Potential sampling bias in long-term forest growth trends reconstructed from tree rings: A case study from the Italian Alps

Tree-ring studies of long-term growth trends have often produced controversial results. In such studies, the largest-diameter trees in a stand are usually sampled. We assessed the influence of stand dynamics on long-term growth trends by examining the past diameters of all the trees living in two uneven-aged subalpine Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) stands in the Italian eastern Alps, as reconstructed from ring widths. The trees were ordered according to diameter, and groups of 12 trees (the 12 largest, the 12 smallest, etc.) were formed. Different diameter groups have different increment curves. In both stands, the 12 largest trees in 1992 have not had consistently faster growth rates than smaller trees. This indicates that changes in diameter ranking order have occurred in the past and may be expected in the future. During stand development, changes occur in the relative position of individual trees, as ordered by diameter. The largest-diameter trees, at any time, may not always have been the largest trees and may not continue to be so. In a given year, the largest trees on average grow slower than other trees, which will become the largest in the future. The mean chronologies of the trees that were among the largest, prior to the harvest, and which presently (in 1992) are no longer in the top 12, and the mean chronologies of the trees that have moved up into the top 12 show very different growth trends. If analysed out of context, they would be interpreted differently, leading to different conclusions on long-term growth trends. when only the 12 largest-diameter trees are sampled, a bias may be present, as the trees may not have been open grown and free of competition in the past. Consequently, studies of long-term growth may be seriously affected by bias attributable to stand dynamics and sampling strategies. In future studies, the growth patterns of all diameter classes in a stand should be assessed, rather than restricting the sampling to the largest diameters. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science B.V.