Volume is an important attribute used in many forest management decisions. Data from 83 fixed-area plots located in central New Brunswick, Canada, are used to examine how different measures of stand-level diameter and height influence volume prediction using a stand-level variant of Honer’s (1967) volume equation. When density was included in the models (choice of diameter measure was more important than choice of height measure. When density was not included, the opposite was true. For models with density included, moment-based estimators of stand diameter and height performed better than all other measures. For models without density, largest tree estimators of stand diameter and height performed better than other measures. The overall best equation used quadratic mean diameter, Lorey’s height, and density (root mean square error ​= ​5.26 ​m³·ha^-1; 1.9 % relative error). The best equation without density used mean diameter of the largest trees needed to calculate a stand density index of 400 and the mean height of the tallest 400 trees per ha (root mean square error ​= ​32.08 ​m³·ha^-1; 11.8 % relative error). The results of this study have some important implications for height subsampling and LiDAR-derived forest inventory analyses.

Tree mortality plays a fundamental role in the dynamics of forest ecosystems, yet it is one of the most difficult phenomena to accurately predict. Various modeling strategies have been developed to improve individual tree mortality predictions. One less explored strategy is the use of a multistage modeling approach. Potential improvements from this approach have remained largely unknown. In this study, we developed a novel multistage approach and compared its performance in individual tree mortality predictions with a more conventional approach using an identical individual tree mortality model formulation. Extensive permanent plot data (n ​= ​9442) covering the Acadian Region of North America and over multiple decades (1965–2014) were used in this study. Our results indicated that the model behavior with the multistage approach better depicted the observed mortality and showed a notable improvement over the conventional approach. The difference between the observed and predicted numbers of dead trees using the multistage approach was much smaller when compared with the conventional approach. In addition, tree survival probabilities predicted by the multistage approach generally were not significantly different from the observations, whereas the conventional approach consistently underestimated mortality across species and overestimated tree survival probabilities over the large range of DBH in the data. The new multistage approach also predictions of zero mortality in individual plots, a result not possible in conventional models. Finally, the new approach was more tolerant of modeling errors because it based estimates on ranked tree mortality rather than error-prone predicted values. Overall, this new multistage approach deserves to be considered and tested in future studies.