Modelagem da distribuição diamétrica de Tectona grandis como ferramenta do planejamento florestal

Abstract

The study of teak growth is essential to know the behavior of the trunk increase over time, to determine management regimes to describe it. Growth can be modeled in different ways, where the level of information detail about the population is the most used. Within this classification, the whole-stand models are the most common, but have several limitations. To try to reduce or overcome these limitations the use of diameter distributions is presented as a way to achieve this reduction. The objective of this work is to develop growth models that serve as support for optimization of management regimes for the teak forests of FLORESTECA company. Tectona grandis data come from plantations in Mato Grosso and Pará, divided into four regions, with spacings ranging from 3m x 2m to 6m x 3m, with different genetic material, consisting of seeds and 10 varieties of clones. Hypsometric model (Pienaar) and individual volume (Schumacher and Hall) model, were adjusted in order to predict the trees unmeasured. Three distributions were tested: Weibull 2-P, Weibull 3-P, and Johnson’s SB, adjusted by the maximum likelihood method, where the best distribution was selected by tests: Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Cramér-von Mises, Anderson-Darling, and the criteria: AIC and BIC. The Weibull3-P distribution achieved better results, however, due to a difficulty in fitting the location parameter and as the Weibull 2-P had the worst results in the fitting stage, the Johnson distribution was recoveredd along with the Weibull distribution 2-P and both were compared through Error Index, which pointed to the Weibull 2-P as more appropriate. With a selected and recovered distribution of the performance indicator calculations, the product value and the IMA in basal area, where baal area was calculated from the distribution, as well as the value of the product. The spacing 3m x 2m obtained the best result of So, productivity and produc valuet, however both the spacing 3m x 2m and the 3m x 3m behave very similarly, especially for the fact of having an intervention intensity in Them. The 4m x 3m spacing, despite not having obtained the best results, has shown great potential because it is young projects, with high productivity and does not yet have its cycle of interventions finished, although it is not possible to determine if a high productivity It is an advantage of intervention or external benefits, as there is little information on this scheme.