at the time as measurement error. However, notes about poor tree condition often accompanied shrinking tree measurements; shrinkage also often preceded death of a tree. Unfortunately, for most trees it is impossible to discern whether the shrinkage was due to a natural process or to error in field recordings.

DEAD_ERR = date(s) of inventories during which tree was marked as alive but previously recorded as dead (could occur either if the "dead" record was incorrect or if the "live" measurement was incorrect). Includes original data where data were changed. If a tree was recorded as dead in one inventory and alive in a later inventory, a “missing data” code was applied to one or more entries. If the tree was recorded as dead in one inventory, measured during the next inventory, and then measured as dead again in following inventory or inventories, the intervening diameter measurement was removed. This discrepancy could result from field personnel failing to notice that a tree was dead, measuring the tree's diameter as if it was alive. If the tree was recorded as dead in one inventory but measured as if alive in several later inventories, the dead record was removed. This error could occur if field personnel falsely marked the tree as dead. This error was also found in Block 1 after the 1988 thinning. Several trees were marked in the after-thinning inventory as "dead - cut," but were discovered years later to be uncut.
Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:
For more details see the Methodology Citation section. Those downloading the full data publication will also wish to consult the Work History supplement for more information about dates and types of treatments and inventories (\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Work_History.pdf).
Overview_Description:
Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:
SUPPLEMENTAL FILES:

Also included in this download are eleven additional files (in the \Supplements folder) that contain information crucial to understanding these data.

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Species_Code_Key.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing description of FIA tree species codes used in the study. In this file is a table containing the following variables:

FIA Code = FIA three-digit code for tree species.

Common Name = common name.

ITIS Latin Species Name = valid ITIS Latin species name.


\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Work_History.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing years in which inventory (measurement of trees) was taken and thinning treatments were performed on each block. In this file there are a couple of tables containing the following variables:

Block No. = block number (1, 2, or 3).

Years of inventories = years of diameter inventories.

Years of thinnings = years of thinning treatments.

Plot = plot number (1-11).

Stand = Stand number (27-58).

Treatment = independent variable assigned to each study plot: % residual density to remain after thinning treatment.

Structure = independent variable assigned to each study plot in Block 3: type of structure-controlling thinning to perform.

Year of Sugar Maple Decline inventory = year the sugar maple decline inventory was performed on the plot, if any.

Year of herbicide treatments = year herbicide treatments were performed, if any.


\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Decision_Memo_1990.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing decision memo evaluating environmental impact of 1990 thinning.

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Decision_Memo_2011.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing decision memo evaluating environmental impact of 2011 thinning.

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Density_Equations.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing equations used to calculate relative stand density.

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Environmental_Analysis_1990.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file reporting the environmental analyses and consultations between Richard Ernst, the lead scientist on the study, and the Allegheny National Forest.

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Herbicides_Record_1985-1987.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing correspondence related to a herbicide treatment study performed in Block 1 in 1985 and1986.

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Maple_Decline_Report_1987.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing progress report: "Blocks II and III Maple Decline Survey" by Redding, James C. (February 1987).

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Maps.pdf: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing maps of study blocks showing relative position of blocks and of plots within blocks.

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Study_Plan_1979: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing study plan "Study 76, Thinning study in Allegheny hardwoods" by Ernst, Richard L. (October 1979).

\Supplements\KaneEF_S76_Study_Plan_2015: Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file containing study plan supplement "Study 76, Supplement 2, Study Plan and Establishment Report" by Stout, Susan L. (August 2015).
Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:
None provided
Back to Top
Distribution_Information:
Distributor:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Organization_Primary:
Contact_Organization: USDA Forest Service, Research and Development
Contact_Position: Research Data Archivist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 240 West Prospect Road
City: Fort Collins
State_or_Province: CO
Postal_Code: 80526
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: see Contact Instructions
Contact Instructions: This contact information was current as of December 2016. For current information see Contact Us page on: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS.
Resource_Description: RDS-2016-0002
Distribution_Liability:
Metadata documents have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness. Unless otherwise stated, all data and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. However, neither the author, the Archive, nor any part of the federal government can assure the reliability or suitability of these data for a particular purpose. The act of distribution shall not constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed for a user's application of these data or related materials.

The metadata, data, or related materials may be updated without notification. If a user believes errors are present in the metadata, data or related materials, please use the information in (1) Identification Information: Point of Contact, (2) Metadata Reference: Metadata Contact, or (3) Distribution Information: Distributor to notify the author or the Archive of the issues.
Standard_Order_Process:
Digital_Form:
Digital_Transfer_Information:
Format_Name: ASCII
Format_Version_Number: see Format Specification
Format_Specification:
Comma-delimited ASCII text file (CSV)
File_Decompression_Technique: Files zipped with Winzip 14.0
Digital_Transfer_Option:
Online_Option:
Computer_Contact_Information:
Network_Address:
Network_Resource_Name: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2016-0002
Digital_Form:
Digital_Transfer_Information:
Format_Name: PDF
Format_Version_Number: see Format Specification
Format_Specification:
Adobe Acrobat PDF/a file
File_Decompression_Technique: Files zipped using Winzip 14.0
Digital_Transfer_Option:
Online_Option:
Computer_Contact_Information:
Network_Address:
Network_Resource_Name: https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2016-0002
Fees: None
Back to Top
Metadata_Reference_Information:
Metadata_Date: 20161219
Metadata_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Susan Stout
Contact_Organization: USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station
Contact_Position: Project Leader
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
Address: 335 National Forge Rd.
City: Irvine
State_or_Province: PA
Postal_Code: 16329
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 814-563-1040
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: sstout@fs.fed.us
Metadata_Standard_Name: FGDC Biological Data Profile of the Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
Metadata_Standard_Version: FGDC-STD-001.1-1999
Back to Top