I think the concept of "stand" for a species of trees is one where you
have proper environment conditions such as soil pH and where the
environment is conducive to growing the species, not necessarily having
to be "native" environment. And most importantly, that the species
volunteers seedlings or is self propagating.

Would that be a good definition of the term "stand". And if not, what
is the science term that describes the above.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Go and ask the Lorax, Archie.


wrote in message
oups.com...
I think the concept of "stand" for a species of trees is one where you
have proper environment conditions such as soil pH and where the
environment is conducive to growing the species, not necessarily having
to be "native" environment. And most importantly, that the species
volunteers seedlings or is self propagating.

Would that be a good definition of the term "stand". And if not, what
is the science term that describes the above.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

On 10 Jan 2006 00:12:03 -0800, wrote:

I think the concept of "stand" for a species of trees is one where you
have proper environment conditions such as soil pH and where the
environment is conducive to growing the species, not necessarily having
to be "native" environment. And most importantly, that the species
volunteers seedlings or is self propagating.

Would that be a good definition of the term "stand".

I doubt it. AFAIK, a stand simply means they are there. One can
_observe_ they are there, without knowing any of the other stuff.

The dictionary supports my point, but that is not necessarily very
definitive re a scientific term. Suggest you search for a definition.
(I have no particular expertise on the point, so don't weigh my
opinion as much more than a clue.)

bob

Bob wrote:
I doubt it. AFAIK, a stand simply means they are there. One can
_observe_ they are there, without knowing any of the other stuff.

The dictionary supports my point, but that is not necessarily very
definitive re a scientific term. Suggest you search for a definition.
(I have no particular expertise on the point, so don't weigh my
opinion as much more than a clue.)

bob

A.P. writes:

Yes, I was wondering if there exist scientific terms to describe trees
in various situations. Whether "native" is a science term and how is it
defined. Whether "stand" is a science term?

I have a stand of blue spruce and a stand of juniper, but there is a
difference between the two in that the blue spruce never volunteer new
plants but the juniper are slowly covering the entire lot by seedling
volunteers. So although both blue-spruce and juniper grow well here,
the juniper self propagates. So is there a science term to describe
these two species.

I am frustrated by lack of terms to use when talking about tree lots.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

When referring to the Wollemi Pine in situ in papers, I have always
encountered the phrases of Stand or Grove of XX samples... Maybe there is a
clue there somewhere...

Is not the definition of a scientific term simply the usage that we as
scientists presume to allocate to a particular word or combination of
words??? Hence the requirement at times for a glossary of terms to define
the application of a term where specific conditions are required for its
application???

Kye.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Bob wrote:
I doubt it. AFAIK, a stand simply means they are there. One can
_observe_ they are there, without knowing any of the other stuff.

The dictionary supports my point, but that is not necessarily very
definitive re a scientific term. Suggest you search for a definition.
(I have no particular expertise on the point, so don't weigh my
opinion as much more than a clue.)

bob

A.P. writes:

Yes, I was wondering if there exist scientific terms to describe trees
in various situations. Whether "native" is a science term and how is it
defined. Whether "stand" is a science term?

I have a stand of blue spruce and a stand of juniper, but there is a
difference between the two in that the blue spruce never volunteer new
plants but the juniper are slowly covering the entire lot by seedling
volunteers. So although both blue-spruce and juniper grow well here,
the juniper self propagates. So is there a science term to describe
these two species.

I am frustrated by lack of terms to use when talking about tree lots.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

here's another opinion from a non-expert.

i think of 'stand' as being just a population of similarly-aged tree
species. although a stand may or may not be self-propagating and
contain individuals of various ages, there is an established population
of similarly-aged trees forming the core of 'the stand.' many
conditions which allow for ongoing self-propagation [and sometimes even
the survival of the particular population or 'stand'] change over time
- and are often inhibited by the 'stand' itself. self-propagation is
probably then dependent upon a major disturbance or a chance encounter
w/ appropriate conditions through animal or wind transport of
propagules. i guess we should acknowledge that 'stand' is not a
scientific word and might connote something static. whereas
'population' implies the presence of dynamic processes which affect it
over time, 'stand' is more colloquial and therefore tends to view
something which might visibly change at a slower rate than us as
'static'.

i've been interested lately in plant population dynamics. as a
nurseryman propagating unusual native california plants, i've noticed
how ph is not only a determining factor for what can germinate, but is
often affected - sometimes negatively and sometimes positively for the
species - by the detritus of the same species. this seems to
contradict it's own survival, but i suspect that i'm just unable to
grasp the picture over evolutionary time. in particular, i've been
experimenting w/ propagating ferns and sedges. they seem to thrive in
ph environments which seem to contradict where they are mostly found.
does anyone have info about this?

please excuse me if i've just described something fairly simple in a
very complicated way. i am a complete scientific novice!

pete veilleux

Kye wrote:
When referring to the Wollemi Pine in situ in papers, I have always
encountered the phrases of Stand or Grove of XX samples... Maybe there is a
clue there somewhere...

Is not the definition of a scientific term simply the usage that we as
scientists presume to allocate to a particular word or combination of
words??? Hence the requirement at times for a glossary of terms to define
the application of a term where specific conditions are required for its
application???

Kye.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Bob wrote:
I doubt it. AFAIK, a stand simply means they are there. One can
_observe_ they are there, without knowing any of the other stuff.

The dictionary supports my point, but that is not necessarily very
definitive re a scientific term. Suggest you search for a definition.
(I have no particular expertise on the point, so don't weigh my
opinion as much more than a clue.)

bob

A.P. writes:

Yes, I was wondering if there exist scientific terms to describe trees
in various situations. Whether "native" is a science term and how is it
defined. Whether "stand" is a science term?

I have a stand of blue spruce and a stand of juniper, but there is a
difference between the two in that the blue spruce never volunteer new
plants but the juniper are slowly covering the entire lot by seedling
volunteers. So although both blue-spruce and juniper grow well here,
the juniper self propagates. So is there a science term to describe
these two species.

I am frustrated by lack of terms to use when talking about tree lots.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

A quick look in an appropriate dictionary shows that "stand" is defined, but
the definition will depend on the scientific discipline in question.
Silviculture recognises several different kinds of "stand", each with a
preceding adjective.
PvR

schreef
here's another opinion from a non-expert.

i think of 'stand' as being just a population of similarly-aged tree
species. although a stand may or may not be self-propagating and
contain individuals of various ages, there is an established population
of similarly-aged trees forming the core of 'the stand.' many
conditions which allow for ongoing self-propagation [and sometimes even
the survival of the particular population or 'stand'] change over time
- and are often inhibited by the 'stand' itself. self-propagation is
probably then dependent upon a major disturbance or a chance encounter
w/ appropriate conditions through animal or wind transport of
propagules. i guess we should acknowledge that 'stand' is not a
scientific word and might connote something static. whereas
'population' implies the presence of dynamic processes which affect it
over time, 'stand' is more colloquial and therefore tends to view
something which might visibly change at a slower rate than us as
'static'.

i've been interested lately in plant population dynamics. as a
nurseryman propagating unusual native california plants, i've noticed
how ph is not only a determining factor for what can germinate, but is
often affected - sometimes negatively and sometimes positively for the
species - by the detritus of the same species. this seems to
contradict it's own survival, but i suspect that i'm just unable to
grasp the picture over evolutionary time. in particular, i've been
experimenting w/ propagating ferns and sedges. they seem to thrive in
ph environments which seem to contradict where they are mostly found.
does anyone have info about this?

please excuse me if i've just described something fairly simple in a
very complicated way. i am a complete scientific novice!

pete veilleux

wrote:
here's another opinion from a non-expert.

i think of 'stand' as being just a population of similarly-aged tree
species. although a stand may or may not be self-propagating and
contain individuals of various ages, there is an established population
of similarly-aged trees forming the core of 'the stand.' many
conditions which allow for ongoing self-propagation [and sometimes even
the survival of the particular population or 'stand'] change over time
- and are often inhibited by the 'stand' itself. self-propagation is
probably then dependent upon a major disturbance or a chance encounter
w/ appropriate conditions through animal or wind transport of
propagules. i guess we should acknowledge that 'stand' is not a
scientific word and might connote something static. whereas
'population' implies the presence of dynamic processes which affect it
over time, 'stand' is more colloquial and therefore tends to view
something which might visibly change at a slower rate than us as
'static'.

i've been interested lately in plant population dynamics. as a
nurseryman propagating unusual native california plants, i've noticed
how ph is not only a determining factor for what can germinate, but is
often affected - sometimes negatively and sometimes positively for the
species - by the detritus of the same species. this seems to
contradict it's own survival, but i suspect that i'm just unable to
grasp the picture over evolutionary time. in particular, i've been
experimenting w/ propagating ferns and sedges. they seem to thrive in
ph environments which seem to contradict where they are mostly found.
does anyone have info about this?

please excuse me if i've just described something fairly simple in a
very complicated way. i am a complete scientific novice!

pete veilleux

Kye wrote:
When referring to the Wollemi Pine in situ in papers, I have always
encountered the phrases of Stand or Grove of XX samples... Maybe there is a
clue there somewhere...

Is not the definition of a scientific term simply the usage that we as
scientists presume to allocate to a particular word or combination of
words??? Hence the requirement at times for a glossary of terms to define
the application of a term where specific conditions are required for its
application???

Kye.


I think we need botany terms for the native range of a tree species.
Perhaps simply "native range". But then we need a term for when a tree
species does well outside its native range and which it
self-propagates. Then another term for when a tree species does well
outside its native range but does not self propagate. So I think we
need those three terms defined as science terms.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Well why dont you write up an article on what usage the terms should have,
when they are applicable and what terminology they replace, and send it off
to a peer reviewed publication??? Wouldnt need to be myuch simply get the
ball moving in the community and soon enough people will be wondering how
they ever did without the words...

Kye.

wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
here's another opinion from a non-expert.

i think of 'stand' as being just a population of similarly-aged tree
species. although a stand may or may not be self-propagating and
contain individuals of various ages, there is an established population
of similarly-aged trees forming the core of 'the stand.' many
conditions which allow for ongoing self-propagation [and sometimes even
the survival of the particular population or 'stand'] change over time
- and are often inhibited by the 'stand' itself. self-propagation is
probably then dependent upon a major disturbance or a chance encounter
w/ appropriate conditions through animal or wind transport of
propagules. i guess we should acknowledge that 'stand' is not a
scientific word and might connote something static. whereas
'population' implies the presence of dynamic processes which affect it
over time, 'stand' is more colloquial and therefore tends to view
something which might visibly change at a slower rate than us as
'static'.

i've been interested lately in plant population dynamics. as a
nurseryman propagating unusual native california plants, i've noticed
how ph is not only a determining factor for what can germinate, but is
often affected - sometimes negatively and sometimes positively for the
species - by the detritus of the same species. this seems to
contradict it's own survival, but i suspect that i'm just unable to
grasp the picture over evolutionary time. in particular, i've been
experimenting w/ propagating ferns and sedges. they seem to thrive in
ph environments which seem to contradict where they are mostly found.
does anyone have info about this?

please excuse me if i've just described something fairly simple in a
very complicated way. i am a complete scientific novice!

pete veilleux

Kye wrote:
When referring to the Wollemi Pine in situ in papers, I have always
encountered the phrases of Stand or Grove of XX samples... Maybe there
is a
clue there somewhere...

Is not the definition of a scientific term simply the usage that we as
scientists presume to allocate to a particular word or combination of
words??? Hence the requirement at times for a glossary of terms to
define
the application of a term where specific conditions are required for
its
application???

Kye.


I think we need botany terms for the native range of a tree species.
Perhaps simply "native range". But then we need a term for when a tree
species does well outside its native range and which it
self-propagates. Then another term for when a tree species does well
outside its native range but does not self propagate. So I think we
need those three terms defined as science terms.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

"Kye" schreef
Well, why dont you write up an article on what usage the terms should have,
when they are applicable and what terminology they replace, and send it
off to a peer reviewed publication??? Wouldn't need to be much, simply get
the ball moving in the community and soon enough people will be wondering
how they ever did without the words...

Kye.

***
It is not kind to mock people so outright
PvR

My sincere apologies.

It was not my intent to mock. I sought to learn whether or not he had
intention of doing so and if not, then to encourage that he should be making
positive steps towards such an action....

Once again I meant no offense and am sorry for any of such given.

Kye.

"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
"Kye" schreef
Well, why dont you write up an article on what usage the terms should
have,
when they are applicable and what terminology they replace, and send it
off to a peer reviewed publication??? Wouldn't need to be much, simply get
the ball moving in the community and soon enough people will be wondering
how they ever did without the words...

Kye.

***
It is not kind to mock people so outright
PvR

I suggest you look up the history of AP.
He is always announcing plans to reinvent the wheel.
PvR

"Kye" schreef
My sincere apologies.

It was not my intent to mock. I sought to learn whether or not he had
intention of doing so and if not, then to encourage that he should be
making
positive steps towards such an action....

Once again I meant no offense and am sorry for any of such given.

Kye.

Aaaah.. I hada read of his website recently and found much there that was
both provocative of thought and shows a person who appears to be fascinated
by the philosophy and "poetry" of sciences mysteries. It would be very
interesting to see what could be produced as a research paper from a mind so
captivated by the philosophy of the world.

Kye.

"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message
...
I suggest you look up the history of AP.
He is always announcing plans to reinvent the wheel.
PvR

"Kye" schreef
My sincere apologies.

It was not my intent to mock. I sought to learn whether or not he had
intention of doing so and if not, then to encourage that he should be
making
positive steps towards such an action....

Once again I meant no offense and am sorry for any of such given.

Kye.

It might, although I am far from sure what field this paper would belong in?
It might also be a colossal waste of time ...
PvR

"Kye" schreef
Aaaah.. I hada read of his website recently and found much there that was
both provocative of thought and shows a person who appears to be
fascinated by the philosophy and "poetry" of sciences mysteries. It would be
very interesting to see what could be produced as a research paper from a
mind so captivated by the philosophy of the world.

Kye.

Kye wrote:
Well why dont you write up an article on what usage the terms should
have,
when they are applicable and what terminology they replace, and send it
off
to a peer reviewed publication??? Wouldnt need to be myuch simply get
the
ball moving in the community and soon enough people will be wondering
how
they ever did without the words...

A.P. writes:

I think some good terms would be:
(1) Native Domain
(2) Secondary Domain Stand
(3) Tertiary Domain Stand

So that it is an open nonending concept and like earthquake categories
or hurricane categories have degree measure differences. Where a tree
species is native to a geography would be in Native-Domain. A species
such as Austrian pine which does well here but never self propagates
would be Secondary Domain Stand. A species that requires much human
intervention to grow would be in a higher bracket.

Perhaps such a system is workable for even humanity. Where temperate
and subtropical climates were native-domain. A place like Antarctica
would be a 9th Domain Stand and a place like the Moon would be, who
knows, a 666 domain-stand.

Such a system would be of upcoming importance because of the extinction
of many plant and animal species and there consequent attempts to
maintain them in human environments, such as zoos or private
properties. Such as the cheetahs have a Native Domain in parts of
Africa, but that perhaps some places in the USA could be a secondary
domain stand. Who knows, maybe the cheetah would thrive in a national
parks of the SouthWest USA in the wild, living off mostly rabbits. At
least that is better then having them go extinct.

So we need this concept and term of science to characterize different
environments where a species makes a living.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies