Comparing Reliability of FHM and ISA Methods in Assessing Old and Large Dipterocarp Trees Health

Rachmadiyanto, Arief Noor; Karlinasari, Lina; Nandika, Dodi; Witono, Joko Ridho; Siregar, Iskandar Zulkarnaen

doi:10.1590/2179-8087-FLORAM-2023-0013

Arief Noor Rachmadiyanto e-mail: ariefnoor@apps.ipb.ac.id

conceptualization (equal)

methodology (equal)

writing – original draft (lead)

writing – review & editing (equal)

Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB University), Faculty of Forestry and Environment, Department of Silviculture, Tropical Silviculture Study Program, Bogor, West Java, Indonesia.

National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Research Center for Applied Botany, Bogor, West Java, Indonesia.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9166-7024

Lina Karlinasari

conceptualization (equal)

investigation (equal)

methodology (equal)

writing – original draft (equal)

writing – review & editing (equal)

Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB University), Faculty of Forestry and Environment, Department of Forest Products, Bogor, Jawa Barat, Indonesia.

Dodi Nandika

conceptualization (equal)

methodology (equal)

validation (equal)

writing – original draft (equal)

writing – review & editing (equal)

Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB University), Faculty of Forestry and Environment, Department of Forest Products, Bogor, Jawa Barat, Indonesia.

Joko Ridho Witono

conceptualization (equal)

methodology (equal)

visualization (equal)

writing – original draft (equal)

writing – review & editing (equal)

National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Research Center for Biosystematics and Evolution, Bogor, Jawa Barat, Indonesia.

Iskandar Zulkarnaen Siregar

conceptualization (equal)

investigation (equal)

supervision (equal)

writing – original draft (equal)

writing – review & editing (equal)

Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB University), Faculty of Forestry and Environment, Department of Silviculture, Bogor, Jawa Barat, Indonesia.

e-mail: ariefnoor@apps.ipb.ac.id

Associate editor: Bruno Mendonça https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0288-0024

CORRESPONDENCE TO

Arief Noor Rachmadiyanto Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB University), Faculty of Forestry and Environment, Department of Silviculture, Tropical Silviculture Study Program, Ulin street IPB, Dramaga, 16680, Bogor, West Java, Indonesia.

Code	Description	Severity Threshold
01	Cancer	≥ 20% of the circumference at the point of occurrence
02	Conks, fruiting bodies, and other indicators of advanced decay	none, except for ≥ 20% of roots > 3 feet (0.91 m) from the bole
03	Open wounds	≥ 20% of the circumference at the point of occurrence
04	Resinosis/gummosis	≥ 20% of the circumference at the point of occurrence
05	Cracks and seams	1.52 m in length and on at least 20% of branches
06	Termite gallery	≥ 20% of the circumference at the point of occurrence
07	Woody liana	≥ 20% of the circumference at the point of occurrence
11	Broken bole or roots < 3 feet (0.91 m) from bole	none
12	Brooms on roots or bole	≥ 20% of roots
13	Broken or dead roots < 3 feet (0.91 m) from the bole	≥ 20% of roots
20	Vines in the crown	≥ 20% of live crowns affected
21	Loss of apical dominance, dead terminal	≥ 1% of crown stem
22	Broken or dead	≥ 20% of branches or shoots
23	Excessive branching or brooms	≥ 20% of branches or brooms
24	Damage foliage or shoots	≥ 30% of the foliage
25	Discoloration of foliage	≥ 30% of the foliage
31	Etc. (other descriptions that have not been mentioned in the coding)

Damage code	values	Location code	values	Severity code	values
1	1.9	0	0.0	0-9%	1.5
2	1.7	1	2.0	10-19%	1.1
3	1.5	2	2.0	20-29%	1.2
4	1.5	3	1.8	30-39%	1.3
5	1.5	4	1.8	40-49%	1.4
6	2.0	5	1.6	50-59%	1.5
7	1.5	6	1.2	60-69%	1.6
11	2.0	7	1.0	70-79%	1.7
12	1.6	8	1.0	80-89%	1.8
13	1.5	9	1.0	90-99%	1.9
20	1.8
21	1.3
22	1.0
23	1.0
24	1.0
25	1.0

Likelihood of failure	Likelihood of Impacting Target
Likelihood of failure	Very low	Low	Medium	High
Imminent	Unlikely	Somewhat likely	Likely	Very likely
Probable	Unlikely	Unlikely	Somewhat likely	Likely
Possible	Unlikely	Unlikely	Unlikely	Somewhat likely
Improbable	Unlikely	Unlikely	Unlikely	Unlikely

Likelihood of Failure & Impact	Consequences of Failure ( weighting )
Likelihood of Failure & Impact	Negligible	Minor	Significant	Severe
Very likely	Low	Moderate	High	Extreme
Likely	Low	Moderate	High	High
Somewhat likely	Low	Low	Moderate	Moderate
Unlikely	Low	Low	Low	Low

Species	n	Age	Dbh (cm)	Tree height (m)	LCR (%)	DCR (m)	PCR (m ² )	Slenderness (%)
Anisoptera marginata Korth.	2	112 ± 8,0	173,5 ± 20,5	38,1 ± 12,0	45,2 ± 27,7	20,9 ± 2,4	345,5 ± 79,0	21,7 ± 4,4
Dipterocarpus alatus Roxb. ex G.Don	2	106 ± 0,0	125,5 ± 24,7	43,9 ± 8,3	48,2 ± 21,1	15,9 ± 5,9	213,0 ± 147,8	35,0 ± 0,3
Dipterocarpus gracilis Blume	4	106 ± 0,0	83,4 ± 33,4	39,5 ± 9,8	49,6 ± 22,2	11,3 ± 4,9	114,3 ± 92,8	53,3 ± 23,3
Dipterocarpus retusus Blume	6	114 ± 21,0	74,7 ± 32,0	34,2 ± 8,3	50,8 ± 21,9	10,5 ± 4,5	99,2 ± 82,5	54,2 ± 24,6
Dipterocarpus turbinatus C.F.Gaertn.	2	106 ± 0,0	72,5 ± 12,0	26,1 ± 9,8	33,2 ± 8,7	17,4 ± 4,7	246,7 ± 129,5	37,6 ± 19,7
Hopea mengarawan Miq.	2	108 ± 0,0	83,5 ± 26,2	39,2 ± 0,8	44,2 ± 9,3	19,4 ± 5,8	308,9 ± 176,8	49,5 ± 16,5
Hopea pierrei Hance	2	106 ± 0,0	76,5 ± 9,2	24,9 ± 4,9	94,1 ± 1,7	13,3 ± 1,8	140,2 ± 36,9	32,4 ± 2,6
Hopea sangal Korth.	2	101 ± 0,0	144,0 ± 2,8	36,9 ± 1,0	36,8 ± 2,3	24,7 ± 1,5	479,3 ± 58,9	25,6 ± 1,2
Shorea balangeran (Korth.) Burck	3	120 ± 24,0	72,2 ± 25,9	26,7 ± 11,6	54,1 ± 33,7	19,8 ± 3,9	316,6 ± 125,1	36,3 ± 5,8
Shorea guiso (Blanco) Blume	3	105 ± 2,0	194,7 ± 58,6	44,5 ± 4,2	48,6 ± 4,5	28,8 ± 6,2	672,5 ± 287,9	24,0 ± 5,6
Shorea leprosula Miq.	3	123 ± 28,0	168,0 ± 8,2	41,7 ± 9,7	45,0 ± 9,5	28,0 ± 7,8	646,3 ± 356,4	24,7 ± 4,7
Shorea multiflora (Burck) Symington	2	115 ± 13,0	76,0 ± 41,0	28,2 ± 5,1	92,8 ± 1,3	12,9 ± 0,1	129,7 ± 2,9	45,5 ± 31,3
Shorea seminis (de Vriese) Slooten	2	106 ± 0,0	57,0 ± 15,6	22,4 ± 5,9	90,7 ± 2,5	16,9 ± 1,3	223,7 ± 33,7	39,3 ± 0,3
Vatica bantamensis (Hassk.) Benth. & Hook.f. ex Miq.	2	106 ± 0,0	63,0 ± 1,4	39,2 ± 0,3	80,6 ± 22,0	9,6 ± 2,1	73,3 ± 30,8	62,2 ± 0,9
Vatica pauciflora (Korth.) Blume	5	106 ± 0,0	64,0 ± 21,2	22,9 ± 3,4	81,3 ± 16,4	10,1 ± 4,1	90,1 ± 65,8	38,2 ± 10,3
Vatica teysmanniana Burck	2	106 ± 0,0	59,0 ± 21,2	42,3 ± 2,1	26,0 ± 8,4	8,6 ± 3,1	61,7 ± 42,4	76,0 ± 23,7

Species	Health index value (FHM)	Risk rating value (ISA)	Pearson correlation
Anisoptera marginata Korth.	3.6 ± 1.1	1.2 ± 0.0	0.93
Dipterocarpus alatus Roxb. ex G.Don	1.8 ± 2.5	1.0 ± 0.0
Dipterocarpus gracilis Blume	0.8 ± 1.6	1.0 ± 0.0
Dipterocarpus retusus Blume	0.6 ± 1.4	1.0 ± 0.0
Dipterocarpus turbinatus C.F.Gaertn.	1.8 ± 2.6	1.2 ± 0.2
Hopea mengarawan Miq.	2.0 ± 2.8	1.2 ± 0.2
Hopea pierrei Hance	2.6 ± 1.7	1.0 ± 0.0
Hopea sangal Korth.	0.0 ± 0.0	1.0 ± 0.0
Shorea balangeran (Korth.) Burck	6.0 ± 5.2	1.2 ± 0.2
Shorea guiso (Blanco) Blume	8.6 ± 2.5	1.4 ± 0.2
Shorea leprosula Miq.	1.1 ± 1.9	1.0 ± 0.0
Shorea multiflora (Burck) Symington	8.3 ± 4.6	1.5 ± 0.7
Shorea seminis (de Vriese) Slooten	0.0 ± 0.0	1.0 ± 0.0
Vatica bantamensis (Hassk.) Benth. & Hook.f. ex Miq.	3.4 ± 0.8	1.2 ± 0.2
Vatica pauciflora (Korth.) Blume	2.7 ± 3.1	1.1 ± 0.1
Vatica teysmanniana Burck	0.7 ± 0.9	1.0 ± 0.0

[1] e-mail: ariefnoor@apps.ipb.ac.id

Brasil

Brasil

Comparing Reliability of FHM and ISA Methods in Assessing Old and Large Dipterocarp Trees Health

Abstract