欢迎访问《应用生态学报》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

应用生态学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (7): 1937-1947.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202207.019

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于贝叶斯似乎不相关回归方法的天然蒙古栎生物量模型构建

谢龙飞, 李凤日, 董利虎*   

  1. 东北林业大学林学院, 森林生态系统可持续经营教育部重点实验室, 哈尔滨 150040
  • 收稿日期:2021-08-27 接受日期:2022-04-05 出版日期:2022-07-15 发布日期:2023-01-15
  • 通讯作者: *E-mail: lihudong@nefu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:谢龙飞, 男, 1990年生, 博士研究生。主要从事林分生长模型研究。E-mail: xielongfei@nefu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    由国家自然科学基金项目(31971649)和中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(2572020DR03)资助。

Constructing biomass models for natural Quercus mongolica based on Bayesian seemingly unrelated regression

XIE Long-fei, LI Feng-ri, DONG Li-hu*   

  1. Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Sustainable Forest Ecosystem Management, School of Forestry, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China
  • Received:2021-08-27 Accepted:2022-04-05 Online:2022-07-15 Published:2023-01-15

摘要: 以胸径和树高作为自变量,基于多元似然分析、似乎不相关回归等方法研建了黑龙江省天然蒙古栎可加性生物量模型系统。结果表明: 树高显著提高了树干生物量模型的效果,决定系数(R2)从0.953提高到0.988,均方根误差(RMSE)减小14 kg,对树枝、树叶和树根生物量的影响并不显著。单变量(仅含胸径)和双变量(胸径、树高)幂函数形式的生物量模型系统的误差结构均为相乘型,表明对数转换后的线性模型形式更合适。树干、树枝、树叶、树根生物量模型的R2分别为0.953~0.988、0.982~0.983、0.916~0.917、0.951~0.952,RMSE分别为13.42~27.03、6.84~7.00、1.95~1.97、9.71~9.84 kg。与广义最小二乘法(FGLS)相比,贝叶斯估计产生了相似的模型拟合效果,却提供了不同变异大小的参数估计值。FGLS各参数标准误为0.054~0.211,而使用Jeffreys不变先验的两种贝叶斯估计方法(DMC和Gibbs1)产生相似的参数变异(标准差为0.055~0.221);使用均值向量为0、方差为1000且协方差为0的多元正态先验(Gibbs2)和使用来自栎属树种生物量模型历史研究汇总的先验(Gibbs3)产生了更大的变异(标准差为0.080~0.278),使用自身数据获取的先验(Gibbs4)估计得到的各参数变异小于其他方法(标准差为0.004~0.013)。当使用Gibbs4法建立模型时,两类模型不仅能提供最窄的95%预测区间,还能产生更小的预估偏差,树干、树枝、树叶、树根和总生物量在单变量模型中的平均绝对偏差百分比(MAPE)分别为19.8%、24.7%、24.6%、29.0%和13.1%,树干和总生物量在双变量模型中的MAPE分别减小到10.5%和9.8%,其他组织MAPE未改变,表明Gibbs4法能提供更准确的生物量预测值。与传统回归方法相比,准确的先验信息使贝叶斯统计在估计稳定性和不确定性减小方面具有优势。

关键词: 生物量, 可加性, 贝叶斯, 传统回归, 天然蒙古栎

Abstract: In this study, the biomass models for natural Quercus mongolica in Heilongjiang Province were constructed based on the predictors of diameter at breast height (D) and tree height (H) by several methods including multivariate likelihood analysis and seemingly unrelated regression. The results showed that the H could significantly improve the stem biomass model, with the coefficient of determination (R2) being increased from 0.953 to 0.988 and the root mean square error (RMSE) being reduced by 14 kg, but it had no significant improvement for the biomass model of branch, foliage, and root. The error structures of both biomass model systems (only D and D-H) were multiplicative, indicating that the linear models after logarithmic transformation were more appropriate. The R2 for the biomass models of stem, branch, foliage and root were 0.953-0.988, 0.982-0.983, 0.916-0.917, and 0.951-0.952, while the RMSE were 13.42-27.03, 6.84-7.00, 1.95-1.97 and 9.71-9.84 kg. Compared with the feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) approach, Bayesian estimation had similar fitting performance and provided parameter estimates with different variations. The standard errors of parameters for FGLS were 0.054-0.211. There were similar variations (standard deviations of 0.055-0.221) for the two Bayesian estimation with no prior information (DMC and Gibbs1). The Gibbs sampler with a multivariate normal distribution with a mean vector of 0, variances of 1000 and covariances of 0 (Gibbs2) or the prior information from the historical researches summary for Quercus trees biomass models (Gibbs3) produced greater variation than those of FGLS, DMC, and Gibbs1 (stan-dard deviations were 0.080-0.278), while Gibbs sampler with the prior information obtained from own data (Gibbs4) provided the lower variations than others (standard deviations were 0.004-0.013). The Gibbs4 approach provided the narrowest 95% prediction interval and produced the smaller prediction biases, with the average absolute error percentage (MAPE) for stem, branch, foliage, root and total of the only-D biomass model being 19.8%, 24.7%, 24.6%, 29.0% and 13.1%, while MAPE for the corresponding components of D-H biomass model kept same except for stem and total decreased to 10.5% and 9.8%, which indicated that Gibbs4 could provide more accurate biomass predictions. Compared with classical statistics, accurate prior information made Bayesian seemingly unrelated regression an advantage in estimation stability and uncertainty reduction.

Key words: biomass, additivity, Bayesian, classical regression, natural Mongolian oak