U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Seruice Research Paper S E - 210

Aboveground Biom;

“4 ?: .octawhatchee

B
Conversion factors: English to metric . .

Multiply BY

Inches 2.540

Feet .3048

Pounds .4536

Cubic feet .02832

Pounds per cubic foot 16.02

To ohtuin

centimeters

meters

kilograms

cubic meters

kilograms per cubic meter

All English units of measure in this report can be converted to metric units by multiplying the

appropriate conversion factor listed above.

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station

Asheoille, North Carolina
Aboveground Biomass of Choctawhatchee

Sand Pine in Northwest Florida’

by

Michael A. Taras’

ABSTRACT.-Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h. were selected from a natural,

uneven-aged stand in northwest Florida to determine the weight and volume of aboveground

biomass. On the average. X5 percent of the green weight of the total tree was wood, I I percent bark.

and 4 percent needles. The average tree sampled had 82 percent ofits wood in the stem and I8 percent

in the crown. Specific gravity. moisture content, and green weight per cubic foot are presented for the

total tree and its components. Tables developed from regression equations predict weight and

cubic-foot volume of the total tree and its components by d.b.h. and total height classes.

Keywords: Pinus c/uusa var. immu,yinara Ward, weight, volume, equations, component proportions

This is the fifth in a series of reports on the

aboveground biomass of southern pines. It contains information on Choctawhatchee sand pine

(Pinus clausa var. immuginata Ward). The first

four papers reported biomass for the four major

southern pines (Taras and Clark 1975; Clark and

Taras 1976; Taras and Clark 1977; and Taras and

Phillips 1978).

This Paper reports weight and volume of

various tree components (wood, bark, crown,

branches, and foliage) as well as equations for

predicting these values. The term “total tree” in

this study refers only to the aboveground portion

of the tree and does not include stump and roots.

Field

PROCEDURE

A stratified random sample of 36 trees was

selected from a natural, uneven-aged Choctawhatchee sand pine stand on Eglin Air Force Base

in northwest Florida. Site index (age 50) averaged

about 50. Six trees in each even-inch d.b.h. class

from 4 to 14 inches were randomly selected.

Means and ranges in tree dimensions are shown in

table 1.

‘This study was conducted in cooperation with the

Forestry Division of Eglin Air Force Base, Fort Walton

Beach, Fla.

?The author is now Professor of Forestry, College of

Forest and Recreation Resources, Clemson University.

Clemson. S.C. 29631.

Sample trees were felled and limbed and the

main stem of each tree was bucked into 3- to

5-foot segments and weighed to the nearest onequarter pound on a portable balance. Separate

weights were recorded for the saw-log portion of

the main stem to a 6-inch d.i.b. top and for the

pulpwood portion of the stem to a 3-inch d.o.b.

top. Sample branches were selected from the

lower, middle, and upper portions of the crown.

These were weighed and stripped of their needles,

and the needles were weighed to establish the

foliage: branch ratio. The remainder of the crown

(needles and branches) was weighed together.

Needle weight for the whole tree was computed

by applying the needle:branch ratio developed

from the branch samples. Dead branches were

weighed separately but were not included in calculations for the total tree in this report.

Moisture content and specific gravity of

wood and bark were determined from disks removed at the butt of each tree, at d.b.h., and at

quarter points in the stem to a 3-inch d.o.b. top.

Disks were also taken from the branches randomly selected from the lower, middle, and upper

portions of the crown. Each disk sample was

sealed in a plastic bag for subsequent laboratory

analysis. Samples of needles and dead branches

were selected for determination of moisture contents of these components.

Laboratory

Each sample disk was weighed and diameters

were measured with and without bark, and spe-
t‘able I.-Means and ranges in dimensions of sample Choctawhatchee sand pines, by d.b.h. class

D.b.h.

class

(inches)

Sample

trees

D.b.h. Total height Age

Average Range Average Range Average Range . .

4

6

8

10

12

14

Number . . . . . Inches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Years . . . . . . .

6 4.2 3.9- 4.4 33 24-44 46 37-52

6 6.1 5.7- 6.4 47 41-56 54 46-59

6 8.1 7% 8.4 50 45-56 53 37-59

6 10.0 9.6-10.3 57 53-61 59 5346

6 12.1 11.6-12.5 60 53-63 58 54-61

6 14.1 13.614.7 64 56-67 73 60-88

All classes 36 9.1 3.9-14.7 52 24-67 57 37-88

cific gravity was determined for each component

on a green-volume and ovendry-weight basis.

Moisture content samples were dried to a constant weight at 103” C, and moisture content was

computed on an ovendry basis. Percentage of

bark was determined from the disk samples on a

green-weight basis. Values for moisture content

(MC), specific gravity (SG), and percentage of

bark in the stem, branches, and total tree were

calculated by weighting disk values in proportion

to the volume of the component each represented.

Weighted moisture content values were used to

convert component green weights to ovendry

weights.

Green weights per cubic foot of wood and

bark were computed from the weighted values for

specific gravity and moisture content with the

equation:

Green wt/ft” (1)

weighted MC in % 1

(weighted SG)(62.4)

100

The green cubic-foot volumes of wood and bark

were computed by dividing a component’s weight

by its green weight per cubic foot. Green cubicfoot volume of wood and bark combined was

computed by adding the green volume of wood to

the green volume of bark.

Analysis

Regression equations for predicting green

and dry weights of wood, bark, and needles in the

total tree and its components were developed

with d.b.h. and total height as independent variables. Equations were also developed to predict

green cubic-foot volumes of wood and bark separately and combined. Total-tree and tree component weights and volumes were estimated with

the equation:

Y = b, + b,D*Th + e (2)

where:

Y = predicted weight or volume of

component

D = d.b.h. in inches

Th = total tree height in feet

e = experimental error

and

bo,bt = coefficients.

Grouping of the data into D2Th classes indicated that the variance of Y increased with increasing D2Th. Therefore, a logarithmic transformation was used to make the variance more

nearly homogeneous and meet this basic assumption of regression analysis. The final form of the

equation used to predict weight and volume of the

total tree and each component sampled was:

LogloY = b, + b,Loglo(D2Th) (3)

SAMPLE TREE CHARACTERISTICS

Total-Tree Biomass

Green weight of the total tree ranged from

126 pounds for 4-inch trees to 2,372 pounds for

16inch trees. On the average, the trees sampled

had 85 percent of their green weight in wood, 11

percent in bark, and 4 percent in needles. This

distribution of wood, bark, and needles is similar

2
to those reported for the major southern pines.

The proportion of tree weight in wood increased

and the proportion in bark decreased sharply between the 4-inch and the 6-inch d.b.h. class, then

remained relatively constant to the ICinch class.

The proportion of needles was highest (7 percent)

in the 4-inch class and was consistently between 3

and 4 percent for all other diameter classes. Proportions of the various tree components computed on a dry basis varied slightly from those

computed on a green basis because of differences

in component moisture content (table 2).

When the trees are viewed as being composed of stem and crown, proportion of tree

weight in the stem increases and that in branches

decreases from the 4-inch d.b.h. class to the 6-

inch class and then increases with tree size (table

3). The stem contained an average of 76 percent of

the tree green weight, and the crown 24 percent.

The proportion of biomass in the stems of Choctawhatchee sand pines is 5 to 8 percent lower than

that reported for the four major species of

southern pine. Since the needle proportion was

the same as reported for other southern pines

(about 4 percent), the primary cause for the difference in crown biomass is the greater weight of

branch material in sand pine.

The green and dry weights of all wood in the

tree and the distribution of wood throughout the

tree are presented in table 4. On the average, 82

percent of green weight was in the main stem (to a

3-inch d.o.b. top), and 18 percent was in the

branches. The proportion of wood increased in

the main stem from the 4-inch d.b.h. class to the

6-inch class and then decreased as tree size increased. Branchwood proportions decreased beTable 2.-Average green and dry weights of the total tree and proportions of the tree in wood. bark, and needles for Choctawhatchee

sand pines 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.

D.b.h.

class

(inches)

Average

total

height

Sample

trees

Totaltree

green

weight

Tree component

proportions (green)

Wood Bark Needles

Totaltree

dry

weight

Tree component

proportions (dry)

Wood Bark Needles

Feet Number Pounds . . . . . . . . . . Percent .___.__, Pounds .._____. Percent

4 33 6 126 75 18 7 63 80 15 5

6 47 6 353 85 I? 3 178 88 IO 2

8 50 6 610 84 12 4 298 86 IO 4

10 57 6 1,167 85 11 4 580 88 9 3

1 2 60 6 1,661 85 12 3 874 88 9 3

1 4 64 6 2,372 87 10 3 I .257 90 7 3

Average - - 1,048 85 II 4 542 88 9 3

Table 3.-Average green and dry weights of the total tree and proportions of the tree in the main stem’ and crown (branches and

needles) for Choctawhatchee sand pines 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.

D.b.h.

class

(inches)

Average

total

height

Sample

trees

Total- Tree component Total- Tree component

tree proportions (green) tree proportions (dry)

green W

weight Stem Crown weight Stem Crown

Branches Needles Branches Needles

4

6

8

10

I2

14

Average

Feet Number Pounds

33 6 126

47 6 353

50 6 610

57 6 1,167

60 6 1,661

64 6 2,372

- - 1,048

. . . . . . . . . . . Percent _,

61 32

80 1 7

79 I7

79 1 7

76 21

76 21

76 20

Pounds

7 63 68

3 I78 84

4 298 83

4 580 82

3 874 79

3 I.257 80

4 542 x0

Percent

27

I4

1 3

15

1 8

1 7

17

5

2

4

3

3

3

3

‘Stem material to 3-inch d.o.b. top.
Table 4.-Average green and dry weights of wood in the total tree and distribution of wood in the

main stem’ and branche\ for Choctawhatchee sand pines 4 to 14 inches d.h.h.

D.b.h. Average

class total

(inches) height

Sample

trees

Totaltree

wood

weight

Proportion of wood inMain stem

saw log Pulpwood Total stem Branches

Feet Numhrr Pounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GREEN

4 33 6 95 - 70 70 30

6 47 6 299 - 85 85 15

8 50 6 509 42 43 85 15

IO 57 6 995 68 I6 84 1 6

I2 60 6 1,408 74 7 81 19

14 64 6 2,069 75 6 81 1 9

Average - - 896 70 I2 82 1 8

DRY

4 33 6 52 - 73 73 27

6 47 6 I56 - 88 88 1 2

8 50 6 257 45 42 87 13

IO 57 6 510 71 I5 86 1 4

- 1 2 60 6 768 76 7 83 17

I4 64 6 1,138 79 5 84 1 6

.4verage - - 480 73 12 85 15

‘Stem material to j-inch d.o.b. top.

tween the 4- and 6-inch d.b.h. classes and then

increased as tree size increased. The proportion

of wood in the pulpwood section of a tree decreased, and proportion in the saw-log section

increased as tree size increased. On the average,

the trees contained 70 percent of their green wood

in saw logs and I2 percent in pulpwood. The proportion of branches in Choctawhatchee sand pine

is 5 to 7 percent greater than that found in the

major species of southern pine because sand pines

have a heavier branching habit.

The weight and distribution of bark in the tree

are presented in table 5. On the average, 44 percent of all green bark in the tree was in the saw

logs, I6 percent in the pulpwood, and 40 percent

in the branches. In comparing the bark proportions with similar computations made from the

major southern pine species, we find bark proportion of the crown to be 7 to 11 percent greater in

sand pine. This difference is due to the greater

proportion of branches in the crown of this

species.

Crown Biomass

When the crown was analyzed as a separate

entity composed of branchwood, branchbark,

and needles, the proportion of crown weight in

wood increased, the proportion of crown bark

decreased, and the proportion of needles decreased as tree size increased (table 6). On the

average, 66 percent of the green weight of the

crown was wood, I9 percent was bark, and I5

percent was needles. Compared to the crowns of

the major southern pine species, Choctawhatchee

sand pine has a higher percentage of wood in the

crown, about the same amount of bark, and fewer

needles.

The dead branch components of these trees

were not included in the total-tree weight or the

weight of the crown even though the weight data

on this component were collected. The reason it

was not included was that it was felt that a high

proportion of this material would be lost in felling

and skidding and not recoverable. Equations

4
were developed, however, for predicting this

component (see tables 9 and IO).

Main Stem Biomuss

When the main stem was analyzed separately, the proportion of stem weight in wood

increased and the proportion of bark decreased as

tree size increased (table 7). On the average, 91

percent of the green weight of the main stem was

wood, and 9 percent was bark. Similar proportions of wood and bark in the main stem have beEn

reported for the four major species of southern

pine.

Table 5.-Average green and dry weights of bark in the total tree and distribution of bark in the main

stem’ and branches for Choctawhatchee sand pines 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.

D.b.h. Average

class total

(inches) height

Sample

trees

Totaltree

bark

weight

Proportion of bark inMain stem

Saw log Pulpwood Total stem Branches

4

6

8

10

12

_ 14

Average

4

6

8

10

12

1 4

Average

Feet Number

33 6

47 6

50 6

57 6

60 6

64 6

33 6

47 6

50 6

57 6

60 6

64 6

-

-

-

Pounds . . . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . Percent . . . . . . . . . .

GREEN

. . . . .

22 - 48 48 52

43 - 67 67 33

74 34 36 70 30

126 50 14 64 36

197 53 6 59 41

225 50 5 55 45

115 44 16 60 40

DRY

9 - 59 59

18 - 74 74

30 41 34 75

52 57 12 69

83 61 5 66

87 54 5 59

44 50 16 66

41

26

25

31

34

41

34

‘Stem material to 3-inch d.o.b. top.

Table h.-Average green and dry weights of the crown and proportion of the crown in wood, bark. and needles for Choctawhatchee

sand pines4 to 14 inches d.b.h.

D.b.h.

class

(inches)

Average Crown proportion (green)- Crown proportion (dryt

total Sample Crown Crown

height trees

weight

(green)

Branchwood

Brdnch- weight

Needles (dry)

Branch- Branchbark wood bark Needles

4

6

8

IO

I2

I4

Average

Feet N/rmher Porlnds PcJrcent PMlld.Y . . . . . . . P~~rcc~nt .__....

33 6 49 59 14 17 21 65 19 16

47 6 71 64 20 1 6 28 68 I6 I6

50 6 126 61 18 21 51 64 IS 21

57 6 248 63 IX I9 I03 67 I5 I8

60 6 407 66 30 I4 181 72 IS I3

64 6 571 68 IX I4 24x 73 I4 I3

245 66 I9 IS I06 70 IS IS

5
Table 7.-Average green and dry weights of the stem’ and proportion of the stem in wood and bark for Choctawhatchee sand pines 4 to

14 inches d.b.h.

D.b.h. Average

class total

(inches) height

Sample

trees

Main stem Stem proportion in green- Main stem Stem proportion in dryweight weight -

(green) Wood Bark (dry) Wood Bark . .

Fret Number Pounds . . . . . . . . Percent . . . . . . Pounds Percent

4 33 6 77 86 14 42 87 1 3

6 47 6 283 90 IO I50 91 9

8 50 6 484 89 I I 248 91 9

10 57 6 919 91 9 477 93 7

I2 60 6 1,254 91 9 691 92 8

I4 64 6 1,802 93 7 1.009 95 5

Average - 803 91 9 436 93 7

‘Stem material to 3-inch d.o.b. top.

Physicul Properties log portion of the tree and the main stem as a

whole averaged 0.485, which is the average reWood and bark specific gravity, moisture ported in a wood density survey of the species

content, and green weight per cubic foot in the (Clark and Taras 1969). Specific gravity of the

total tree and its components are presented in pulpwood portion of the tree averaged 0.455,

table 8. Wood specific gravity for the total tree which is slightly lower than the saw-log portion of

averaged 0.475. Wood specific gravity of the saw- the tree but slightly higher than that for the

Table 8.,Average wood and bark specific gravity, moisture content, and green weight per cubic

foot for Choctawhatchee sand pine trees and tree components

Tree

component

Total tree

Saw log

Pulpwood

Main stem

Branches

Total tree

Saw log

Pulpwood

Main stem

Branches

Total tree

Saw log

Pulpwood

Main stem

Branches

Average and standard deviation

I I 1

Specific

gravity

Moisture

content

Green weight per

cubic foot

I I I

Percent Pounds

WOOD

0.475 ? 0.025 91 IL I4 56.4 t 3.4

.485 t .030 8l? II 54.7 5 3.9

.455 t ,041 101 & 21 56.8 ? 3.7

,485 ” .!I29 842 13 55.7 ? 3.5

.433 * .028 123 ‘- 21 59.9 ? 3.9

BARK

0.349 r 0.022 151 2 15

.398 & .037 ll7? 26

.316 ” .066 I83 2 57

.390 -+ .035 121 2 26

.288? ,016 195 -c 18

WOOD AND BARK

0.457 IL 0.020 962 16

.478 2 .027 842 IO

.440 * .04l 110” 23

.475 ? .026 88* 12

.398 ? ,023 140 + I7

53.3 +- 2.3

53.4 2 3.2

53.5 ? 2.7

53.4 -c 3.3

52.9 2 1.8

55.8 & 2.9

54.5 + 3.5

56.4 ? 3.3

55.3 t 3.2

58.3 2 3. I

6
branches (0.433). Bark specific gravity was consistently lower than wood specific gravity, averaging 0.349 for the total tree, 0.390 for the main

stem, and 0.288 for the branches. The specific

gravity of the main stem bark approached that

reported for longleaf pine (0.409) and was higher

than that reported for loblolly, shortleaf, and

slash pine. The branchbark specific gravity

(0.288) was lower than that found for the four

major species of southern pine.

Wood moisture content averaged 91 percent

for the total tree, 84 percent for the main stem,

and 123 percent for the branches (table 8). Wood

moisture content was considerably higher for

pulpwood (101 percent) than for saw logs (8 1 percent).

On a total-tree basis, bark moisture content

averaged 151 percent, which was 60 percent

higher than the corresponding value for wood

(table 8). Bark moisture content was lower for

saw logs (117 percent) than for pulpwood (183

percent) or branches (195 percent). The bark

moisture contents reported here are all considerably higher (up to 100 percent higher) than those

reported for other species of southern pine. These

large differences are probably due to sand pine’s

considerably thinner bark and higher ratio of

inner bark (which has an extremely high moisture

content) to outer bark.

Green wood weight per cubic foot ranged

from 54.7 pounds in saw logs to 59.9 pounds in

branches and averaged 56.4 pounds in the total

tree. Bark green weight per cubic foot was consistently lower than that of the wood (table 8),

averaging about 53.4 pounds per cubic foot.

Green weight of wood and bark per cubic foot of

wood and bark averaged 55.8 pounds for the total

tree, 55.3 pounds for the main stem, and 58.3

pounds for the branches.

PREDICTION EQUATIONS

Equations were developed to predict weights

and volumes of the total tree and its components.

Those used for predicting dry weight (Y) and

green:dry weight ratio (Y,) to 6- and 4-inch d.i.b.

tops are presented in table 9. Similar equations for

predicting cubic-foot volume (Y) and cubic-foot

volume ratio (Y,) are given in table 10. A ratio

technique developed by Burkhart (1977) was used

to avoid crossovers in which predicted values to a

6-inch top exceed values to a 4-inch top in the *I

same tree. In this procedure, two equations are

used to predict the weight or volume at any given

top diameter: (1) a total stem volume of weight

equation, and (2) an equation for estimating the

ratio of merchantable stem volume or weight to

total stem volume or weight for the specified top

diameter. With these two equations, volume or

weight can be obtained to any top diameter limit

or between any two specific points on the stem

simply by subtraction. In this study, we developed equations to predict the weight and

volume ratios to a 6-inch d.i.b. top and a 4-inch

d.i.b. top.

The equations presented in tables 9 and 10 for

predicting wood, bark, and wood and bark to a 6-

or 4-inch d.i.b. top predict only the volume or

weight ratios of the merchantable stem and not

the actual weight or volume. To find the weight or

volume to these merchantable limits, the predicted ratio (Y,) must be subtracted from the

value 1 and then multiplied by the predicted total

stem weight or volume. An example of application of this ratio technique is presented in the

Appendix.

YIELD TABLES

For convenience to the users, the equations

for total tree, stem to a 3-inch d.o.b. top, and

crown in tables 9 and 10 were used to develop

weight and volume tables; they are presented in

the Appendix (tables 1 l-21). Other equations in

tables 9 and 10 can be used to construct tables as

needed, or they can be requested from the author.

Trees with the same d.b.h. and total height

can vary considerably in weight and volume because of differences in crown size, moisture content, specific gravity, and taper. The yield tables

presented in the Appendix should not be used

indiscriminately over the range of sand pine without testing. Rather, they should be applied only to

trees in natural stands which are similar in age,

taper rate. and wood properties.

7
Toted tree (mcluding needle\K

Green 1_0g,,~Y = ~0.55hVl * O.Y57lH I .og,oD’Th

Dry I <,g,,,Y O.YIXZh + 0 97591 Iw,,,D’I‘h

Total tree (excluding needle\):

Green I,,,~,,,Y 2 ~(I.62122 + 0.96994 I.og,,,Dzfh

Dry I.og,,,Y = ~0.97756 i 0.9X720 L.og,(jD’Th

Total tree--wood:

Green Log,,,Y = ~0.7963’) + I.00201 Log,,)D’Th

Dry I.og,,,Y = ~1.12X44 + I.Olh’)XLog,~j ‘Th

Tolal tree-hark

Greell I og,,,Y ~il.XJOXX + 0 77Y14 I.og,,,D~l-h

Dr> l.op,,,Y = I. 1614X + 0 7h(Xl? I og,,,D’Th

Wood in total \tem from stump 10 a h-Inch d I b. top: ‘I

Green I.ogioY, = 2.93777 3.62%~ l.~g,,~D

Dry l.~g,~~Y, = 3.0171 I 7.73405 I_og,,~D

Bark in total \tem from stump to a h-inch d.1.h top’”

Gwen Lq?,,)Y, = 2.51x37 1.15915 Log,,,D

Dry I.og,,,Y, = ?.514?2 ? 21465 I.og,,jD

Wood and hark in ;otal \tem from stump to a h-inch d.i.h. top: Ia

Green Log,,,Y, = 2 90135 3.58539 Log,(,D

Dry Log,,,Y, : 2.9X467 3.70246 Log,,jD

Wood m total \tem from stump to a4-mch d.1.h. top:’

Green 1,0g,,~Y, : I .X7940 3 5890 I.og,,)D

Dry I.og,,,Y, = I.97120 3 7X576 Log,,,D

Bark m total em from stump to a I-Inch d.1.h. top:’

Green L~~,,,Y, = I 5214x 3.14421 L0g,,,r~

Dry Log,,,Y, = I .054l I 2.86XZh L_og,()D

Wood and bark I” total \tem from stump to a 4.Inch d.1 b. top”

Green t.~g,,~Y,= 1.X4122 3.53XMI.og,,,D

Dry I.oglclY, = I.91231 - 3 72593 Log,,,D

Wood in total \tem from stump to a 3.inch d.o h top:

Green Log,,,Y = 1.0X341 + I 055X8 Log,,jD’Th

Dry Log,,,Y = I 17Yl5 + I.(&463 1 og,,,D’Th

Bark in total \tem from stump to a i-inch d.o.h. top:

Green I.ogloY = I.20771 + O.Xl96OI.og,(jD’Th

Dry lag ,,,Y = I .33X09 + 0.76003 Log ,,,D-Th

Wood and bark in total \tem from stump to a Vlnch d.o.b. top:

Green Log,,,Y = -0 Y46XY + I .0305h Log,,,D’Th

Dry LogloY = I.23518 + I.03557 I.og,,,DTh

Crown weight (including branchwood. branchbark. and needle\):

Green I.og,“Y = -0.69?9? + 0.X1995 Log,oD’Th

Dry L?p,,,Y = ~I.13105 + O.X?74OLog,“D”Th

Needles:

Greell Log,,,Y = I 41056 + 0.79520 Log,,jD-Th

Dry Log,oY = I.86151 + O.XO9XX Log,,,D’Th

Wood in live branch material:

Green Log,,,Y = I.03397 + 0.86048 Log,,jD’Th

Dry Log,,,Y = I.41556 + 0.X7041 I.og,,)D-Th

Bark m hve branch material.

Green Log,,,Y = I.12593 + 0.74215 Log,,,DTh

Dry Log,,,Y = I 6M95 + 0.76767 Log,,,D-Th

Wood and bark in live branch material

Green Log,,,Y = -0.X1 I48 + 0.83105 Log,,,D’Th

Dry Log,“Y = I.25295 + 0.X5039 I.og,,,D’Th

Wood and bark m dead branch matern.

Green

Dry Log,,,Y = -3.?h819 + I.17798 I.og,,,D’Th

0.W

.w

w

W

w

.w

.96

Y4

.X5

X4

.x7

.XI

.X6

.X4

.Y4

92

.92

.73

.94

.96

.9x

.9x

.96

.Y4

.99

.99

X6

.X4

.72

72

.x7

.X6

.8l

.x2

.X6

.X5

.79

.039

,047

041

,044

,073

oxx

I43

IS6

II3

148

,139

,154

.I62

.?II

.I69

.3x

.ISX

xx

,052

,053

MY

.O9O

,046

.O46

,157

,165

233

.235

,153

,165

.I66

,171

I54

.I64

,282

whew

y L Total \trm wghl waght to \pcc,fied d I h top

r Total \,em we,ghr

8
Table IO.-Regression equations for estimating green cubic-foot and volume ratios of aboveground biomass of

Choctawhatchee sand pine trees and tree components with d.b.h. and total height as independent variables

Cubic-foot volume (Y) Regression equation’

Coefficient of Standard

determination error .

(R’) (Sy.JZ

Total tree:

Wood LogloY = -2.63695 + 1.02742 LogloD’Th

Bark LogloY = -2.52437 + 0.76732 LogIoDZTh

Wood & bark LogloY = -2.43029 + 0.98764 LogloD2Th

Total stem to a 6-inch top::‘”

Wood LogjoY, = 3.00835 ~ 3.70252 LogloD

Bark LogloY, = 2.52777 - 3.19292 LogloD

Wood & bark LogloYr = 2.97064 - 3.66251 LogloD

Total stem to a 4-inch top::<”

Wood LogloYr = 1.97174 - 3.72042 LogloD

Bark LogloYr= 1.45182 - 3.11971 LogIoD

Wood & bark LogloYr = 1.91809 - 3.65827 LogloD

Total stem to a 3-inch top:

Wood LogloY = -2.92462 + 1.08298 LogloDZTh

Bark LogloY = -2.83818 + 0.79252 LogloD2Th

Wood & bark LogloY = -2.75688 + 1.04968 LogloDzTh

Live branch material:

Wood LogloY = -2.83057 + 0.86608 LogloD’Th

Bark LogloY = -2.86248 + 0.74598 LogjoD’Th

Wood & bark LogloY = -2.58501 + 0.83384 Logl@Th

Dead branch material:

Wood & bark LogloY = -4.72271 + 1.18320 LogIoD”Th

0.99 0.036

.96 .076

.99 .032

.86 .I43

.86 .123

.86 ,140

.93 .I91

.90 .I85

.93 .I83

.99

.97

99

.88 .I51

.81 ,167

.87 .I54

.81 ,271

.052

,066

,044

lLogloY = bg + bl LogloD’Th

where:

Y = cubic feet of tree or component,

D = d.b.h. in inches,

Th = total height in feet.

Log1oY, = bg + b, LogloD

where:

Y, = Total stem volume - volume to specified d.i.b. top

Total stem volume

D = d.b.h. in inches.

LStandard error of estimate in Log10 form.

3Regression equations based on 24 trees 8 to I4 inches d.b.h.

‘Cubic-foot volume to a specified d.i.b. top can be computed using ratio values (Y,) as follows:

Volume to specified d.i.b. top = 1 -(Y,) (total stem volume to 3-inch d.o.b. top).
LITERATURE CITED

Burkhart, Harold E.

1977. Cubic-foot volume of lohlolly pine to any

merchantable top limit. South. J. Appl. For. l(2):

7-9.

Clark. Alexander, III, and Michael A. Tatms.

1969. Wood density surveys of the minor species of

yellow pine in the Eastern United States. Part

II-sand pine (Pinus clartsa (Chapm.) Vasey).

USDA For. Serv., Res. Pap. SE-5 I, I4 p. Southeast. For. Exp. Stn.. Asheville. N.C.

Clark. Alexander, III. and Michael A. Taras.

1976. Biomass of shortleaf pine in a natural sawtimber

stand in northern Mississippi. USDA For. Serv.,

Res. Pap. SE-146, 32 p. Southeast. For. Exp.

Stn., Asheville. N.C.

Taras. Michael A.. and Alexander Clark III.

1977. Aboveground biomass of longleaf pine in a natural

sawtimber stand in southern Alabama. USDA

For. Serv., Res. Pap. SE-162. 32 p. Southeast.

For. Exp. Stn., Asheville. N.C.

Taras. Michael A., and Alexander Clark III.

1975. Aboveground biomass of loblolly pine in a natural, uneven-aged sawtimber stand in central

Alabama. TAPPI 58(2): 103-105.

Taras, Michael A.. and Douglas R. Phillips.

1978. Aboveground biomass of slash pine in a natural

sawtimber stand in southern Alabama. USDA

For. Serv.. Res. Pap. SE-188, 31 p. Southeast.

For. Exp. Stn.. Asheville. N.C.

10
APPENDIX
ILLUSTRATION OF THE

RATIO TECHNIQUE

Suppose you have a tree with a d.b.h. of 9.8

inches and a total height of 58 feet and you wish to

compute the cubic-foot volume to a 4-inch top.

First select the appropriate cubic-foot volume

equation from table 10 for predicting total stem

volume to a 3-inch top and substitute the tree

dimensions:

LogjO( -2.75688 + 1.04968 Log(O(D’(Th))

= -2.75688 + 1.04968 Log,0 (O.X”(CX))

= 14.97 ft:’ in total stem.

Cubic-foot volume to a 4-inch top (d.i.b.) is

computed by substituting into the appropriate

volume ratio (Y,) equation in table 10. In this case,

since we wish to predict volume of wood and bark

to a 4-inch top, we would use the following equation:

Log,,) (Y,) = 1.91809 ~ 3.65877 LoglO

= 1.91809 - 3.65827 Log(()(9.8)

= 0.01958.

The ratio computed above is the proportion

of wood in the main stem between the 4-inch

(d.i.b.) and the 3-inch (d.0.b.) top. To compute

the actual weight or volume to a 4-inch top, the

above ratio must be subtracted from 1 and the

resultant value multiplied by the previously computed total stem value as follows:

Volume to a 4-inch top

= (I -Y,) (Total stem volume to j-inch top)

= (I - 0.01958) (14.97 fP)

= 14.68ft:

12
Table 1 I.-Predicted weight of total tree (wood, bark, and needles) above ground for Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h. (inches)

20 30

Total-tree height’ (feet)

40 50

. .

60 70

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

11

12

1 3

14

15

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1 4

15

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GREEN:’

1 69 102 135 I 167 198

106 157 I 206 256 304 f

151

202

431

I

500

579 671

261 385 508 628 748 867

328 483 636 787 937 1,086

591 778 963 1,147 1,329

709 934 1,156 1,376 1.595

2,492 2,888

74

DRY-’

110 1 146

100

52

149

77

197

130

102

193 256

164 243 322

299 395

360 476

426 564

660

763

181

82

217

293

98

380

478

587

127

708

838

152

980

1,133

1,296

252

340

442

556

683

822

975

1,139

1,317’

1,507 J

‘Blocked-in area indicates range of data.

‘Includes l-foot stump allowance.

JLoglOY = -0.55650 + 0.95706 LogloD’Th.

‘LoglOY = -0.91826 + 0.97593 LoglOD’Th.

1 3
Table 12.-Predicted weight of total tree (wood and bark) excluding needles for Choctawhatchee

sand pine trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches) 20 30

Total-tree height’ (feet)

40 50

. .

60 70

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pounds . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GREEN”

4 I64 95 126 1 156 186

5 99 147 I 194 241 288 1

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1 4

15

141 209 I 776 _

191 282 373

246 366 484

310 460 608

564 746

678 897

803 1,062

1,241

1.432

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

13

1 4

15

344 410

464 553

601 717

754 901

926 1,105

1,114 1,329

1.318

1,540

1,778

1

1,574

1,838

2,122

._ 2,426

DRY4

I471 32 78 93

49 73 -

1

97 121 145 a

70 105 139 174 208 242

95 142 189 236 282 328

124 185 246 307 367 428

157 234 310 387 463 540

288 382 477 570 664

347 461 575 689 802

412 548 683 818 952

642 800

1

958 1,115

743 926

‘Blocked-in area indicates range of data.

‘Includes l-foot stump allowance.

3Log10Y = -0.62122 + 0.96994 LogjODTh.

4Log10Y = -0.97356 + 0.98720 LogIOD1Th.

14
Table 13.-Predicted weight of all aboveground wood excluding bark for Choctawhatchee sand pine

trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches)

Total-tree height’ (feet)

20 30 40 50 60 70 **

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GREEN:’

6

7

8

9

IO

I1

12

1 3

I4

I5

4 [ 52 78 104 ‘3 130 156

5 81 122 1 162 203 243

1 I7 175 i___u__ _ 292 351 409

159 238 318 398 477 557

208 312 416 520 624 728

263 394 526 658 790 922

487 650 813 976 1.139

590 787 984 1,181 1,378

702 937 _11171 1,406 1,641

1,100 1,375 1.65 I 1,927

1,276 1,595 1,915 2,235

2,199 2,566

4

5

6

7

8

9

IO

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

I5

140) 26 L 67 80

41 62 -1 84 105 126 1

60 90 L-L.2l--

82 124 166

IO8 162 218

137 206 277

256 343

310 416

370 496

584

679

i

152

208

273

347

430

522

623

733

852

183

250

329

418

517

628

750

882

L

1,026

1,180

‘Blocked-in area indicates range of data.

“Includes l-foot stump allowance.

:‘LoglOY = -0.79639 + 1.00201 LogIODZTh.

‘LoglOY = -1.12844+ l.O1698Log@‘-Th.

15
Table 14.-Predicted weight of wood and bark in main stem to a 3-inch d.o.b. top for Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to I4 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches)

20 30

Total-tree height’ (feet)

40 50

. .

60 70

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

II

12

1 3

1 4

15

4

-5

6

7

8

9

IO

II

12

1 3

14

15

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poutds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GREENri

1 43 661 III 134

68 104 -.. 140 - 176 212

100 151 203 256 309 362

137 208 279 351 424 497

180 273 368 463 558 655

229 348 469 590 712 834

433 582 733 885 1.037

527 709 892 1,077 1,262

63 I 848 1,067 I.288 1,510

1,000 1,259 I ,5 I9 1,781

1,165 1,467 1,770 2.074

2,040 2,391

DRY’

/ 23

36

53

;; 1 ,;; I ,:; ;I; ;;I

73 111 149 I88 227 267

96 146 197 248 300 352

123 187 251 317 383 449

232 313 394 476 558

283 381 480 580 680

339

‘Blocked-in area indicates range of data.

‘Includes l-foot stump allowance.

“LoglOY = -0.94689 + 1.03056 LoglOD’Th.

‘LoglOY = - 1.23518 + 1.03557 LoglODZTh.

1 6
Table 15.--Predicted weight of wood excluding bark in main stem to a 3-inch d.o.b. top for

Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches) 20 30

Total-tree height2 (feet)

40 50

. .

60 70

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

11

12

13

1 4

15

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pounds . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GREEN:’

[ 96 116

154 186

226 274 322

119 182 247

158 242 328

202 310 420

387 525

474 642

569 771

913

1,068

DRY”

r 19 41 \ 52 62

31 6.5 83 100

46 71 L96

64 98 134

85 131 178

109 168 228

210 286

258 350

310 421

499

585

122 148

170 206

225 273

289 351

362 440

444 539

_- 534 _ 648

633 769

741 900

--I

175

242

322

414

518

635

764

906

----QK- 1

11,043 1,229 1

lBlocked-in area indicates range of data.

‘Includes l-foot stump allowance.

:‘LoglOY = - 1.08343 + I.05588 LoglODZTh.

-‘LogjOY = -1.37915 + 1.06463 LoglODZTh.

17
Table 16.-Predicted weight of crown material (branchwood. branchbark. and needles) in Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches) 20

Total-tree height’ (feet)

. .

30 40 50 60 70

I

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

I1

12

1 3

14

15

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GREEN”

[ 23 32 _

33 46

45 62

58 80

,; :=I y;

72 100 126 152 176 200

87 121 153 184 214 243

144 182 219 254 288

168 213 256 297 337

194 246 295 343 . 389

280 336 I 391 1 443

316 380 441 5011

1 494 561 1

DRYa

4 ] 9 20 23

5 14 29 34 I

6

7

8

9

1 0

I1

12

1 3

14

15

18 26 L--L%._.

24 33 42

30 42 53

36 51 64

60 77

71 90

82 104

I19

135

39 46 52

51 59 68

64 74 84

78 90 103

93 108 123

109 126 144

126 146 167

144 167 \

190

163 189 216

213 242

IBlocked-in area indicates range of data

‘Includes l-foot stump allowance.

:‘LoglOY = -0.69292 + 0.81995 LoglOD’Th.

lLoglOY = -I. 13105 + 0.83740 LoglOD’Th.

18
Table 17.-Predicted weight of wood and bark in branches of Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to

14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches) 20 30

Total-tree height’ (feet)

40 50 60 70 ..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . .

GREEN”

4 !7 26 ----33-l 40 46

5 27 --------I 48 58 67 I

6 37 5 1

7 47 66

8 59 83

9 72 100

10 120

II 140

12 162

13

14

15

1 78 91 104

84 101 I18 134

105 126 147 167

128 154 179 203

153 183 313 242

178 214 250 284

206 248 288 228

235 283

266 320 I

1 418 475

DRY+

4 1 6 16 19

5 II 24 28

6 I5 33 38 44

7 20 43 50 57

8 24 53 62 7 1

9 30 65 76 87

10 78 91 104

II 92 107 137__

12 106 124 143

13 101 122 142 162 c

14 II4 138 161 184

I5 182 207

‘Blocked-in area indicates range of data.

‘Includes i-foot stump allowance.

‘LoglOY = -0.81 I48 + 0.83105 LoglOD’Th.

‘LoglOY = - 1.22295 + 0.85039 LoglOD’Th.

19
Table lg.--Predicted weight of hranchwwcl in Choctawhatchet: sand pine trees 4 to I4 inchm

d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches) 20

Total-tree height’ (feet)

30 40 50

. .

60 70

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Powlds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GREEN:{

4 [ I3 1924 29 34

5 I9 26 35 43 50

6 27’ 38 48 58 68 78

7 35 49 63 7 76 89 I02

8 4 4 62 79 96 II2 128

9 53 76 97 II7 138 157

10 91 I16 I41 165 I88

II to7 137 166 194 222

I2 124 I59 193 226 258

I3 I83 221 259 296

I4 206 251 294 336

I5 331 378

4 f 6 8 11 1 I3 I5

5 9 I2 i 16 I9 22

26 31 1

- 6

7

8

9

IO

I I

I2

I3

I4

I5

12 I7 I 22

I5 22 28

I9 28 36

2 4 34 4 4

41 52

48 62

5 6 72

83

94

34 4 0

I

35

4 6

43 51 58

53 71

-$q

75 85

88 101

;;I

I I7

I35

._

I34 I53

I51 -l173

‘Blocked-in area indicates range of data.

Llncludes l-foot stump allowance.

:‘LoglOY = - 1.03397 + 0.86048 LoglOD’Th.

‘LoglOY = ~ I.41556 + 0.87041 LoglOD’Th.

20
Table 19.-Predicted green volume of wood and bark of the total tree for Choctawhatchee sand pine

trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches) 20 30

Total-tree height’ (feet)

40 50

. .

60 70

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cubic feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WOOD AND BARK”

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

II

12

13

1 4

15

1’1

1:7

zI2[ 2.7 3.3

3.4 4.2 5.1 I

2.5 3.7 I 4.9 __

3.3 5.0 6.6

4.4 6.5 8.6

5.5 8.2 10.9

10.1 13.4

12.2 16.2

14.5 19.2

22.5

26.1

6.1 7.3

8.3 9.9

10.8 12.9

13.6 16.2

16.7 20.0

20.2 24.2

24.0 28.7

28.1 33.6

32.5 L38.9

37.2 44.6

8.5

11.5

15.0

18.9

23.3

28.1

33.4

39.1

WOOD4

4 [ 0.9 1.3

5 1.4 2.1

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1 4

15

2.0 3.0 i 4.1

2.7 4.1 5.6

3.6 5.4 7.3

4.6 6.9 9.3

8.6 11.6

10.5 14.1

12.5 16.9

19.9

23.1

5.1 6.2

7.0 8.4

9.2 11.1

11.7 14.2

14.6 17.6

17.7 21.4

21.2 25.6

7.2

9.9

13.0

16.6

20.6

25.0

29.9

35.3

41.11

‘Blocked-in area indicates range of data.

‘Includes l-foot stump allowance.

:‘LoglOY = -2.43029 + 0.98764 LogjOD’Th.

-‘LoglOY = -2.63695 + 1.02742 LoglOD”Th.

2 1
Table 20.-Predicted green volume of wood and bark in the main stem to a 3-inch d.o.b. top for

Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h.

(inches) 20 30

Total-tree height” (feet)

40 50

. .

60 70

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cubic feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WOOD AND BARK”

4 2.0 2.4

5 3.1 3.8

6 4.6 5.5 6.5

7 2.4 3.7 5.0 6.3 7.6 9.0

8 3.2 4.9 6.6 8.4 10.1 11.9

9 4.1 6.3 8.5 10.7 13.0 15.2

1 0 7.8 10.6 13.4 16.2 19.0

11 9.6 12.9 16.3 19.8 23.2

12 11.5 15.5 19.6 23.7 27.9

13 18.3 23.2 28.1 33.0

1 4 21.4 27.1 32.8 38.6

15 31.3 37.9 44.6

WOOD”

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

13

1 4

15

LO.6 1.7 2.0

1.0 2.7 3.3 1

1.5 2.3 ‘3.1_. 4.0 4.9 5.7

2.1 3.2 4.4 5.6 6.8 8.0

2.8 4.3 5.9 7.4

3.6 5.5 7.5 9.6 11.7 13.8

6.9 9.5 12.1 14.7 17.4

8.5 11.6 14.8 18.1 21.3

10.3 14.1 17.9

L-L 9.1 10.7

21.8 25.8

16.7 21.3 25.9 30.6

19.6 25.0 30.4 36.0

29.0 35.4 41.8

IBlocked-in area indicates range of data.

zlncludes i-foot stump allowance.

:‘LoglOY = -2.75688 + 1.04968 LoglOD’Th.

‘LoglOY = -2.92462 + 1.08298 LogIODqh.

22
Table 21.-Predicted green volume of wood and bark in branches for Choctawhatchee sand pine

trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h.’

D.b.h. (inches)

20 30

Total-tree height” (feet)

40 50

. .

60 70

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

12

13

1 4

15

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1 3

14

1 5

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cubic feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . .

WOOD AND BARK”

[ 0.3 0.4 0 6

I 0:8

I

0.7 0.8

0.5 0.6 1.0 1.2

0.6 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.8

0.8 1.1 1.4 1 1.7 2.0 2.3

1.1 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.5 2.9

1.2 1.7 2.2 2.6 3.1 3.5

2.1 2.6 3.2 3.7 4.2

2.4 3.1 3.7 4.3 4.9

2.8 3.6 4.3 5.0 5.7

4.1 4.9 ’ 5.7 6.5

4.6 5.5 6.4 7 3

6.2 7.2 8:2

WOOD4

1 0.2

0.3

0.4

0.6

0.7

0.9

‘Blocked-in area indicates range of data.

*Includes l-foot stump allowance.

3Log10Y = -2.58501 + 0.83384 LoglODTh.

4Log10Y = -2.83057 + 0.86608 LoglODTh.

r

-----____ A -- -

Taras, Michael A.

1980. Aboveground biomass of Choctawhatchee sand pine in northwest Florida.

USDA For. Serv., Res. Pap. SE-2 IO, 00 p. Southeast. For. Exp. Stn.. Asheville.

N.C.

Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to 14 inches d.b.h. were selected from a natural, unevenaged stand in northwest Florida to determine the weight and volume ofaboveground biomass.

On the average, 85 percent of the green weight of the total tree was wood, I I percent bark. and

4 percent needles. The average tree sampled had 82 percent of its wood in the stem and I8

percent in the crown. Specific gravity, moisture content, and green weight per cubic foot are

presented for the total tree and its components. Tables developed from regression equations

predict weight and cubic-foot volume of the total tree and its components by d.b.h. and total

height classes.

KEYWORDS: Pinus clausa var. immuginara Ward, weight, volume, equations, component

proportions.

L ----------___

-- --- -__ _

I

I

I

I

I

1

I

I

I

_L

Taras. Michael A.

19X0. Aboveground biomass of Choctawhatchee sand pine in northwest Florida

USDA For. Serv.. Res. Pap. SE-2 IO. 00 p. Southeast. For. Exp. Stn.. Ashevtlle.

N.C.

Choctawhatchee sand pine trees 4 to I4 inches d.b.h. were selected from a natural. unevenaged stand in northwest Florida to determine the weight and volume ofaboveground btomass.

On the average, 85 percent of the green weight ofthe total tree was wood. 1 I percent bark. and

4 percent needles. The average tree sampled had X2 percent of it\ wood in the stem and IX

percent in the crown. Specific gravity. moisture content, and green weight per cubic foot are

presented for the total tree and its components. Tables developed from regression equations

predict weight and cubic-foot volume of the total tree and its components by d.b.h. and t<)t;tl

height classes.

KEYWORDS: Pimts clausu var. immuginarcl Ward. weight. volume. equations. component

proportions.
The Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, is dedicated to the principle of multiple

use management of the Nation’s

forest resources for sustained

yields of wood, water, forage,

wildlife, and recreation. Through

forestry research, cooperation

with the States and private forest

owners, and management of the

National Forests and National

Grasslands, it strives-as directed by Congress-to provide

increasingly greater service to a

growing Nation.

USDA policy does not permit discrimination because of

race, color, national origin, sex or religion. Any person

who believes he or she has been discriminated against in

any USDA-related activity should write immediately to

the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250.