Full description
Data from 68 pine hybrid trees (Pinus elliottii var. elliottii x P. caribaea var. hondurensis) sampled in southern Queensland (note no data exists for tree 61, hence tree numbers range from 1 to 69). The trees were collected from three sites in the southeast Queensland plantation estate owned by HQPlantations. Tree sizes were stratified by diameter at breast height, to ensure we collected the full range of sizes in the plantations. Ages of the trees ranged from 19 to 28 years.
23 variables in columns and 69 lines of hybrid pine data:
1. Tree#: Identifier for the tree
2. Stocking,
3. DBH: Diameter at breast height (1.3 m) overbark
4. Whole log Density: Average density of the approximately 8 m log
5. Whole log Density: Average density of the approximately 8 m log
6. Whole log MOE: 8 m log MOE estimated using resonance acoustics and log density
7. Butt Log Dia: Large end diameter of a 1.3 m peeler log taken from the bottom of the 8 m log collected from the field (between discs 1 and 2)
8 . Butt Log density: Average density of the 1.3 m bottom log (between discs 1 and 2)
9. Butt log MOE: 1.3 m butt log MOE calculated using resonance acoustics and density measured on the butt log
10. Sawlog Log Dia: Large end diameter of a 3.9 m sawlog log taken from the middle of the 8 m log collected from the field (between discs 2 and 3)
11. Sawlog Log density: Average density of the 3.9 m sawlog log (between discs 2 and 3)
12. Sawlog log MOE: 3.9 m sawlog MOE calculated using resonance acoustics and density measured on the sawlog
13. Top Log Dia: Large end diameter of a 1.3 m peeler log taken from the top of the 8 m log collected from the field (between discs 3 and 4)
14. Top Log density: Average density of the 1.3 m top log (between discs 3 and 4)
15. Top log MOE: Top log MOE: 1.3 m top log MOE calculated using resonance acoustics and density measured on the top log (between discs 3 and 4)
16. Segment avg core 1 MOE: Average MOE of a transverse core cut out of disc 1 which had been segmented into 20 mm sections, conditioned at 12% moisture content and their properties were measured using an ultrasound system
17. Segment avg core 2 MOE: Average MOE of a transverse core cut out of disc 2 which had been segmented into 20 mm sections, conditioned at 12% moisture content and their properties were measured using an ultrasound system
18. Segment avg core 3 MOE: Average MOE of a transverse core cut out of disc 3 which had been segmented into 20 mm sections, conditioned at 12% moisture content and their properties were measured using an ultrasound system
19. Segment avg core 4 MOE: Average MOE of a transverse core cut out of disc 4 which had been segmented into 20 mm sections, conditioned at 12% moisture content and their properties were measured using an ultrasound system
20. Integral avg core 1 MOE: Integral average MOE of a transverse core cut out of disc 1 which had been segmented into 20 mm sections, conditioned at 12% moisture content and their properties were measured using an ultrasound system
21. Integral avg core 2 MOE: Integral average MOE of a transverse core cut out of disc 2 which had been segmented into 20 mm sections, conditioned at 12% moisture content and their properties were measured using an ultrasound system
22. Integral avg core 3 MOE: Integral average MOE of a transverse core cut out of disc 3 which had been segmented into 20 mm sections, conditioned at 12% moisture content and their properties were measured using an ultrasound system
23. Integral avg core 4 MOE: Integral average MOE of a transverse core cut out of disc 4 which had been segmented into 20 mm sections, conditioned at 12% moisture content and their properties were measured using an ultrasound system
This study was part of a project titled “Improving returns from Southern Pine plantations through innovative resource characterisation” Project PNC361-1415. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support for the project funded by Forest and Wood Products Australia, DAF Forest Industries and industry partners: HQPlantations, Forest Corporation New South Wales, Hancock Victoria Plantations and Hyne Timber Pty Ltd. We acknowledge the contribution by all staff at DAF Gympie and Salisbury Research Facility including Rhianna Robinson, Rica Minett, Jock Kennedy, John Huth, Chris Fitzgerald, Anton Zbonak, Cristina Latorre, Hernan Retamales, Eric Littee, Tony Burridge, John Oostenbrink, Kerri Chandra, William Leggate and Tracey Menzies.
This study was part of a project titled “Improving returns from Southern Pine plantations through innovative resource characterisation” Project PNC361-1415. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support for the project funded by Forest and Wood Products Australia, DAF Forest Industries and industry partners: HQPlantations, Forest Corporation New South Wales, Hancock Victoria Plantations and Hyne Timber Pty Ltd. We acknowledge the contribution by all staff at DAF Gympie and Salisbury Research Facility including Rhianna Robinson, Rica Minett, Jock Kennedy, John Huth, Chris Fitzgerald, Anton Zbonak, Cristina Latorre, Hernan Retamales, Eric Littee, Tony Burridge, John Oostenbrink, Kerri Chandra, William Leggate and Tracey Menzies.
Issued: 2020
Created: 2015 to 2018
Spatial Coverage And Location
text: Location: Southeast Queensland
Subjects
Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences |
Applied Mathematics |
Engineering |
Forestry Sciences |
Materials Engineering |
Mathematical Sciences |
MOE |
Modulus of Elasticity |
cores |
density |
integral average |
southern pine |
ultrasound |
User Contributed Tags
Login to tag this record with meaningful keywords to make it easier to discover
Identifiers
- usc : 11131039200002621
