Skip to main content
Download PDF
  • Data Paper
  • Published:

EuMIXFOR empirical forest mensuration and ring width data from pure and mixed stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) through Europe

Annals of Forest Science volume 74, Article number: 63 (2017) Cite this article

Abstract

Key message

This data set provides unique empirical data from triplets of Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech ( Fagus sylvatica L.) across Europe. Dendrometric variables are provided for 32 triplets, 96 plots, 7555 trees and 4695 core samples. These data contribute to our understanding of mixed stand dynamics. Dataset access at http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.8v04m . Associated metadata available at https://metadata-afs.nancy.inra.fr/geonetwork/apps/georchestra/?uuid=b3e098ca-e681-4910-9099-0e25d3b4cd52&hl=eng .

1 Background

During the last decade, empirical research often showed superiority of ecosystem functions of mixed forest stands compared to monocultures, e.g. productivity (Río and Sterba 2009; Pretzsch et al. 2010, 2013; Vallet and Perot 2011, Condés et al. 2013; Bielak et al. 2014; Liang et al. 2016), structural diversity (Río et al. 2016a) or stability (Knoke et al. 2008). However, the underlying processes are often still poorly understood. Moreover, generalizations require empirical data from different growing conditions, e.g. soil and climate. This unique data set includes 32 triplets across 16 European countries (Fig. 1) representing different ecoregions. Each triplet includes two pure stands and one with the two species in mixture, all with similar climatic and soil conditions. Effects of mixing these species can be analysed with respect to their corresponding pure stands. Under the umbrella of COST Action FP1206 EuMIXFOR (European Network on Mixed Forests), these triplets were established for the common European tree species, Scots pine and European beech. These species differ in their functional traits, and the data set provides a unique opportunity to develop a general understanding of the causes and patterns of mixing responses.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Distribution of the triplet locations across Europe and distribution of European beech and Scots pine according EUFORGEN (www.euforgen.org). Triangles represent triplet locations

Full size image

2 Methods

2.1 Study sites

All stands (plots) represent mostly even-aged and mono-layered forests. Intra-specific age (species in pure vs species in mixed stand) within each triplet is always similar; however, inter-specific age may differ. Plots within a triplet are mostly rectangular in shape ranging from 0.01 to 1.6 ha in size. The geographical location, altitude, slope, aspect, mean annual temperature, annual precipitation and substrate are available for each plot (Table 1). Due to the established gradient, these variables differ between triplets but are similar within each triplet.

Table 1 Overview of all triplets with: Country; corresponding country, Triplet name; name of the triplet in Fig. 1, Triplet; triplet identification number, longitude and latitude (for mixed stands), age; average age for the triplet (years, yr), altitude; elevation above sea level (m), slope (degrees), aspect (degrees [clockwise from north]), t; mean annual temperature (C°), p; annual precipitation (mm) and substrate. Altitude, slope and aspect represent average plot values
Full size table

2.2 Survey protocol

A standard protocol for data collection was established and applied for each triplet. For all trees exceeding diameter at breast height of 7 cm, mandatory attributes (Table 2) were defined and collected including tree number (Nr), tree species, diameter at breast height (dbh), tree height (h) and crown base height (cbh). In addition, on each plot, increment core samples for 10–20 dominant trees per species and angle count samples (acs) for the sampled trees were collected (Bitterlich 1952). Specific information is assigned to each tree indicating its status (alive, dead or damaged). Only standing trees were recorded. Spatial location (Cartesian coordinates) of individual trees was defined as an optional variable but was measured on most plots.

Table 2 Overview of measured mandatory and optional descriptive and dendrometric attributes
Full size table

The tree numbering system is in ascending order starting from 1 for trees located within the plot and, if recorded, 901 for trees outside but with part of their crowns inside the plot. For all labelled trees, the corresponding species was determined. Diameter at breast height was measured for all trees using girth tape while a digital hypsometer was used for measuring tree height and crown base height. Increment cores aiming to reach the pith were taken at 1.30 m height in north and east directions from the stem using increment borers. Likewise, 1–2 angle count samples (acs) were recorded using a relascope with basal area factor 4 or 1 m2 ha−1. All data were stored using predefined templates. In total, 7555 trees were measured and 4695 core samples were taken.

For 24 triplets, optional data of individual tree location and crown radii were collected. Crown radii (m) were mostly measured in N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W and NW cardinal directions with a minimum of four directions. Tree spatial information is given in Cartesian coordinates referring to a point of origin, e.g. the south west corner post of the corresponding plot.

2.3 Data processing—stand level data

Stand characteristics such as mean tree dimension, basal area (BA m2 ha−1) and volume stock per hectare (V m3 ha−1) were derived for each plot and species group, pine and beech. Additional coniferous and deciduous species within the mixed stands were grouped either as pine or beech, respectively. In pure stands, all additional species were assigned to the corresponding main species. Stand attributes are based on all surveyed living trees within the corresponding plot and are expressed per ha. A Petterson height curve function (Petterson 1955) was parameterized for each plot and species group. Missing tree heights and the height of quadratic mean diameter tree (hg) were calculated applying the corresponding height curve function. Stand volume was derived while taking into account each individual tree’s diameter at breast height, derived tree height and species-specific form factors (Franz 1971). All stand characteristics (Table 3) were calculated using standard evaluation software available at the Chair of Forest Growth and Yield Science, TU München (Biber 2013).

Table 3 Example (triplet 1033) of main stand characteristics per plot with: Country; corresponding country for the triplet, Triplet; triplet identification number, Plot plot identification (pibe; mixed stand pi; pure pine, be; pure beech), Year; year of survey, Species; species name, Age; plot age at survey, N; number of trees, dg; quadratic mean diameter (cm), hg height of quadratic mean diameter (m), BA; basal area (m2) and V; merchantable volume per hectare (m3). All variables refer to the main species and 1 ha
Full size table

3 Access to data and metadata description

The data set is available from the Dryad Digital Repository http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.8v04m (Heym et al. 2017) and cover five files (Contact.txt, TripletInformation.txt, Trees.txt, Crowns.txt and Cores.txt). Contact.txt file includes all contact information of the specific data provider. Associated metadata available at https://metadata-afs.nancy.inra.fr/geonetwork/apps/georchestra/?uuid=b3e098ca-e681-4910-9099-0e25d3b4cd52&hl=eng.

TripletInformation.txt provides plot and stand characteristics. The first two columns (Triplet and Plot) identify each plot. Plot characteristics cover year and month of the survey (year and month), plot size (area), location (longitude and latitude), elevation above sea level (altitude), inclination (slope), exposition (aspect), temperature (t), precipitation (p) and substrate (substrate). Stand characteristics cover tree species (species), age (Age), number of trees (N), quadratic mean diameter (dg) and corresponding height (hg), basal area (BA) and merchantable stand volume over bark (V). All variables refer to 1 ha and the main species (species) pine or beech, respectively. Additional species are assigned either as pine or beech as described in methods.

Trees.txt includes all measured tree attributes. Each row describes one tree and can be identified by columns Triplet, Plot and Nr. Tree information covers scientific species name (species), tree’s spatial information (x and y), diameter at breast height (dbh), tree height (h), crown base height (cbh) and two angle count measurements for the cored trees (acs_1 and acs_2). Column cored distinguishes cored trees (1) and non-cored trees (0). Any additional information is given in column remarks.

Crowns.txt contains all measured crown radii (distance) with its corresponding cardinal direction (azimuth). Column Triplet, Plot and Nr ensure the link to the corresponding tree in Trees.txt. In addition y_axis_to_north describes the deviation of the y-axis to north direction.

Cores.txt file contains all year ring width values (rw) for each year (year) and the two different directions (azimuth). Column Triplet, Plot and Nr ensure unique tree identification and link the corresponding tree attributes.

Missing information is always described using NA. All tables can be linked based on the columns Triplet, Plot and Nr. Detailed description of the metadata can be found in the supplementary material (EuMIXFOR Scots pine - European beech data.xlsx).

4 Technical validation

Validation of each data set was performed including crosschecks by hand, graphical and numerical tests. First, the unit of tree attributes and year ring width was carefully validated. Tree and corresponding core labels were compared manually and corrected where needed. Cross-dating of radial increment was performed by each collaborator and inconsistent cores were dropped. The relationship of individual tree height to its corresponding diameter at breast height, expressed by a Petterson height curve, was analysed for each triplet, shown as an example for triplet 1032 in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Detecting (left side, a) and correcting (right side, b) inconsistent height measurements. Data from triplet 1032 for pine (black) and beech (grey) in pure (triangles) and mixed stands (circles). Dashed and solid lines representing species-specific Petterson height curve for mixed and pure stands, respectively

Full size image

Crown base height was validated by visualizing cbh and corresponding tree height. If spatial information was available, visual inspection was applied to validate tree position and crown measurements. In addition, allometric relationships between diameter at breast height and crown projection area (cpa), calculated based on mean squared crown radii, cpa = a ∗dbhb , were validated visually (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Crown projection area (cpa) and diameter at breast height (dbh) for all measured pine (left side) and beech (right side) in pure (triangles) and mixed stands (circles). Allometric relationships are described by solid (pure stands) and dashed lines (mixed stands)

Full size image

Location of border trees was inspected by means of graphical output. Core data were also compared with species-specific variation of basal area increment in pure and mixed stands within each triplet (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Example of basal area increment per calendar year for beech (upper; a, b), and pine (lower; c, d), in pure (left; a, c) and mixed stand (right; b, d), for triplet 1035. Grey solid lines represent arithmetic means and n refers to number of cores for years shown on x-axis

Full size image

All data were imported into an access database and technical plausibility checks were applied, e.g. data types or duplicates.

5 Reuse potential and limits

The original data set covers attributes at the tree level, increments cores, stand and triplet characteristics and has been used for different purposes by Pretzsch et al. (2015, 2016), Río et al. (2016b, 2017), Dirnberger et al. (2016) and Forrester et al. (2017). The data set presented here describes the original data, but ongoing projects can complement the published data by additional measurements of resource supply, nutritional status and wood properties. Furthermore, it has the potential to reveal the effect of site conditions on the mixing responses at the stand, species and individual tree level. Available spatial information allows analyses of crown projection (Dirnberger et al. 2016), crown architecture or light regimes. The available core data allow retrospective analyses and can be linked to corresponding tree attributes, e.g. Pretzsch et al. (2016) or Río et al. (2017). Reconstructing stand characteristics provides temporal stand level information, e.g. Pretzsch et al. (2015). Moreover, spatial information of most of the plots allows for distance dependent analysis at small scales.

However, for specific analyses, some plot sizes could be too small. Tree and stand characteristics are only available for the year of survey. Therefore, temporal analyses require reconstructions at the tree and stand levels.

References

  • Biber P (2013) Kontinuität durch Flexibilität – Standardisierte Datenauswertung im Rahmen eines waldwachstumskundlichen Informationssystems, Allg. Forst- u. J.-Ztg., 184. Jg., 7/8:167–177

  • Bielak K, Dudzińska M, Pretzsch H (2014) Mixed stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst) can be more productive than monocultures. Evidence from over 100 years of observation of long-term experiments. For Syst 23:573–589

  • Bitterlich W (1952) Die Winkelzählprobe. Forstwiss Cbl 71:215–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Condés S, Río M, Sterba H (2013) Mixing effect on volume growth of Fagus sylvatica and Pinus sylvestris is modulated by stand density. For Ecol Manag 292:86–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirnberger G, Sterba H, Condés S, Ammer C, Annighöfer P, Avdagić A, Bielak K, Brazaitis G, Coll L, Heym M, Hurt V, Kurylyak V, Motta R, Pach M, Ponette Q, Ruiz-Peinado R, Skrzyszewski J, Šrámek V, de Streel G, Svoboda M, Zlatanov T, Pretzsch H (2016) Species proportions by area in mixtures of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) Eur J For Res. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10342-016-1017-0

  • Forrester DI, Ammer C, Annighöfer PJ, Barbeito I, Bielak K, Bravo-Oviedo A, Coll L, Río Md, Drössler L, Heym M, Hurt V, Löf M, Ouden Jd, Pach M, Pereira MG, Plaga B, Ponette Q, Skrzyszewski J, Sterba H, Svoboda M, Zlatanov T, Pretzsch H (2017) Effects of crown architecture and stand structure on light absorption in mixed and monospecific Fagus sylvatica and Pinus sylvestris forests along a productivity and climate gradient through Europe. J Ecol 00:1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12803

  • Franz F (1971) Funktionen und Tabellen der Derbholzformhöhen für die wichtigsten Baumarten in Bayern. München, Manuskriptdruck, Lehrstuhl für Waldwachstumskunde, Technische Universität München, unpublished

  • Heym M, Ruíz-Peinado R, del Río M, Bielak K, Forrester DI, Dirnberger G, Barbeito I, Brazaitis G, Ruškytė I, Coll L, Fabrika M, Drössler L, Löf M, Sterba H, Hurt V, Kurylyak V, Lombardi F, Stojanović D, den Ouden J, Motta R, Pach M, Skrzyszewski J, Ponette Q, de Streel G, Sramek V, Čihák T, Zlatanov TM, Avdagic A, Ammer C, Verheyen K, Włodzimierz B, Bravo-Oviedo A, Pretzsch H (2017) EuMIXFOR empirical forest mensuration and ring width data from pure and mixed stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) through Europe. Dryad Digital Repository. [Dataset]. http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.8v04m

  • Knoke T, Ammer H, Stimm B, Mosandl R (2008) Admixing broadleaved to coniferous tree species: a review on yield, ecological stability and economics. Eur J For Res 127:89–101

  • Liang J, Crowther TW, Picard N, Wiser S, Zhou M, Alberti G, Schulze E-D, McGuire AD, Bozzato F, Pretzsch H, de-Miguel S, Paquette A, Hérault B, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Barrett CB, Glick HB, Hengeveld GM, Nabuurs G-J, Pfautsch S, Viana H, Vibrans AC, Ammer C, Schall P, Verbyla D, Tchebakova N, Fischer M, Watson JV, HYH C, Lei X, Schelhaas M-J, Lu H, Gianelle D, Parfenova EI, Salas C, Lee E, Lee B, Seok Kim H, Bruelheide H, Coomes DA, Piotto D, Sunderland T, Schmid B, Gourlet-Fleury S, Sonké B, Tavani R, Zhu J, Brandl S, Vayreda J, Kitahara F, Searle EB, Neldner VJ, Ngugi MR, Baraloto C, Frizzera L, Bałazy R, Oleksyn J, Zawiła-Niedźwiecki T, Bouriaud O, Bussotti F, Finér L, Jaroszewicz B, Jucker T, Valladares F, Jagodzinski AM, Peri PL, Gonmadje C, Marthy W, O’Brien T, Martin EH, Marshall AR, Rovero F, Bitariho R, Niklaus PA, Alvarez-Loayza P, Chamuya N, Valencia R, Mortier F, Wortel V, Engone-Obiang NL, Ferreira LV, Odeke DE, Vasquez RM, Lewis SL, Reich PB (2016) Positive biodiversity-productivity relationship predominant in global forests. Science 354(6309):196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf8957

  • Petterson H (1955) Die Massenproduktion des Nadelwaldes. Mitt Forstlichen Forschungsanstalten Schwedens 45(1):1–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretzsch H, Block J, Dieler J, Dong PH, Kohnle U, Nagel J, Spellmann H, Zingg A (2010) Comparison between the productivity of pure and mixed stands of Norway spruce and European beech along an ecological gradient. Ann For Sci 67:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pretzsch H, Bielak K, Block J, Bruchwald A, Dieler J, Ehrhart H-P, Kohnle U, Nagel J, Spellmann H, Zasada M, Zingg A (2013) Productivity of pure versus mixed stands of oak (Quercus petraea (MATT.) LIEBL. and Quercus robur L.) and European beech (Fagus Sylvatica L.) along an ecological gradient. Eur J For Res 132:263–280

  • Pretzsch H, Río M, Ammer C, Avdagic A, Barbeito I, Bielak K, Brazaitis G, Coll L, Dirnberger G, Drössler L, Fabrika M, Forrester D, Heym M, Hurt V, Kurylyak V, Löf M, Lombardi F, Mohren F, Motta R, den Ouden J, Pach M, Ponette Q, Schütze G, Schweig J, Skrzyszewski J, Sramek V, Sterba H, Stojanović D, Svoboda M, Vanhellemont M, Verheyen K, Wellhausen K, Zlatanov T, Bravo-Oviedo A (2015) Growth and yield of mixed versus pure stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) analysed along a productivity gradient through Europe. For Ecol Manag 373:149–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pretzsch H, Rio M, Schütze G, Ammer C, Annighöfer P, Avdagic A, Barbeito I, Bielak K, Brazaitis G, Coll L, Drössler L, Fabrika M, Forrester DI, Kurylyak V, Löf M, Lombardi F, Matovic B, Mohren F, Motta R, den Ouden J, Pach M, Ponette Q, Skzyszewski J, Sramek V, Sterba H, Svoboda M, Verheyen K, Zlatanov T, Bravo-Oviedo A (2016) Mixing of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) enhances structural heterogeneity, and the effect increases with water availability. For Ecol Manag 373:149–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Río M, Sterba H (2009) Comparing volume growth in pure and mixed stands of Pinus sylvestris and Quercus pyrenaica. Ann For Sci 66:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Río M, Pretzsch H, Alberdi I, Bielak K, Bravo F, Brunner A, Condés S, Ducey MJ, Fonseca T, von Lüpke N, Pach M, Peric S, Perot T, Souidi Z, Spathelf P, Sterba H, Tijardovic M, Tomé M, Vallet P, Bravo-Oviedo A (2016a) Characterization of the structure, dynamics, and productivity of mixed species stands: review and perspectives. Eur J For Res 135:23–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Río M, Pretzsch H, Ruíz-Peinado R, Ampoorter E, Annighöfer P, Barbeito I, Bielak K, Brazaitis G, Coll L, Drössler L, Fabrika M, Forrester DI, Heym M, Hurt V, Kurylyak V, Löf M, Lombardi F, Madrickiene E, Matović B, Mohren F, Motta R, den Ouden J, Pach M, Ponette Q, Schütze G, Skrzyszewski J, Sramek V, Sterba H, Stojanović D, Svoboda M, Zlatanov T, Bravo-Oviedo A (2016b) Data from: Species interactions increase the temporal stability of community productivity in Pinus sylvestris-Fagus sylvatica mixtures across Europe. Dryad Digital Repository. [Dataset]. http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.fq4tk

  • Río M, Pretzsch H, Ruíz-PeinadoR AE, Annighöfer P, Barbeito I, Bielak K, Brazaitis G, Coll L, Drössler L, Fabrika M, Forrester DI, Heym M, Hurt V, Kurylyak V, Löf M, Lombardi F, Madrickiene E, Matović B, Mohren F, Motta R, den Ouden J, Pach M, Ponette Q, Schütze G, Skrzyszewski J, Sramek V, Sterba H, Stojanović D, Svoboda M, Zlatanov T, Bravo-Oviedo A (2017) Species interactions increase the temporal stability of community productivity in Pinus sylvestris-Fagus sylvatica mixtures across Europe. J Ecol 105(40):1032–1043. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12727

  • Vallet P, Perot T (2011) Silver fir stand productivity is enhanced when mixed with Norway spruce: evidence based on large-scale inventory data and a generic modelling approach. J Veg Sci 22:932–942

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article is based upon work from COST Action FP1206 (EuMIXFOR), supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology). All contributors thank their national funding institutions and the woodland owners for agreeing to establish, measure, analyse and reuse data from the triplets. Many thanks to the anonymous reviewer and data paper handling editor Marianne Peiffer for their helpful comments to improve the early draft of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair for Forest Growth and Yield Science, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany

    Michael Heym & Hans Pretzsch

  2. Department of Silviculture and Forest Systems Management, INIA-CIFOR, Madrid, Spain

    Ricardo Ruíz-Peinado, Miren Del Río & Andrés Bravo-Oviedo

  3. Sustainable Forest Management Research Institute University of Valladolid & INIA, Valladolid, Spain

    Ricardo Ruíz-Peinado, Miren Del Río & Andrés Bravo-Oviedo

  4. Department of Silviculture, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland

    Kamil Bielak & Buraczyk Włodzimierz

  5. Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland

    David I. Forrester

  6. Department of Forest and Soil Science, BOKU University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria

    Gerald Dirnberger & Hubert Sterba

  7. Laboratoire d’Etude des Ressources Forêt Bois (LERFoB), INRA centre of Nancy, Champenoux, France

    Ignacio Barbeito

  8. Institute of Forest Biology and Silviculture, Faculty of Forest Science and Ecology, Aleksandras Stulginiskis University, Studentu str. 11, Akademija, LT–53361, Kaunas dist, Lithuania

    Gediminas Brazaitis & Indrė Ruškytkė

  9. Department of Agriculture and Forest Engineering – Forest Sciences Centre of Catalonia (CTFC), University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain

    Lluís Coll

  10. Department of Forest Management and Geodesy, Faculty of Forestry, Technical University in Zvolen, Zvolen, Slovakia

    Marek Fabrika

  11. Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp, Sweden

    Lars Drössler & Magnus Löf

  12. Department of Silviculture, Mendel University, Brno, Czech Republic

    Václav Hurt

  13. Forestry Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Lviv, Ukraine

    Viktor Kurylyak

  14. Dipartimento di AGRARIA, Università Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria, Contrada Melissari, Loc. Feo di Vito, 89122, Reggio Calabria, Italy

    Fabio Lombardi

  15. Institute of Lowland Forestry and Environment, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia

    Dejan Stojanović

  16. Forest Ecology and Forest Management Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Jan Den Ouden

  17. Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences DISAFA, University of Turin, Turin, Italy

    Renzo Motta

  18. Department of Silviculture, Institute of Forest Ecology and Silviculture, University of Agriculture, Krakow, Poland

    Maciej Pach & Jerzy Skrzyszewski

  19. Faculty of Bioscience Engineering & Earth and Life Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

    Quentin Ponette & Géraud De Streel

  20. Forestry and Game Management Research Institute, Opocno, Czech Republic

    Vit Sramek

  21. Forestry and Game Management Research Institute, Jíloviště, Czech Republic

    Tomáš Čihák

  22. Department of Silviculture, Forest Research Institute, Sofia, Bulgaria

    Tzvetan M. Zlatanov

  23. Faculty of Forestry, University Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Admir Avdagic

  24. Abteilung Waldbau und Waldökologie der gemäßigten Zonen, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany

    Christian Ammer

  25. Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Forest & Nature Lab, Ghent University, Melle, Gontrode, Belgium

    Kris Verheyen

Authors
  1. Michael Heym
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ricardo Ruíz-Peinado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Miren Del Río
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kamil Bielak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. David I. Forrester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gerald Dirnberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ignacio Barbeito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Gediminas Brazaitis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Indrė Ruškytkė
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Lluís Coll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Marek Fabrika
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Lars Drössler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Magnus Löf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Hubert Sterba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Václav Hurt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Viktor Kurylyak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Fabio Lombardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Dejan Stojanović
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Jan Den Ouden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Renzo Motta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Maciej Pach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Jerzy Skrzyszewski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Quentin Ponette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Géraud De Streel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  25. Vit Sramek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  26. Tomáš Čihák
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  27. Tzvetan M. Zlatanov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  28. Admir Avdagic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  29. Christian Ammer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  30. Kris Verheyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  31. Buraczyk Włodzimierz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  32. Andrés Bravo-Oviedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  33. Hans Pretzsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Heym.

Ethics declarations

Funding

Networking for the design and discussion of the transect study was supported by COST Association during FP1206 COST Action (EuMIXFOR: European mixed forests – Integration Scientific Knowledge in Sustainable Forest Management). Funding for the establishment of the plots and collection of the data belonged to co-author.

Additional information

Handling Editor: Marianne Peiffer

Contribution of the co-authors

All co-authors contributed to the data set with establishing the triplets, supervising and undertaking field campaigns, data providing, synchronizing core data. M.H. wrote the data paper, all coauthors reviewed it and H.P. coordinated the transect study.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(XLSX 28 kb).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heym, M., Ruíz-Peinado, R., Del Río, M. et al. EuMIXFOR empirical forest mensuration and ring width data from pure and mixed stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) through Europe. Annals of Forest Science 74, 63 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-017-0660-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-017-0660-z

Keywords

Annals of Forest Science

ISSN: 1297-966X