# Predicting Aboveground Biomass and Carbon Storage for Ma Bamboo (Dendrocalamus latiflorus Munro) Plantations

^{1}

^{2}

^{3}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

^{2}and lower root mean square error values. Compared to the AGB predicted by the allometric model with the age factor at the stand level, the range of relative error was from −16.56 to 5.26% and from −40.0 to 71.7% for the AGB predicted by the allometric model without the age factor and that by the diameter distribution model, respectively. According to the allometric model with the age factor, the AGB and AGCS were predicted to be 35.7 ± 3.4 and 16.3 ± 1.5 Mg ha

^{−1}, respectively, in Ma bamboo plantations. The results also reflected that the current status of Ma bamboo management is intensive management, where the focus is on harvesting bamboo shoots.

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Materials and Methods

#### 2.1. Study Areas

^{−1}, and the monthly average temperature was 19.3 °C and ranged from 14.4 °C (January) to 22.9 °C (July) [16]. Among the various bamboo species, some species, such as Ma bamboo, Makino bamboo and Moso bamboo (Phyllostachys pubescens Mazel), have high economic value [2,3,4,6,14]. Usually, bamboo species with economic value are planted and managed by farmers on plantations. The present study addressed Ma bamboo plantations distributed in a low mountainous area.

#### 2.2. Data Collection

#### 2.3. Fundamental Information on the Stands in This Study

^{−1}; the culms per clump was 7.0 ± 3.6 culms clump

^{−1}for the three stands [14]. In addition, the stand diameter distribution of these three stands was quantified by the Weibull function, and all passed the Kolmogorov‒Smirnov (K‒S) test. This result indicated that the Weibull function effectively quantified the DBH distribution for these three stands. The a, b and c parameters of the Weibull function were predicted to be 2.61 ± 1.64, 6.06 ± 0.84 and 3.56 ± 0.61, respectively [14]. For detailed information on these three stands, please refer to Sun and Yen [14].

#### 2.4. Methods

#### 2.4.1. Sampling to Determine Biomass and Percent Carbon Content

#### 2.4.2. Predicting Aboveground Biomass by Allometric Model

_{section}= a × DBH

^{b},

_{section}is the biomass of different sections, including foliage, branches and culms and aboveground (leaf, branches and culms); DBH is the diameter at breast height of the culm; a and b are parameters.

_{i}and Ŷ

_{i}are the i observed and the predicted values in the allometric model, respectively; n is the total number of observations; p is the number of parameters in the models.

#### 2.4.3. Predicting Aboveground Biomass and Carbon Storage at the Stand Level

## 3. Results

#### 3.1. Biomass Distribution in Sample Bamboo

#### 3.2. Predicting Biomass by the Allometric Model

^{2}was found for the foliage biomass, but a higher R

^{2}was found for the culm biomass and AGB, regardless of age (Table 3). We pooled all the age data for each section, and the relationships between the observations and the curves predicted by allometric equations are shown in Figure 2. The allometric equation well simulated the culm biomass and AGB, with a higher R

^{2}(0.747–0.748) than that of the biomass of other sections (R

^{2}from 0.423 to 0.500) (Table 3 and Figure 2).

#### 3.3. Percent Carbon Contents of Different Sections

#### 3.4. Biomass and Carbon Yield

^{−1}for clump level, respectively, and 32.4–39.1 and 32.6–35.3 Mg ha

^{−1}for stand level, respectively. Since a higher R

^{2}was found in the former model (R

^{2}from 0.831 to 0.960) for predicting AGB, we used that model as the basis for calculating the relative error (RE), where RE (%) = [(ABG predicted by model without age − ABG predicted by model with age)/ABG predicted by model with age)] × 100% for stand level. The RE ranged from −16.56 to 5.26%.

^{−1}for stands A, B and C, respectively.

^{−1}for stands A, B and C, respectively.

## 4. Discussion

^{−1}). This result implied that Ma bamboo has a high potential for carbon storage, while the large variation in carbon storage might result from different management patterns, such as the focus on harvesting bamboo culms or shoots.

^{2}(0.831–0.960) and a lower RMSE (1.853–4.925 kg) than those of the latter model (R

^{2}= 0.749 and RMSE = 4.971 kg). Therefore, we used the allometric equation with the age factor as the basis for comparing the AGB predicted by the allometric equation without the age factor at the stand level. The RE ranged from −16.56 to 5.26%, indicating that the former model might underestimate or overestimate AGB.

^{−1}for the three Ma bamboo stands. There was a lower AGCS value in the present study than in the previous study (48.94 ± 41.06 Mg ha

^{−1}) [4]. Because the farmers address the economic benefit of bamboo forests, the purpose of current bamboo forest management mainly focuses on bamboo shoot production in Taiwan. The results also reflected the current status of Ma bamboo management, which is intensive management, where the focus is on harvesting bamboo shoots.

## 5. Conclusions

- At the individual bamboo level, the proportions of foliage, branches and culms to AGB were 11.1, 23.7 and 65.2%, respectively. The mean PCC was predicted to be 41.68, 44.21 and 46.72% for foliage, branches and culms, respectively;
- The allometric equation with the age factor had better predictive ability than that without the age factor because the former equation had higher R
^{2}and lower RMSE values; - At the stand level, although the AGB predicted by the DDM showed more abundant information, this model still had a higher RE than that predicted by the allometric model with the age factor;
- The AGB and AGCS were predicted to be 35.7 ± 3.4 and 16.3 ± 1.5 Mg ha
^{−1}, respectively, in Ma bamboo plantations; - Our study reflected that the current status of Ma bamboo management is intensive management, where the focus is on harvesting bamboo shoots;
- The limitation of the present study was the small sample size used for developing the allometric function. The potential value of a larger sample and the use of a mixed model that fully represents the nested sampling and it is suggested for this bamboo species because Ma bamboo appears as an aboveground clump structure on land.

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Lu, C.-M. Cultivation and Management of Bamboo Forests; Taiwan Forestry Research Institute: Taipei, Taiwan, 2001; pp. 1–204. [Google Scholar]
- Yen, T.-M.; Ji, Y.-J.; Lee, J.-S. Estimating biomass production and carbon storage for a fast-growing makino bamboo (Phyllostachys makinoi) plant based on the diameter distribution model. For. Ecol. Manag.
**2010**, 260, 339–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yen, T.-M.; Lee, J.-S. Comparing aboveground carbon sequestration between moso bamboo (Phyllostachys heterocycla) and China fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata) forests based on the allometric model. For. Ecol. Manag.
**2011**, 261, 995–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Liu, Y.-H.; Yen, T.-M. Assessing aboveground carbon storage capacity in bamboo plantations with various species related to its affecting factors across Taiwan. For. Ecol. Manag.
**2021**, 481, 118745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Nath, A.J.; Das, G.; Das, A.K. Above ground standing biomass and carbon storage in village bamboos in North East India. Biomass Bioenergy
**2009**, 33, 1188–1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yen, T.-M. Comparing aboveground structure and aboveground carbon storage of an age series of moso bamboo forests subjected to different management strategies. J. For. Res.
**2015**, 20, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, L.-E.; Lin, Y.-J.; Yen, T.-M. Using allometric models to predict the aboveground biomass of thorny bamboo (Bambusa stenostachya) and estimate its carbon storage. Taiwan J. For. Sci.
**2016**, 31, 37–47. [Google Scholar] - Yuen, J.Q.; Fung, T.; Ziegler, A.D. Carbon stocks in bamboo ecosystems worldwide: Estimates and uncertainties. For. Ecol. Manag.
**2017**, 393, 113–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Inoue, A.; Koshikawa, K.; Sato, M.; Shima, H. Allometric equations for predicting the aboveground biomass of square bamboo, Chimonobambusa quadrangularis. J. For. Res.
**2019**, 4, 376–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Liu, Y.H.; Lin, Z.R.; Yen, T.M. Comparison of biomass prediction by various approaches for a makino bamboo (Phyllostachys makinoi Hayata) plantation. Q. J. Chin. For.
**2019**, 41, 203–215. [Google Scholar] - Hyink, D.M.; Moser, J.W. A generalized framework for projecting forest yield and stand structure using diameter distributions. For. Sci.
**1983**, 29, 85–95. [Google Scholar] - Hussain, M.; Lin, Z.-R.; Yen, T.-M.; Lin, C.-C. Application of models to predict stand volume, aboveground biomass accumulation, and carbon storage capacity for a Konishii fir (Cunninghamia konishii Hayata) plantation in central Taiwan. Forests
**2021**, 12, 1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chen, T.-H.; Wang, D.-H.; Chung, H.-Y. Effects of management strategy on growth and shoot products in Dendrocalamus latiflorus. Q. J. For. Res.
**2012**, 34, 297–304. [Google Scholar] - Sun, B.-K.; Yen, T.-M. Predicting stand structure and carbon storage for ma bamboo (Dendrocalamus latiflorus) and moso bamboo (Phyllostachys pubescens) plantations subjected to different management types in central Taiwan. J. Agric. For.
**2017**, 64, 233–244. [Google Scholar] - Li, Z.-Y.; Chen, T.-H. The growth and shoot production of Dendrocalamus latiforus by different propagation methods. Q. J. For. Res.
**2018**, 40, 149–159. [Google Scholar] - Taiwan Central Weather Bureau. 2020. Available online: http://www.cwb.gov.tw/eng/index.htm. (accessed on 20 February 2020).
- Baskerville, G.L. Estimation of dry weight of tree components and total standing crop in conifer stands. Ecology
**1965**, 46, 867–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zianis, D.; Mencuccini, M. On simplifying allometric analyses of forest biomass. For. Ecol. Manag.
**2004**, 187, 311–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Draper, N.R.; Smith, H. Applied Regression Analysis, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Strub, M.R.; Burkhart, H.E. A class-interval-free method for obtaining expected yields from diameter distributions. For. Sci.
**1975**, 21, 67–69. [Google Scholar] - Bailey, R.; Dell, T. Quantifying Diameter Distributions with the Weibull function. For. Sci.
**1973**, 19, 97–104. [Google Scholar] - Lin, Y.-J. Review, current status, and prospects of the bamboo industry in Taiwan. Taiwan J. For. Sci.
**2011**, 26, 99–111. [Google Scholar] - Yen, T.-M.; Hu, H.-L.; Lee, J.-S. Economic study on culms of Moso bamboo (Phyllostachys heterocycle) in Chu-Sun area. Q. J. For. Res.
**2003**, 25, 25–36. [Google Scholar] - Yen, T.-M.; Hu, H.-L.; Lee, J.-S. The shoots of Moso bamboo (Phyllostachys heterocycle) in Chu-Sun area. Q. J. For. Res.
**2003**, 25, 43–54. [Google Scholar] - Sun, B.-K.; Chen, Y.-T.; Yen, T.-M.; Li, L.-E. Stand characteristics, aboveground biomass and carbon storage of moso bamboo (Phyllostachys pubescens) stands under different management levels in central Taiwan. Q. J. For. Res.
**2013**, 35, 23–32. [Google Scholar] - Yen, T.-M. Culm height development, biomass accumulation and carbon storage in an initial growth stage for a fast-growing moso bamboo (Phyllostachy pubescens). Bot. Stud.
**2016**, 57, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Jember, A.A.; Taye, M.A.; Gebeyehu, G.; Mulu, G.; Long, T.T.; Jayaraman, D.; Abebe, S. Carbon stock potential of highland bamboo plantations in northwestern Ethiopia. Carbon Balance Manag.
**2023**, 18, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Huy, B.; Thanh, G.T.; Poudel, K.P.; Temesgen, H. Individual plant allometric equations for estimating aboveground biomass and its components for a common bamboo species (Bambusa procera A. Chev. and A. Camus) in tropical forests. Forests
**2019**, 10, 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Abebe, S.; Gebeyehu, G.; Teketay, D.; Long, T.T.; Jayaraman, D. Allometric models for estimating biomass storage and carbon stock potential of Oldeania alpina (K. Schum.) Stapleton forests of south-western Ethiopia. Adv. Bamboo Sci.
**2023**, 2, 100008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lin, Z.-R.; Yen, T.-M. Assessing prediction effects among height-diameter models with varied structures for a Taiwania (Taiwania cryptomerioides Hayata) plantation. Taiwan J. For. Sci.
**2021**, 36, 111–125. [Google Scholar] - Lee, J.-S.; Chen, C.-T. Study on the stand structure and composition of species in natural forests of Cho-Kou watershed. Annu. Taiwan Mus.
**1991**, 34, 11–32. [Google Scholar] - Lee, J.-S.; Yen, T.-M. Study on thinning effect of Chamaecyparis formosensis by diameter distribution in Ta-Hsueh-Shan area. Bull. Exp. For. Natl. Chung Hsing Univ.
**1992**, 14, 89–101. [Google Scholar] - Lee, J.-S.; Jong, S.-S. A study on the stand structure of natural forest in Ta-Hsueh-Shan area. Exp. For. Natl. Chung Hsing Univ.
**1996**, 18, 43–57. [Google Scholar] - Yen, T.-M.; Ai, L.-M.; Li, C.-L.; Lee, J.-S.; Huang, K.-L. Aboveground carbon contents and storage of three major Taiwanese conifer species. Taiwan J. For. Sci.
**2009**, 24, 91–102. [Google Scholar]

**Figure 1.**The proportion of foliage, branch and culm biomass to aboveground biomass by (

**a**) age class and (

**b**) DBH class.

**Figure 2.**Relationships between observations and predicted curves by the allometric function (Y = a × DBH

^{b}) for the biomass of different sections of Ma bamboo.

**Figure 4.**The aboveground biomass (AGB) predicted by the diameter distribution model for the three stands of Ma bamboo, where the stand diameter distribution predicted by the Weibull function and the a, b and c parameters were predicted to be 1.53, 5.80 and 2.94; 1.80, 5.39 and 4.15; 4.50, 7.00 and 3.60 for stands A, B and C, respectively. These parameters were cited from Sun and Yen [14], and the biomass equation (Equation T–A) was used to predict AGB for each diameter class.

**Figure 5.**Comparison of aboveground biomass predicted by the diameter distribution model and allometric model with age factor for Ma bamboo stands.

**Table 1.**Detailed information on the Ma bamboo stands used in this study [14].

Code | Stand Type | Elevation (m) | Longitude and Latitude | Treatment |
---|---|---|---|---|

A | Pure stand | 348 | 120°42′10″ E and 23°42′42″ N | Thinning, fertilizing and irrigation |

B | Pure stand | 348 | 120°42′06″ E and 23°42′45″ N | Thinning, fertilizing and irrigation |

C | Pure stand | 524 | 120°42′18″ E and 23°42′20″ N | Thinning, fertilizing and irrigation |

D | Mixed stand | 534 | 120°42′23″ E and 23°42′03″ N | Thinning, fertilizing and irrigation |

E | Pure stand | 528 | 120°42′29″ E and 23°41′58″ N | Thinning |

F | Pure stand | 538 | 120°42′29″ E and 23°41′56″ N | Thinning |

**Table 2.**The distribution of the diameter at breast height (DBH), culm height (H) and biomass of different sections of age and DBH classes in Ma bamboo samples.

Item | Class | N | DBH (cm) | H (m) | Biomass (kg) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Foliage | Branches | Culms | Aboveground | |||||

Age | 1-year-old | 5 | 8.4 ± 3.3 ^{1} | 11.3 ± 2.6 | 0.870 ± 0.583 | 2.034 ± 1.365 | 6.893 ± 4.830 | 9.797 ± 6.590 |

2-year-old | 5 | 8.5 ± 3.5 | 12.2 ± 4.2 | 1.930 ± 1.075 | 2.477 ± 1.698 | 8.400 ± 5.689 | 12.807 ± 8.182 | |

3-year-old | 5 | 8.2 ± 3.6 | 10.0 ± 3.3 | 2.218 ± 1.637 | 4.904 ± 3.308 | 10.949 ± 7.572 | 18.071 ± 11.438 | |

4-year-old | 5 | 8.2 ± 3.3 | 9.8 ± 3.7 | 1.831 ± 1.233 | 4.446 ± 2.755 | 9.161 ± 6.215 | 15.439 ± 9.924 | |

5-year-old | 5 | 8.2 ± 3.5 | 10.1 ± 4.6 | 1.211 ± 0.758 | 3.400 ± 2.121 | 11.986 ± 10.522 | 16.598 ± 13.030 | |

DBH ^{2} | I | 5 | 4.0 ± 0.3 | 6.0 ± 1.5 | 0.395 ± 0.124 | 0.809 ± 0.190 | 1.452 ± 0.449 | 2.656 ± 0.448 |

II | 5 | 6.0 ± 0.4 | 8.7 ± 1.6 | 1.206 ± 0.841 | 2.292 ± 1.176 | 4.308 ± 1.129 | 7.807 ± 2.800 | |

III | 5 | 8.3 ± 0.3 | 11.3 ± 0.7 | 1.618 ± 0.876 | 3.449 ± 2.413 | 10.501 ± 4.862 | 15.568 ± 7.273 | |

IV | 5 | 10.6 ± 0.4 | 12.8 ± 2.8 | 2.664 ± 1.364 | 5.503 ± 2.759 | 13.528 ± 1.036 | 21.696 ± 4.718 | |

V | 5 | 12.5 ± 0.1 | 14.5 ± 2.2 | 2.177 ± 0.781 | 5.208 ± 0.982 | 17.599 ± 6.204 | 24.985 ± 6.716 |

^{1}Mean ± standard deviation.

^{2}I: DBH < 5 cm; II: 5 cm ≤ DBH < 7.5 cm; III: 7.5 cm ≤ DBH <10 cm; IV: 10 cm ≤ DBH < 12.5 cm; V: DBH >12.5 cm.

**Table 3.**The a and b parameters, R

^{2}and root mean squared error (RMSE) of each allometric model for predicting the biomass of various sections of Ma bamboo.

Age | Sections | Y = a × DBH^{b} | Equation Number | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

a | b | R^{2} | RMSE (kg) | p-Value | |||

1-year-old | Foliage (kg) | 0.056 | 1.284 | 0.602 | 0.425 | 0.034 | 1–-F |

Branches (kg) | 0.035 | 1.862 | 0.966 | 0.288 | <0.001 | 1–B | |

Culms (kg) | 0.143 | 1.782 | 0.908 | 1.688 | 0.004 | 1–C | |

Aboveground (kg) | 0.221 | 1.745 | 0.941 | 1.853 | 0.002 | 1–A | |

2-year-old | Foliage (kg) | 0.207 | 1.043 | 0.591 | 0.794 | 0.023 | 2–F |

Branches (kg) | 0.076 | 1.589 | 0.640 | 1.176 | 0.031 | 2–B | |

Culms (kg) | 0.180 | 1.760 | 0.961 | 1.299 | 0.001 | 2–C | |

Aboveground (kg) | 0.372 | 1.622 | 0.902 | 2.960 | 0.004 | 2–A | |

3-year-old | Foliage (kg) | 0.168 | 1.227 | 0.608 | 1.183 | 0.041 | 3–F |

Branches (kg) | 0.375 | 1.221 | 0.700 | 2.109 | 0.023 | 3–B | |

Culms (kg) | 0.788 | 1.252 | 0.754 | 4.337 | 0.018 | 3–C | |

Aboveground (kg) | 1.329 | 1.241 | 0.861 | 4.925 | 0.006 | 3–A | |

4-year-old | Foliage (kg) | 0.177 | 1.117 | 0.574 | 0.929 | 0.038 | 4–F |

Branches (kg) | 0.483 | 1.062 | 0.630 | 1.935 | 0.026 | 4–B | |

Culms (kg) | 0.326 | 1.569 | 0.923 | 1.996 | 0.003 | 4–C | |

Aboveground (kg) | 0.900 | 1.347 | 0.831 | 4.711 | 0.009 | 4-A | |

5-year-old | Foliage (kg) | 0.139 | 1.033 | 0.595 | 0.557 | 0.030 | 5–F |

Branches (kg) | 0.183 | 1.374 | 0.900 | 0.775 | 0.004 | 5–B | |

Culms (kg) | 0.038 | 2.604 | 0.960 | 2.423 | 0.002 | 5–C | |

Aboveground (kg) | 0.168 | 2.104 | 0.960 | 3.008 | 0.002 | 5–A | |

Total | Foliage (kg) | 0.143 | 1.144 | 0.423 | 0.885 | <0.001 | T–F |

Branches (kg) | 0.230 | 1.274 | 0.500 | 1.754 | <0.001 | T–B | |

Culms (kg) | 0.236 | 1.713 | 0.747 | 3.526 | <0.001 | T–C | |

Aboveground (kg) | 0.542 | 1.533 | 0.748 | 4.971 | <0.001 | T–A |

**Table 4.**The prediction of aboveground biomass (AGB) at the clump and stand levels based on the allometric functions with and without an age factor for Ma bamboo, where the relative error (%) was calculated as [(ABG predicted by model without age − ABG predicted by model with age)/ABG predicted by model with age] × 100%.

Stand | Clump Level (kg clump^{−1}) | Stand Level (Mg ha^{−1}) | Relative Error (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|

ABG Predicted by Model with Age | ABG Predicted by Model without Age | ABG Predicted by Model with Age | ABG Predicted by Model without Age | ||

A | 118.7 ± 23.9 ^{1} | 117.7 ± 24.1 | 35.6 | 35.3 | −0.89 |

B | 54.0 ± 17.4 | 56.9 ± 20.8 | 32.4 | 34.1 | 5.26 |

C | 78.2 ± 43.3 | 65.3 ± 35.6 | 39.1 | 32.6 | −16.58 |

^{1}Mean ± standard deviation.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |

© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Yen, T.-M.; Sun, P.-K.; Li, L.-E.
Predicting Aboveground Biomass and Carbon Storage for Ma Bamboo (*Dendrocalamus latiflorus* Munro) Plantations. *Forests* **2023**, *14*, 854.
https://doi.org/10.3390/f14040854

**AMA Style**

Yen T-M, Sun P-K, Li L-E.
Predicting Aboveground Biomass and Carbon Storage for Ma Bamboo (*Dendrocalamus latiflorus* Munro) Plantations. *Forests*. 2023; 14(4):854.
https://doi.org/10.3390/f14040854

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Yen, Tian-Ming, Pai-Kuan Sun, and Long-En Li.
2023. "Predicting Aboveground Biomass and Carbon Storage for Ma Bamboo (*Dendrocalamus latiflorus* Munro) Plantations" *Forests* 14, no. 4: 854.
https://doi.org/10.3390/f14040854