SNF Forest Understory Cover Data (Table): Data Set Guide Document

Summary:

   The purpose of the SNF study was to improve our understanding of the
   relationship between remotely sensed observations and important
   biophysical parameters in the boreal forest. A key element of the
   experiment was the development of methodologies to measure forest
   stand characteristics to determine values of importance to both remote
   sensing and ecology. Parameters studied were biomass, leaf area index,
   above ground net primary productivity, bark area index and ground
   coverage by vegetation. Thirty two quaking aspen and thirty one black
   spruce sites were studied.

   Sites were chosen in uniform stands of aspen or spruce. The dominant
   species in the site constituted over 80 percent, and usually over 95
   percent, of the total tree density and basal area. Aspen stands were
   chosen to represent the full range of age and stem density of
   essentially pure aspen, of nearly complete canopy closure, and greater
   than two meters in height. Spruce stands ranged from very sparse
   stands on bog sites, to dense, closed stands on more productive
   peatlands. Use of multiple plots within each site allowed estimation
   of the importance of spatial variation in stand parameters.

   Within each plot, all woody stems greater than two meters in height
   were recorded by species and the following dimensions were measured:
   diameter breast height, height of the tree, height of the first live
   branch, and depth of crown. For each plot, a two meter diameter
   subplot was defined at the center of each plot. Within this subplot,
   the percent of ground coverage by plants under one meter in height was
   determined by species. These data, averaged for the five plots in each
   site, are presented in this data set (i.e., SNF Forest Understory
   Cover Data (Table)) in tabular format, e.g. plant species with a count
   for that species at each site. The same data are presented in the SNF
   Forest Understory Cover Data data set but are arranged with a row for
   each species and site and a percent ground coverage for each
   combination.

Table of Contents:

    1. Data Set Overview
    2. Investigator(s)
    3. Theory of Measurements
    4. Equipment
    5. Data Acquisition Methods
    6. Observations
    7. Data Description
    8. Data Organization
    9. Data Manipulations
   10. Errors
   11. Notes
   12. Application of the Data Set
   13. Future Modifications and Plans
   14. Software
   15. Data Access
   16. Output Products and Availability
   17. References
   18. Glossary of Terms
   19. List of Acronyms
   20. Document Information

1. Data Set Overview:

  Data Set Identification:

   SNF Forest Understory Cover Data (Table).

  Data Set Introduction:

   Percent ground coverage for vegetation less than 1 meter high at each
   study site are presented by vegetation species. Each value of percent
   ground coverage is an average of five two-meter subplots.

  Objective/Purpose:

   The purpose of the SNF study was to improve our understanding of the
   relationship between remotely sensed observations and important
   biophysical parameters in the boreal forest. A key element of the
   experiment was the development of methodologies to measure forest
   stand characteristics to determine values of importance to both remote
   sensing and ecology. Parameters studied were biomass, leaf area index,
   above ground net primary productivity, bark area index and ground
   coverage by vegetation. Thirty two quaking aspen and thirty one black
   spruce sites were studied.

  Summary of Parameters:

   Canopy and subcanopy phenology, percent ground coverage.

  Discussion:

   Sites were chosen in uniform stands of aspen or spruce. The dominant
   species in the site constituted over 80 percent, and usually over 95
   percent, of the total tree density and basal area. Aspen stands were
   chosen to represent the full range of age and stem density of
   essentially pure aspen, of nearly complete canopy closure, and greater
   than two meters in height. Spruce stands ranged from very sparse
   stands on bog sites, to dense, closed stands on more productive
   peatlands.

   In each stand a uniform site 60 meters in diameter was laid out.
   Within this site, five circular plots, 16 meters in diameter, were
   positioned. One plot was at the center of the site and four were
   tangent to the center plot, one each in the cardinal directions. In
   very dense stands, plot radii were decreased so that stem count for
   the five plots remained around 200 stems. Use of multiple plots within
   each site allowed estimation of the importance of spatial variation in
   stand parameters.

   Within each plot, all woody stems greater than two meters in height
   were recorded by species and relevant dimensions were measured.
   Diameter breast height (dbh) was measured directly. Height of the tree
   and height of the first live branch were determined by triangulation.
   The difference between these two heights was used as the depth of
   crown. The distances between trees and observer were such that no
   angle exceeded 65 degrees. Most plots were level, small slopes were
   ignored in calculating heights. Similar measurements were made for
   shrubs between one and two meters tall in the aspen sites. The Forest
   Canopy Composition (SNF) data set provides the counts of canopy (over
   two meters tall) tree species and subcanopy (between one and two
   meters tall) tree species.

   For each plot, a two meter diameter subplot was defined at the center
   of each plot. Within this subplot, the percent of ground coverage by
   plants under one meter in height was determined by species. These
   data, averaged for the five plots in each site, are presented in this
   data set (i.e., SNF Forest Understory Cover Data (Table)) in tabular
   format, e.g. plant species with a count for that species at each site.
   The same data are presented in the SNF Forest Understory Cover Data
   data set but are arranged with a row for each species and site and a
   percent ground coverage for each combination.

   In addition, these data sets: canopy, subcanopy, and understory counts
   have been combined into a SNF Forest Cover by Species/Strata data set.

   Also related, for the aspen sites, in each plot a visual estimation of
   the percent coverage of the canopy, subcanopy and understory
   vegetation was made. The site averages of these coverage estimates are
   presented in the Aspen Forest Cover by Stratum/Plot (SNF) data set.

  Related Data Sets:

     * Forest Canopy Composition (SNF)
     * SNF Forest Understory Cover Data
     * SNF Forest Cover by Species/Strata
     * Aspen Forest Cover by Stratum/Plot (SNF)

2. Investigator(s):

  Investigator(s) Name and Title:

   Dr. Forrest G. Hall
   NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

   Dr. K. Fred Huemmrich
   NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

   Dr. Donald E. Strebel
   Versar, Inc.

   Dr. Scott J. Goetz
   Universtity of Maryland

   Ms. Jamie E. Nickeson
   NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

   Ms. K.D. Woods
   NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

   Dr. Celeste Jarvis
   NASA Headquarters

  Title of Investigation:

   Biophysical, Morphological, Canopy Optical Property, and Productivity
   Data on the Superior National Forest.

  Contact Information:

   Dr. Forrest G. Hall
   NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
   Code 923
   Greenbelt, Maryland 20771
   USA

   Fax +1 (301) 286-0239
   Telephone +1 (301) 286-2974
   Email: fghall@ltpmail.gsfc.nasa.gov

3. Theory of Measurements:

   Not available.

4. Equipment:

  Sensor/Instrument Description:

    Collection Environment:

   Ground-based.

    Source/Platform:

   Field investigation.

    Source/Platform Mission Objectives:

   Not available.

    Key Variables:

   Parameters studied were biomass, leaf area index, above ground net
   primary productivity, bark area index and ground coverage by
   vegetation.

    Principles of Operation:

   Not available.

    Sensor/Instrument Measurement Geometry:

   Not available.

    Manufacturer of Sensor/Instrument:

   Not available.

  Calibration:

   Not available.

5. Data Acquisition Methods:

   Not available.

6. Observations:

  Data/Field Notes:

   Not available.

7. Data Description:

  Spatial Characteristics:

   The study area covered a 50 x 50 km area centered at approximately 48
   degrees North latitude and 92 degrees West longitude in northeastern
   Minnesota at the southern edge of the North American boreal forest.

  Temporal Characteristics:

   This data set was collected during the summers of 1983 and 1984 in a
   portion of the Superior National Forest (SNF) near Ely, Minnesota,
   USA.

  Data Characteristics:

  __________________________________________________________________________


  Variable Name/ Long Name         SAS Type      Generic Type
  Description
  __________________________________________________________________________

1  speccode    SPECIES_CODE          $ 10        CHAR(5)
   "Plant species code [see speccomm
    (Common Name) and spec_sci
    (Latin Name)]"
  __________________________________________________________________________

2  speccomm    COMMON_NAME           $ 36        CHAR(20)
   "Plant species common name"
  __________________________________________________________________________

3  spec_sci    LATIN_NAME            $ 36        CHAR(25)
   "The Latin (botanical) name of
    the species"
  __________________________________________________________________________

4  can_layr                          $ 12
   "Canopy layer"
  __________________________________________________________________________

5  _2                                   8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 2
    for named species (% is average
    of five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

6  _3                                   8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 3
    for named species(% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

7  _12                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 12
    for named species(% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

8  _14                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 14
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

9  _15                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 15
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

10 _16                                  8
  "% ground coverage for site ID 16
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

11 _18                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 18
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

12 _19                                  8
  "% ground coverage for site ID 19
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

13 _20                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 20
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

14 _21                                  8
  "% ground coverage for site ID 21
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

15 _36                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 36
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

16 _38                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 38
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

17 _39                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 39
    for named species (% is average of
   five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
   in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

18 _41                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 41
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

19 _42                                  8
    "% ground coverage for site ID 42
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

20 _43                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 43
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

21 _45                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 45
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

22 _47                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 47
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

23 _48                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 48
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

24 _49                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 49
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

25 _50                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 50
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

26 _51                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 51
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

27 _52                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 52
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

28 _54                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 54
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

29 _55                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 55
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

30 _56                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 56
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

31 _57                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 57
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

32 _62                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 62
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

33 _63                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 63
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

34 _64                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 64
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

35 _68                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 68
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

36 _69                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 69
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

37 _71                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 71
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

38 _72                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 72
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

39 _73                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 73
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

40 _74                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 74
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

41 _75                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 75
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

42 _77                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 77
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

43 _79                                  8
    "% ground coverage for site ID 79
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

44 _80                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 80
    for named species(% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

45 _81                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 81
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

46 _82                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 82
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

47 _83                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 83
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

48 _84                                  8
    "% ground coverage for site ID 84
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

49 _85                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 85
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

50 _86                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 86
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

51 _87                                  8
    "% ground coverage for site ID 87
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

52 _88                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 88
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

53 _89                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 89
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

54 _90                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 90
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

55 _92                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 92
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

56 _93                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 93
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

57 _94                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 94
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

58 _95                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 95
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

59 _96                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 96
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

60 _97                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 97
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

61 _98                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 98
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

62 _99                                  8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 99
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

63 _100                                 8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 100
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

64 _101                                 8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 101
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

65 _102                                 8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 102
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

66 _103                                 8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 103
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

67 _105                                 8
   "% ground coverage for site ID 105
    for named species (% is average of
    five 2-meter-diameter subsamples
    in each site)"
  __________________________________________________________________________

  Sample Data Record:


speccode  speccomm             spec_sci                   can_layr
_2         _3        _12        _14       _15      _16       _18      _19     _
20
  __________________________________________________________________________

"ABBA"    "Fir, Balsam"        "Abies Balsamea"          "Understory"
0          0          0         0         0         0         0         0
   3
"ACRU"    "Maple, Red"         "Acer Rubrum"             "Understory"
0          2          0         0         0         10        0         0
   1
"ACSP"    "Maple, Mountain"    "Acer Spicatum"           "Understory"
0          2          0         0         0         17        0         0
   1
"ACTA"    "Baneberry"          "Actaea Spp.  "           "Understory"
.          .          .         .         .         .         .         .
   .
"ALRU"    "Alder, Speckled"    "Alnus Rubra  "           "Understory"
0          0          0         0         0         0         0         0
   0
"AMEL"    "Juneberry"          "Amelanchier Spp.  "      "Understory"
0          0          0         0         0         0         0         0
   0
"ANGL"    "Bog Rosemary"       "Andromeda Glaucophylla"  "Understory"
0          0          4         0         0         0         3         1
   0
"ANQU"    "Wood Anemone"       "Anemonequinquefolia"     "Understory"
0          1          0         0         0         3         0         0
   0
"ARNU"    "Wild Sarsaparilla"  "Aralia Nudicaulis"       "Understory"
0          7          0         0         0         2         0         0
   0
     _________________________________________________________________

   Footnote:
   For presentation in this document, some padding blanks may have been
       eliminated between columns in the Sample Data Record. Due to the
       many fields in this data file, these columns will wrap while
       viewing. The actual data files, however, are column delimited with
       an adequate record length to prevent wrapping. See the Data Format
       Section for conventions used for missing data values in the data
       file.

8. Data Organization:

   The data file is sorted by species code (speccode). Columns beginning
   with an underscore and a number (e.g. _2) indicate the percent
   coverage for that study site, (e.g. Site 2).

  Data Granularity:

   This data set consists of a single ASCII file containing average
   percent ground coverage for all species measured at all sites.

   A general description of data granularity as it applies to the IMS
   appears in the EOSDIS Glossary.

  Data Format:

   The data files associated with this data set consist of numeric and
   character fields of varying lengths aligned in columns. The first row
   of each data file contains the 8 character SAS variable name that
   links to the data format definition file. Character fields are
   enclosed in double quotes and numeric fields are listed without
   quotes.

   Missing data values can be of two varieties:
    1. Values that were identified as missing in the original data files.
       Missing numeric values of this type are identified in these data
       as -999.
    2. Those holes that were created as a result of combining files that
       contained a slightly different variable set. Missing values of
       this type are identified in these data files as empty double
       quotes for character fields and a single period, '.' for numeric
       fields.

9. Data Manipulations:

   Not available.

10. Errors:

  Sources of Error:

   Not available.

  Quality Assessment:

    Data Validation by Source:

   Not available.

    Confidence Level/Accuracy Judgment:

   Not available.

    Measurement Error for Parameters:

   Not available.

    Additional Quality Assessments:

   Not available.

    Data Verification by Data Center:

   The Superior National Forest data was received from the Goddard Space
   Flight Center in three media:
     * As data dumps from the original Oracle SNF database maintained by
       GSFC, transferred electronically from the GSFC system to the ORNL
       system;
     * As ASCII files that mirrored the tables published in the Tech
       Memo; and
     * As hard copy (Tech Memo).

   Data from both electronic sources were input into SAS by ORNL DAAC
   data management staff and compared using computer code developed to
   process the SNF data. In many cases, the data values from both sources
   were found to be identical. In some cases, however, differences were
   identified and the providers of the data were consulted to resolve
   inconsistencies.

   Additionally, some variable columns were available in one source, but
   not the other for various reasons. For example, some calculated
   variables/columns were provided in the ASCII files (reflecting the
   Tech Memo tables) that were not stored in the Oracle database for
   purposes of space conservation.

   For similar reasons, coded values were used for many of the site and
   species identifier variables. A separate reference table was provided
   to link the coded variable with its definition, e.g., the SPECIES_REF
   file and the SITE_REF file.

   The database produced by the ORNL DAAC is a hybrid product that is a
   composite of data and information extracted from all three source
   media. In data sets where coded variables were included, the code
   definition variables have been added to improve usability of the data
   set as a stand-alone product.

   Therefore the ASCII files that are available through the ORNL DAAC
   on-line search and order systems are output from a data set that is a
   product of the essential core of numeric data provided by the data
   source (GSFC), augmented with additional descriptive information
   provided by GSFC and reorganized by the ORNL DAAC into a data
   structure consistent with other similar data sets maintained by the
   ORNL DAAC.

11. Notes:

  Limitations of the Data:

   Not available.

  Known Problems with the Data:

   None known at this revision.

  Usage Guidance:

   Not available.

  Any Other Relevant Information about the Study:

   None.

12. Application of the Data Set:

   This data set can be used to improve our understanding of the
   relationship between remotely sensed observations and important
   biophysical parameters in the boreal forest.

13. Future Modifications and Plans:

   None known at this revision.

14. Software:

   Not available.

15. Data Access:

  Contact Information:

   ORNL DAAC User Services
   P.O. Box 2008
   Mail Stop 6407
   Oak Ridge National Laboratory
   Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6407

   Telephone: (423) 241-3952
   FAX: (423) 574-4665

   Email: ornldaac@ornl.gov

  Data Center Identification:

   EOSDIS Distributed Active Archive Center
   P.O. Box 2008
   Mail Stop 6407
   Oak Ridge National Laboratory
   Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6407
   USA

   Telephone: (423) 241-3952
   FAX: (423) 574-4665

   Email: ornldaac@ornl.gov

  Procedures for Obtaining Data:

   Users may place requests by letter, telephone, electronic mail, FAX,
   or personal visit. Data is also available via the World Wide Web at
   http://www-eosdis.ornl.gov.

  Data Center Status/Plans:

   The Superior National Forest Data is available from the ORNL DAAC.
   Please contact the ORNL DAAC User Services Office for the most current
   information about these data.

16. Output Products and Availability:

   Available online, as a computer FTP file (zipped or unzipped), on tape
   or IBM-formatted diskettes.

17. References:

   Not available.

  Archive/DBMS Usage Documentation.

   Contact the EOS Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) at Oak Ridge
   National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge, Tennessee (see the Data Center
   Identification Section). Documentation about using the archive and/or
   online access to the data at the ORNL DAAC is not available at this
   revision.

18. Glossary of Terms:

   A general glossary for the DAAC is located at EOSDIS Glossary.

19. List of Acronyms:

   URL
          Uniform Resource Locator

   A general list of acronyms for the DAAC is available at
   http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/cdiac/pns/acronyms.html.

20. Document Information:

  Document Revision Date:

   October 10, 1996.

  Document Review Date:

   February 17, 1997.

  Document ID:

   ORNL-SNF_TAB3_3T.

  Citation:

   Please cite the following NASA Technical Memorandum 104568 in any work
   or any publication using these data:

   Hall, F.G., K.F. Huemmrich, D.E. Strebel, S.J. Goetz, J.E. Nickeson,
   and K.D. Woods, July 1992. Biophysical, Morphological, Canopy Optical
   Property, and Productivity Data From the Superior National Forest.
   NASA Technical Memorandum 104568. National Aeronautics and Space
   Administration, Washington, D.C. 20546.

  Document Curator:

   Donna O. Lambert
   dlambert@daacs.esd.ornl.gov

  Document Author: Merilyn J. Gentry
  mjg@walden.rmt.utk.edu

  Document URL:

   http://www-eosdis.ornl.gov
   /SNF/guides/forest_understory_cover_table.html
     _________________________________________________________________


    SNF Home Page | Oak Ridge DAAC Home Page | ORNL Home Page
    ORNL DAAC User Services Office: 423-241-3952; email
    ornldaac@ornl.gov
    Web Document Curator: Sarah Jennings, xqj@ornl.gov
    Document Editor: Donna Lambert Revision Date: December 04, 1997
    URL: http://www-eosdis.ornl.gov
    /SNF/guides/forest_understory_cover_table.html