Improved estimation of biomass accumulation by environmental and mallee plantings using FullCAM

104 Pages·2013·6.94 MB·English

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE FLAGSHIP

Improved estimation of biomass accumulation by
environmental plantings and mallee plantings using
FullCAM

K. Paul1, S. Roxburgh1, J. Raison1, J. Larmour1, J. England1, S. Murphy2, J. Norris2, P. Ritson3, K. Brooksbank3, T.
Hobbs4, C. Neumann4, T. Lewis5, Z. Read6, D. Clifford1, L. Kmoch1, M. Rooney7, D. Freudenberger7, J. Jonson8, A.
Peck9, R. Giles9, J. Bartle9, G. McAurthur10, D. Wildy11, A. Lindsay5, N. Preece12, S. Cunningham13, T. Powe14, J.
Carter1, R. Bennett1, D. Mendham1, R. Sudmeyer5, B. Rose15, D. Butler16, L. Cohen17, T. Fairman2, R. Law2, B.
Finn2, M. Brammar2, G. Minchin18, P. van Oosterzee12 and A. Lothian17

31st October 2013

Prepared for: Department of the Environment

1CSIRO, 2Victorian Department of Environment and Primary Industries, 3Department of Agriculture and Food, WA, 4SA Department of Environment, Water and
Natural ResoCuSrcIeRsO, 5 QSuuesetnasilannadb Dlee pAagrtrmicenutl toufr eA gFrilcaugltsuhrei,p F, isahnedrie Cs SaInRdO F oErceostsryy, s6tAeumstrsa lSiacni eNnactieonsa l University, 7Greening Australia, 8Threshold
Environmental, 9WA Department of Environment and Conservation, 10AusCarbon Pty Ltd., 11Fares Rural Pty Ltd., 12Biocarbon Pty Ltd., 13Monash University,
14Greenfleet Pty Ltd., 15Carbon Neutral Pty Ltd., 16Queensland Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts, 17Canopy, trading
1
name of Australian Carbon Biosequestration Initiative Ltd (ACBI), 18Lachlan Catchment Management Authority.
Citation
K. Paul, S. Roxburgh, J. Raison, J. Larmour, J. England, S. Murphy, J. Norris, P. Ritson, K. Brooksbank, T.
Hobbs, C. Neumann, T. Lewis, Z. Read, D. Clifford, L. Kmoch, M. Rooney, D. Freudenberger, J. Jonson,
A. Peck, R. Giles, J. Bartle, G. McAurthur, D. Wildy, A. Lindsay, N. Preece, S. Cunningham, T. Powe, J.
Carter, R. Bennett, D. Mendham, R. Sudmeyer, B. Rose, D. Butler, L. Cohen, T. Fairman, R. Law, B.
Finn, M. Brammar, G. Minchin, P. van Oosterzee and A. Lothian. (2013) Improved estimation of
biomass accumulation by environmental planting and mallee plantings using FullCAM. Report for The
Department of the Environment. CSIRO Sustainable Agriculture Flagship, Canberra, Australia.
Copyright and disclaimer
© 2013 CSIRO To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication
covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the
written permission of CSIRO.
Important disclaimer
CSIRO advises that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements based
on scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such information may be
incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation. No reliance or actions must therefore be
made on that information without seeking prior expert professional, scientific and technical advice.
To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO (including its employees and consultants) excludes all liability
to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses
and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in part or in
whole) and any information or material contained in it.

2
Contents
Abbreviations used in this report ....................................................................................................................... 5
Definitions .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
1 Executive summary ............................................................................................................................. 10
2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 13
3 Methodological aspects ...................................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 14
3.2 Sampling Error .......................................................................................................................... 14
3.3 Precision sampling: increased efficiency of measurement ...................................................... 18
3.4 Rapid measurement techniques ............................................................................................... 19
3.5 Planted area calculation ........................................................................................................... 21
3.6 Sampling error when deriving allometrics ............................................................................... 23
4 New biomass estimates ...................................................................................................................... 25
4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 25
4.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 25
4.3 Allometrics for the estimation of above-ground biomass........................................................ 26
4.4 Site average root-to-shoot ratios ............................................................................................. 26
4.5 Testing of allometrics ............................................................................................................... 28
4.6 Estimates of mean annual biomass increment ........................................................................ 29
4.7 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 30
5 Database analysis ................................................................................................................................ 31
5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 31
5.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 31
5.3 Allometrics ................................................................................................................................ 37
5.4 Uncertainty in above-ground biomass estimates..................................................................... 41
5.5 Analysis of factors influencing biomass .................................................................................... 43
5.6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 52
6 Calibration of FullCAM ........................................................................................................................ 53
6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 53
6.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 54
6.3 Calibration of the Tree Yield Formula ....................................................................................... 56
6.4 Implementation considerations ............................................................................................... 64
6.5 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 68
7 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 70
8 References .......................................................................................................................................... 72
9 Appendix ............................................................................................................................................. 78

3
Acknowledgments
The project was funded largely by The Department of the Environment. Additional financial support
for this project was provided by Vic DEPI, while significant in-kind support in the form of assistance
with field work was provided by Vic DEPI (10 sites), DAFWA (7 sites), SA DEWNR (3 sites), Qld DAFF (3
sites), LCMA (2 sites), ANU (1 site), Qld DSITIA (1 site) and Threshold Environmental (1 site).
Technical support was provided by Alex Drew, Gordon McLachlan, Craig Baillie, Paul Warburton, Gary
Bastin (all CSIRO), Byron Yeo, Alex Winter, Mike Cully, Len Norris and Bob Hingston (all DAFWA),
Katelyn Ryan and Mervyn Tucker (both SA DEWNR), Scott Swift (Qld DAFF) and Dailiang Peng
(Chinese Academy of Science). ANUCLIM applications were undertaken by Jenny Kesteven (ANU).
For providing broad guidance with FullCAM growth curve calibrations and issues associated with
implementation of these calibrations, we thank: Matt Searson, Rob Sturgis, Brendan Pippen, Rochelle
Christian and particularly Rob de Ligt (The Department of the Environment). For providing broad
guidance with this work, including site selection and facilitating the collation of data, we thank: Craig
Barton and Fabiano Ximenes (NSW DPI), Gavin Kay (Terrain NRM), Keith Smith (Qld DSITIA), John
McGrath, Paul Turnbull (FFI CRC), Simon Dawkins (OMA), John Field (ANU), Angela Higgins (Lachlan
CMA), Gavin Kay (Terrain NRM), Tom Baker and Lauren Bennett (The University of Melbourne), Jason
Cummings (Greening Australia), Ray Wilson and Mariana Brekalo (Carbon Neutral), Kent Broad
(AusCarbon Pty Ltd.), Harry Roberts (SA Water), Ben Keogh (Australian Carbon Traders Pty Ltd.),
Richard Smith (previously Landcare Australia), Matthew O'Connor and Helen Burnie (Regenesis),
Richard Harper and Stan Sochacki (Murdoch University), Euan Beaumont (Carbon Diversity), Brendan
Vollemaere (Citola Pty Ltd.) and Peter Milthorpe.
We are also indebted to the landowners who gave us permission to harvest trees on their properties,
including Ingrid Davies, Greg Moir, David and Michael McFall, Philip Henseleit, Alan Piggott, John
Pepal, Audrey Bird, Norm Quicke, James Williams, Leo Rijs, Robert Temby, Joe Angel, Mitch Kemp,
Len Storey, Greg Carmody, Rob Batters, Dennis Watts, Trevor Campbell, Leo Tellefson, Rodney
Milthorpe, Chris Jones, Rob Rich, Bendigo City Council, John Toll, Elders Forestry, Trevor and Muriel
Muirhead, Gladstone Area Water Board, Tony and Trudy Woodall, Graeme Fitzgerald, Ross Battern,
David Sutton and Tony and Trudy Woodall.
Drs Mike Battaglia, Phil Polglase and Kelvin Montagu are thanked for their thorough review of this
report.
4
Abbreviations used in this report

ANU Australian National University
BA Basal area of a single tree (m2) or group of trees (m2 ha-1)
CF Correction factor (Snowdon 1991) used to correct for bias in back
transformations
%CV Coefficient of variation (standard deviation divided by the mean x100)
Class 1 New above-ground biomass measures or estimates obtained from this study
CVI Canopy Volume Index, calculated as Ht x CW x CW (m3)
1 2
CW Canopy width (m)
DAFF Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
DBH Diameter of the stem measured at breast height (or 130 cm) (cm)
D10, D30 etc. Diameter of the stem measured at 10 cm, 30 cm, etc. height (cm)
DAFWA Department of Agriculture and Food WA
EF Model efficiency, increasing performance as values approach 1.0 (or 100%)
FullCAM Full Carbon Accounting Model
FFI CRC Future Farm Industries Cooperative Research Centre
GA Greening Australia
GRTS Generalised Random Tesselation Stratified sampling
Ht Tree or shrub height (m)
IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia
LCMA Lachlan Catchment Management Authority
Lox Eucalyptus loxophleba subsp. lissophloia
M Forest biomass at maturity as defined by Richards and Brack (2004a)
MAR Mean annual rainfall (mm) over the period of growth
N Number of observations within the dataset
NIS National Inventory System
NSW DPI NSW Department of Primary Industries
OMA Oil Mallee Association
Pavg Forest productivity index as defined by Kesteven et al. (2004)
Poly Eucalyptus polybractea
PropTree Proportion of total individuals within a planting which are eucalypt trees
Qld DSITIA Queensland Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and
the Arts
Qld DAFF Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
UWA University of Western Australia
R:S Root-to-shoot ratio, with the boundary being defined as ground level
SA DEWNR Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources SA
Stdev. Standard deviation of the mean
sph Stems per hectare
Vic DEPI Department of Environment and Primary Industries Victoria
WA DEC WA Department of Environment and Conservation

5
Definitions
Block planting geometry
Where the spatial configuration of a planting is:
a. For mixed-species environmental plantings:
i. not a narrow or wide linear planting
b. For mallee eucalypt plantings:
i. not a narrow or wide linear planting
Note: The treatment of the space between blocks is set out in the CFI Mapping Guidelines. Under the
Guidelines: (i) features greater than 5 metres in width; or (ii) areas less than 5 metres in width that
total more than 5% of the project area; must be defined as exclusion areas and must not be counted
as part of the carbon estimation area.

Densely stocked planting
Plantings where, after the first 3 years post-establishment, the number of individuals per hectare
remains relatively high at; (a) >1,500 individuals per hectare, in mixed-species environmental
plantings; or (b) >2,300 individuals per hectare, in mallee eucalypt plantings.

Mallee eucalypt planting
A planting, on ex-agricultural land, of a single Australian species of Eucalyptus that consists of species
that have a number of almost unbranched stems arising from a large underground lignotuber (i.e.
not a mixed mallee species planting). Mallee eucalypt plantings included under this definition are of
the species:
a. Eucalyptus loxophleba ssp. lissophloia L.A.S. Johnson & K.D. Hill (smooth bark york gum),
b. E. polybractea R.T. Baker (blue mallee) and
c. ‘Other’ mallee including species
i. E. kochii, Maiden & Blakely
ii. E. kochii ssp. borealis C.A. Gardner, and
iii. E. kochii ssp. plenissima C.A. Gardner
All other mallee species known to be planted that are not applicable to the findings of this report
include:
a. planting that has a mix of two or more of the mallee eucalypt species included under this
definition (E. loxophleba ssp. lissophloia, E. polybractea, E. kochii, E. kochii ssp. Borealis and
E. kochii ssp. Plenissima; and
b. planting of one or more of mallee species such as, but not limited to: E. horistes, E.
calycogona, E. cneorifolia [Kangaroo Island CS20275], E. cyanophylla [Loxton cult.], E.
dumosa, E. gracilis [Loxton cult.], E. incrassata, E. leptophylla, E. oleosa, E. plenissima, E.
porosa, and E. socialis

Mixed-species environmental planting
A planting, on ex-agricultural land, that consists of a mixture of tree and shrub species that:
a. are native to the local area of the planting; and
b. are sourced from seeds:
i. from within the natural distribution of the species; and
ii. that are appropriate to the biophysical characteristics of the area of the planting;
and
c. may be a mix of trees, shrubs, and understorey species where the mix reflects the structure
and composition of the local native vegetation community, and
6
d. are established through tube stock, direct seeding or broadcast seeding. That is it does not
include mixed-species regenerated naturally without planting seeds or seedlings (i.e. natural
regeneration or regrowth).

Narrow linear planting geometry
Where the spatial configuration of a planting is:
a. For mixed-species environmental plantings established in either rows (from tube-stock or
direct-seeding) or random (from tube-stock and/or broadcast-seeding):
i. narrow linear or belt planting where the distance between the stems of the
outermost trees or shrubs (random plantings) or rows of the planting is 20 m or less
across; and
ii. where the distance between the stems of trees or shrubs at the edge of the plantings
is at least 12 m from the stems of any adjacent significant stand of trees (e.g.
plantings, natural regeneration or remnant vegetation);
iii. where if planted in rows, the average distance between rows within the planting is 4
m or less across, and
b. For mallee eucalypt plantings:
i. narrow linear or belt planting of two rows of trees (from tube-stock or direct-
seeding); and
ii. where the distance between the outermost rows of trees in a planting is at least 12
m from the stems of any adjacent significant stand of trees (e.g. plantings, natural
regeneration or remnant vegetation), and
iii. where the average distance between rows within the planting is 4 m or less across.

Planted area
The spatial area defining the planting that is used to estimate carbon abatement where:
a. For blocks or belts in which plants are established in rows:
i. the location of the outside edge of the long axis of the rows is a distance
from the outer row of stems one half of the average spacing between trees
within rows within the planted area;
ii. the location of the outside edge perpendicular to rows is a distance from the
outer row of stems one half of the average spacing between trees within the
planted area;
iii. the location of an edge internal to the planting perimeter bordering on an
exclusion area is a distance of one half of the average width of the rows
within the planted area from the outermost stem; and
iv. requirements for the minimum area of the planting and exclusion areas are
set out in the CFI Mapping Guidelines; and
b. For blocks or belts in which plants are established randomly (i.e. not in rows):
i. the location of any outside edge from the outer stems is equal to zero
meters from the outer stems;
ii. the location of an edge internal to the planting perimeter bordering on an
exclusion area is equal to zero meters from the outermost stem; and
iii. requirements for the minimum area of the planting and exclusion areas are
set out in the CFI Mapping Guidelines;

Project area
The subjectively defined spatial area defining the planting/s managed under the project including
exclusions and spaces between adjacent linear plantings. Note: Planted area, not project area is used
to estimate carbon abatement.

7
Sparsely stocked planting
Plantings where, after the first 3 years post-establishment, the number of individuals per hectare
remains relatively low at; (a) 500-1,500 individuals per hectare, in mixed-species environmental
plantings; or (b) <2,300 individuals per hectare, in mallee eucalypt plantings.

Stand density or stocking
The number of live individuals per hectare. Includes all live woody individual trees or shrubs,
regardless of their size. Excludes only ground-cover plants and grasses. Note, stand density is
equivalent to stems per hectare given, as described below, although a shrub or tree may be multi-
stemmed and have numerous stem-branches of small diameters, an equivalent single stem is
calculated and assigned to such individuals.

Stems or multi-stems
A stem is the main woody structural component of the above-ground portion of a tree or shrub.
Although it may branch into multiple stems at heights between 10 and 130 cm from the ground
where stem diameters were measured, in this report these multi-stemmed trees or shrubs are
assigned a single stem equivalent size. The numerous stem-branches of small diameters were
converted to an equivalent single stem value.

Tree-dominant planting
Mixed-species environmental plantings that have at least 75% of live individuals of tree growth-habit.
That is, the proportion of trees in the planting is ≥0.75. The definition of a tree was made in relation
to species. A species was classified as having a tree growth habit if it was (or has the potential to
attain) a stem diameter measurement at breast height (130 cm height).

Tropical planting
A planting that consists of a mixture of tree and shrub species that:
a. are native to the local area of the planting; and
b. are sourced from seeds:
i. from within the natural distribution of the species; and
ii. that are appropriate to the biophysical characteristics of the area of the
planting; and
c. may be a mix of trees, shrubs, and understorey species where the mix reflects the
structure and composition of the local native vegetation community,
d. are established through tube stock, direct seeding or broadcast seeding. That is it
does not include mixed-species regenerated naturally without planting seeds or
seedlings (i.e. natural regeneration or regrowth), and
e. are in tropical regions of Australia classified as having hot (or warm) humid summers
as per the temperature/humidity zones of climate classification of BOM (2006).

Very sparsely stocked planting
Plantings where, after the first 3 years post-establishment, the number of individuals per hectare
remains very low at <500 individuals per hectare in mixed-species environmental plantings.

Wide linear planting geometry
Where the spatial configuration of a planting is:
a. For mixed-species environmental plantings established in either rows (from tube-stock or
direct-seeding) or random (from tube-stock and/or broadcast-seeding):
i. wide linear or belt planting where the distance between the stems of the outermost
trees or shrubs (random plantings) or rows of the planting is greater than 20 m
across, but less than 40 m; and
8
ii. where the distance between the stems of trees or shrubs at the edge of the plantings
is at least 12 m from the stems of any adjacent significant stand of trees (e.g.
plantings, natural regeneration or remnant vegetation);
iii. where if planted in rows, the average distance between rows within the planting is 4
m or less across, and
b. For mallee eucalypt plantings:
i. wide linear or belt planting of three to eight rows of trees (from tube-stock or direct-
seeding); and
ii. where the distance between the outermost rows of trees in a plantings is at least 12
m from the stems of any adjacent significant stand of trees (e.g. plantings, natural
regeneration or remnant vegetation), and
iii. where the average distance between rows within the planting is 4 m or less across.

9
1 Executive summary
• Overview: During the last two years, a major nationally-collaborative research program has
been lead by CSIRO to improve the estimation of biomass accumulation by mixed-species
environmental plantings and mallee eucalypt plantings. It has involved evaluation of the
uncertainties associated with using alternative approaches to biomass estimation, and the
collation and refinement of new and existing field inventories and biomass estimates for
these plantings, growing in various configurations throughout the non-arid (>300 mm mean
annual rainfall) regions of Australia. A large database on growth and biomass accumulation
across a wide range of planting types has been developed, comprising 1,480 site-based
observations, or 884 site-based observations not including repeated measures at the one
site, 183,675 stem diameter measures (36% from new work in this project) and 8,288
measures of tree or shrub above- and below-ground biomass (40% from new work in this
project). These data have been analysed to identify the key factors affecting the growth of
plantings, resulting in 26 statistically-different categories of plantings. Modifiers that account
for large variations in growth of these categories of plantings have been developed for use in
FullCAM (which underpins the Reforestation Modelling Tool, RMT).
• Sampling error: Sampling error was found to be the main factor affecting the accuracy of
biomass estimates. Unless a sufficient number of trees/shrubs are sampled in a manner that
is representative of the planting, biomass estimates can have high coefficients of variation of
>50%. Even within reasonably homogeneous plantings, a large number of trees needed to be
sampled to obtain biomass estimates with a 90% chance of being within – 10% of the true
mean. For block planting geometries, the number of trees required to be measured based on
simple random sampling was 700-1,600 and 130-280 for direct seeded and tubestock
plantings, respectively. In linear plantings, the number of trees required was 540-1,030 and
116-180, respectively. Guidance is also provided on sampling strategies to decrease sample
error by providing representative plots, and correct definition of the extent (area) of the
planting for consistency in estimates of biomass when comparisons between linear and block
plantings are required.
• Verification of allometrics: Direct field measures of above- and below-ground biomass
(through whole-of-plot harvesting) were used to test the reliability of a range of allometric
equations. It was shown that uncertainties resulting from the application of allometric
equations to estimate above-ground biomass are very low (generally <10% difference
between measured and estimated biomass) when using site-based allometrics, or moderate
(generally <16% difference between measured and estimated biomass) when generalised
non-site allometrics are used. This report contains a comprehensive set of new allometric
equations that can be used to estimate biomass of mixed-species environmental and mallee
eucalypt plantings.
• Root to shoot ratios: Root to shoot ratios can be high in young plantings grown in water and
nutrient-limited environments. They ranged between 0.28 and 0.81 across 13 sites studied.
Ratios were higher in tree-dominated plantings, where the ratio tended to decline as
productivity increased. A set of new root allometric equations were verified with direct
measurement from whole plot excavation.
• Uncertainty in biomass estimates: Several sources of uncertainty contribute to the challenge
of reliably estimating biomass accumulation, with estimates being highly variable within a
planting, across the broader landscape, and over time. Substantial errors can result from
10