1. Assmann E. The Principles of Forest Yield Study. Pergamon Press, Oxford; 1970.
2. Weller DE. A reevaluation of the −3/2 power rule of plant self-thinning. Ecological Monographs. 1987;57:23–43.
3. Hara T. Dynamics of size structure in plant populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 1988;3:129–132. [PubMed]
4. Hara T. Effects of the mode of competition on stationary size distribution in plant populations. Annals of Botany. 1992;69:509–513.
5. Kohyama T. Size-structured multi-species model of rain forest trees. Functional Ecology. 1992;6:206–212.
6. Kohyama T. Density-size dynamics of trees simulated by a one-sided competition multi-species model of rain forest stands. Annals of Botany. 1992;70:451–460.
7. Silvertown J, Charlesworth D. Introduction to plant population biology (4th ed.) Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford; 2001.
8. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Biodiversity: What is it, where is it, and why is it important? Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C; 2005.
9. Royal Society. Global carbon stocks and sinks on land. The Role of Land Carbon Sinks in Mitigating Global Climate Change. Royal Society, London; 2001.
10. Purves DW, Pacala SW. Predictive models of forest dynamics. Science. 2008;320:1452–1453. [PubMed] 11. Fisher R, McDowell N, Purves D, Moorcroft P, Sitch S, et al. Assessing uncertainties in a second-generation dynamic vegetation model due to ecological scale limitations. New Phytologist. 2010;187:666–681. [PubMed]
12. Bugmann H. A review of forest gap models. Climatic Change. 2001;51:259–305.
13. Lichstein JW, Dushoff J, Ogle K, Chen A, Purves DW, et al. Unlocking the forest inventory data: relating individual-tree performance to unmeasured environmental factors. Ecological Applications. 2010;20:684–699. [PubMed] 14. Enquist BJ, Niklas KJ. Invariant scaling relations across tree-dominated communities. Nature. 2001;410:655–660. [PubMed] 15. Price CA, Gillooly JF, Allen AP, Weitz JS, Niklas KJ. The metabolic theory of ecology: Prospects and challenges for plant biology. The New Phytologist. 2010;188:696–710. [PubMed] 16. Muller-Landau HC, Condit RS, Chave J, Thomas SC, Bohlman SA, et al. Testing metabolic ecology theory for allometric scaling of tree size, growth, and mortality in tropical forests. Ecology Letters. 2006;9:575–588. [PubMed] 17. Muller-Landau HC, Condit RS, Harms KE, Marks CO, Thomas SC, et al. Comparing tropical forest tree size distributions with the predictions of metabolic ecology and equilibrium models. Ecology Letters. 2006;9:589–602. [PubMed] 18. Coomes DA. Challenges to the generality of WBE scaling theory. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2006;21:593–596. [PubMed]
19. Lahde E, Laiho O, Norokorpi Y, Saska T. Structure and yield of all-sized and even-sized Scots pine-dominated stands. Annals of Forest Science. 1994;51:97–109.
20. O'Hara KL, Nagel LM. A functional comparison of productivity in even-aged and multi-aged stands: A synthesis for Pinus ponderosa. Forest Science. 2006;52:290–303.
21. Hanewinkel M. Comparative economic investigations of even-aged and uneven-aged silvicultural systems: A critical analysis of different methods. Forestry. 2002;75:473–481.
22. Adams DM, Ek AR. Optimizing the management of uneven-aged forest stands. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 1974;4:274–287.
23. Buongiorno J, Michie BR. A matrix model of uneven-aged forest management. Forest Science. 1980;26:609–625.
24. Hansen GD, Nyland RD. Effects of diameter distribution on the growth of simulated uneven-aged sugar maple stands. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 1987;17:1–8.
25. Haight RG, Brodie JD, Adams DM. Optimizing the sequence of diameter distributions and selection harvests for uneven-aged stand management. Forest Science. 1985;31:451–462.
26. Buongiorno J, Kolbe A, Vasievich M. Economic and ecological effects of diameter-limit and BDq management regimes: simulation results for northern hardwoods. Silva Fennica. 2000;34:223–235.
27. Strigul N, Pristinski D, Purves DW, Dushoff J, Pacala SW. Scaling from trees to forests: tractable macroscopic equations for forest dynamics. Ecological Monographs. 2008;78:523–545.
28. Purves DW, Lichstein JW, Strigul N, Pacala SW. Predicting and understanding forest dynamics using a simple tractable model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2008;105:17018–17022. [PubMed] 29. Adams TA, Purves DW, Pacala SW. Understanding height-structured competition in forests: is there an R* for light? Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 2007;274:3039–3047. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
30. Lorimer CG, Dahir SE, Nordheim EV. Tree mortality rates and longevity in mature and old-growth hemlock-hardwood forests. Journal of Ecology. 2001;89:960–971.
31. Coomes DA, Duncan RP, Allen RB, Truscott J. Disturbances prevent stem size-density distributions in natural forests from following scaling relationships. Ecology Letters. 2003;6:980–989.
33. Coates KD, Canham CD, LePage PT. Above- versus below-ground competitive effects and responses of a guild of temperate tree species. Journal of Ecology. 2009;97:118–130.
34. Hix DM, Lorimer CG. Growth-competition relationships in young hardwood stands on two contrasting sites in southwestern Wisconsin. Forest Science. 1990;36:1032–1049.
35. Webster CR, Lorimer CG. Comparative growing space efficiency of four tree species in mixed conifer-hardwood forests. Forest Ecology and Management. 2002;177:361–377.
36. Pretzsch H, Schutze G. Crown allometry and growing space efficiency of Norway spruce and European Beech in pure and mixed stands. Plant Biology. 2005;7:628–639. [PubMed]
37. Groot A, Saucier JP. Volume increment efficiency of Picea mariana in northern Ontario, Canada. Forest Ecology and Management. 2008;255:1647–1653.
38. Weiner J. Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 1990;5:360–364. [PubMed] 39. Purves DW, Lichstein JW, Pacala SW. Crown plasticity and competition for canopy space: a spatially implicit model parameterized for 250 North American tree species. PLoS ONE. 2007;2(9):e870. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000870. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
40. Canham CD, LePage PT, Coates KD. A neighborhood analysis of canopy tree competition: effects of shading versus crowding. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 2004;34:778–787.
41. Rowe JS. Forest Regions of Canada. Canadian Forest Service Publication. 1972;1300
42. Nyland RD. Selection system in northern hardwoods. Journal of Forestry. 1998;96:18–21.
43. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. A Silvicultural Guide for the Tolerant Hardwood Forests in Ontario. Queen's Printer for Ontario, Toronto; 2000.
44. Hayden J, Kerley J, Carr D, Kenedi T, Hallarn J. Field Manual for Establishing and Measuring Permanent Sample Plots. Queen's Printer for Ontario, Ontario, Toronto; 1995.
45. Holloway GL, Caspersen JP, Vanderwel MC, Naylor BJ. Cavity tree occurrence in hardwood forests of Central Ontario. Forest Ecology and Management. 2007;239:191–199.
46. Caspersen JP. Elevated mortality of residual trees following single-tree felling in northern hardwood forests. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 2006;36:1255–1265.
47. Cole WG. Hardwood Tree Crown Measurement Guide. Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Forest Research Institute, Sault-Ste. Marie; 1995.
48. Baker FS. A revised tolerance table. Journal of Forestry. 1949;47:179–181.
49. Burns RM, Honkala BH. Silvics of North America: Volume 2, Hardwoods. Agriculture Handbook, 654. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC; 1990.
50. Pacala SW, Canham CD, Saponara J, Silander JA, Kobe RK, et al. Forest models defined by field measurements: estimation, error analysis and dynamics. Ecological Monographs. 1996;66:1–43.
51. McKenny HC, Keeton WS, Donovan TM. Effects of structural complexity enhancement on eastern red-backed salamander (Plethodon cinereus) populations in northern hardwood forests. Forest Ecology and management. 2006;230:186–196.
52. Holloway GL, Malcolm JR. Sciurid habitat relationships in forests managed under selection and shelterwood silviculture in Ontario. Journal of Wildlife Management. 2006;70:1735–1745.
53. Bowman JC, Robitaille JF. Winter habitat use of American martens (Martes americana) within second-growth forests in Ontario, Canada. Wildlife Biology. 1997;3:97–105.
54. Vanderwel MC, Malcolm JR, Smith SM, Islam N. Insect community composition and trophic guild structure in decaying logs from eastern Canadian pine-dominated forests. Forest Ecology and Management. 2006;225:190–199.
55. Vanderwel MC, Thorpe HC, Shuter JL, Caspersen JC, Thomas SC. Contrasting downed woody debris dynamics in managed and unmanaged northern hardwood stands. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 2008;38:2850–2861.
56. McGee GG. Stand-level effects on the role of decaying logs as vascular plant habitat in Adirondack northern hardwood forests. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society. 2001;128:370–380.
57. Vanderwel MC, Malcolm JR, Smith SM. Long-term snag and downed woody debris dynamics under periodic surface fire, fire suppression, and shelterwood management. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 2009;39:1709–1721.
58. Vanderwel MC, Caspersen JP, Malcolm JR, Papaik MJ, Messier C. Structural changes and potential vertebrate responses following simulated partial harvesting of boreal mixedwood stands. Forest Ecology and management. 2011;261:1362–1371.
59. Poulin JF, Villard MA, Edman M, Goulet PJ, Eriksson AM. Thresholds in nesting habitat requirements of an old forest specialist, the Brown Creeper (Certhia Americana) as conservation targets. Biological Conservation. 2008;141:1129–137.
60. Jung TS, Thompson ID, Titman RD, Applejohn AP. Habitat selection by forest bats in relation to mixed-wood stand types and structure in central Ontario. Journal of Wildlife Management. 1999;63:1306–1319.
61. Straus MA, Bavrlic K, Nol E, Burke DM, Elliot KA. Reproductive success of cavity-nesting birds in partially harvested woodlots. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 2011;41:1004–1017.
62. Poulin JF, Villard MA, Hache S. Short-term demographic response of and old forest specialist to experimental selection harvesting. Ecoscience. 2010;17:20–27.
63. Brunner A. A light model for spatially explicit forest stand models. Forest Ecology and Management. 1998;107:19–46.
64. Canham CD, Papaik M, Uriarte M, McWilliams W, Jenkins JC, et al. Neighborhood analyses of canopy tree competition along environmental gradients in New England forests. Ecological Applications. 2006;16:540–554. [PubMed]
65. Lopez-Gonzalez G, Lewis SL, Burkitt M, Phillips OL. ForestPlots.net: a web application and research tool to manage and analyse tropical forest plot data. Journal of Vegetation Science. 2011;22:610–613.
66. Losos EC, Leigh EG., Jr . The whole is greater than the sum of the plots. In: Losos EC, Leigh EG Jr, editors. Tropical forest diversity and dynamism: findings from a large-scale plot network. Chicago: Chicago University Press; 2004.
67. Kraft NJ, Metz MR, Condit RS, Chave J. The relationship between wood density and mortality in a global tropical forest dataset. New Phytologist. 2010;188:1124–1136. [PubMed]
68. Herault B, Bachelot B, Poorter L, Rossi V, Bonger F, et al. Functional traits shape ontogenetic growth trajectories of rain forest tree species. Journal of Ecology. 2011;99:1431–1440.