Lubomír Scheer

Prof. Lubomír Scheer


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2016 in Dendrochronologia
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MBMichal Bošeľa
Michal Bošeľa
PGPatrizia Gasparini
Patrizia Gasparini
LCLucio Di Cosmo
Lucio Di Cosmo
BPBarbara Parisse
Barbara Parisse
FNFlora De Natale
Flora De Natale
LSLubomír Scheer
Lubomír Scheer

27 July 2015 in Forests
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RSRóbert Sedmák
Róbert Sedmák
LSLubomír Scheer
Lubomír Scheer
Róbert MarušákRóbert Marušák
Róbert Marušák
MBMichal Bošeľa
Michal Bošeľa
DSDenisa Sedmáková
Denisa Sedmáková
MFMarek Fabrika
Marek Fabrika
The main objective of this study was to explore the accuracy of Weise’s rule of thumb applied to an estimation of the quadratic mean diameter of a forest stand. Virtual stands of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) across a range of structure types were stochastically generated and random sampling was simulated. We compared the bias and accuracy of stand quadratic mean diameter estimates, employing different ranks of measured stems from a set of the 10 trees nearest to the sampling point. We proposed several modifications of the original Weise’s rule based on the measurement and averaging of two different ranks centered to a target rank. In accordance with the original formulation of the empirical rule, we recommend the application of the measurement of the 6th stem in rank corresponding to the 55% sample percentile of diameter distribution, irrespective of mean diameter size and degree of diameter dispersion. The study also revealed that the application of appropriate two-measurement modifications of Weise’s method, the 4th and 8th ranks or 3rd and 9th ranks averaged to the 6th central rank, should be preferred over the classic one-measurement estimation. The modified versions are characterised by an improved accuracy (about 25%) without statistically significant bias and measurement costs comparable to the classic Weise method.