This competition measure can either be spatial (distance-dependent) or non-spatial (distance-independent). Although many additional submodels and features are often

Etoposide molecular weight available (e.g., in growth routine, form factor functions, merchantable volume equations, insect damage, etc.), we will focus on the diameter and height increment functions and submodels for competition and crown ratio, which are the routines needed to predict height:diameter ratio. These functions usually are the core of the simulator. Two general strategies exist for predicting growth: potential growth modifier functions, and direct functions. With the former, the growth rate of individual trees is the product of potential growth and a modifier (Newnham, 1964). For height increment, the theoretical maximum height growth rate attainable is most frequently estimated from height growth (site-index) curves of dominant trees at different ages for a given level of site productivity. Modifier functions may vary, but most contain crown ratio and some index of tree density or tree competition. The modifier will reduce height growth rate if a given tree is in a disadvantageous position within a stand. The growth models BWIN, Moses, and

Silva use height increment models with a potential and modifier see more (see Table 1). With the latter strategy, direct functions express diameter or height increment directly as a function of tree, stand, and site characteristics, including the competitiveness of a tree in a stand (Wykoff, 1990). Commonly used functions include the logistic, Chapman–Richards, or the Evolon model (Mende and Albrecht, 2001). Prognaus uses a direct functional approach ( Table 1). An advantage of models with a potential height increment is that height growth is reasonably bounded from above. In contrast, a model without growth potential might give unreasonable tree

height increments if the underlying mathematical model is inappropriate or site conditions or the age span Arachidonate 15-lipoxygenase are an extreme extrapolation. A disadvantage of models with a potential height increment is that the potential might be wrong. If the potential is too high (or low), then also the influence of competition would be overestimated (or underestimated) (Hasenauer, 2006). Similarly, diameter increment models also use an approach with and without a growth potential. For diameter increment, the growth rates of open-grown trees provide useful empirical bounds for individual stand-grown trees (Smith et al., 1992). The potential growth is then again adjusted by a modifier accounting for competition. One possible concern is that open-grown trees become less and less analogous to forest-grown trees as the trees age and get larger. Models without a potential usually express increment as a function of size, site characteristics, and competition.