Selection from the list of topics

What do the numbers stand for?
What is the purpose of the standard error?
When are two results statistically different?
When is it not sufficient to consider only the standard error?
Two types of changes?
Change analyses: When are the results (not) additive?
Why is a dot (“.”) sometimes given in the cells for standard error or estimated value?
Why are no standard error values shown in some tables?
Negative values for growing stock, increment or fellings?

1. What do the numbers stand for?

The tables mainly show results that were calculated using statistical methods from the data of the sample inventory of the National Forest Inventory (NFI). Such results always consist of two figures: (1) the estimated value and (2) the sampling error, the so-called standard error.

Example 1: Estimated value and standard error

NFI5

volume of deadwood (stemwood)
ownership (2 categories)

regional demarcation: production region

unit: m³/ha

evaluation area: accessible forest without shrub forest

grid: 1.4 km grid, subgrids 1-5

state 2018/26
	production region
	Jura		Plateau		Pre-Alps		Alps		Southern Alps		Switzerland
ownership (2 categories)	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%
public	30	10	17	13	37	9	36	6	26	10	30	4
private	27	17	20	12	50	10	32	8	39	13	34	5
total	29estimated value	9standard error	19	9	44	7	35	5	29	8	32	3

The tables usually show the relative (percentage) standard error (“±%”), but occasionally – in the case of estimated percentages – the absolute standard error (“±”).

top

2. What is the purpose of the standard error?

The standard error can be used to define confidence intervals around the estimated value, which contain the true value of the population with a certain statistical certainty.

The statistical certainty is:

68% if the confidence interval is calculated using the standard error
(68% confidence interval = estimated value ± standard error), and
95% if the confidence interval is calculated using twice the standard error
(95% confidence interval = estimated value ± 2 × standard error*)

Example 2: Calculating confidence intervals

LFI5
volume of deadwood (stemwood)
ownership (2 categories)
regional demarcation: production region
unit: m³/ha
evaluation area: accessible forest without shrub forest
grid: 1.4 km grid, subgrids 1-5
state 2018/26
	production region
	Jura
ownership (2 classes)	m³/ha	±%
public	30	10
private	27	17
total	29	9

Question
What are the 68% and 95% confidence intervals of the above estimates?

Procedure

Calculate the absolute standard error (= relative standard error × estimated value / 100)
Calculate the confidence intervals
- 68% confidence interval = estimated value ± absolute standard error
- 95% confidence interval = estimated value ± 2 × absolute standard error

Answer

			Step 1	Step 2

ownership (2 categories)	volume of deadwood Jura NFI5
	estimated value	standard error		confidence interval
		relative	absolute	68%	95%
	m³/ha	±%	±m³/ha	m³/ha	m³/ha
public	30	10	3	27-33	24-36
private	27	17	5	22-32	17-37
total	29	9	3	26-32calculated with the standard error, i.e. 29 ± 3	23-25calculated with twice the standard error, i.e. 29 ± 2 × 3

The volume of deadwood in the Jura is between 26 and 32 m³/ha with a statistical certainty of 68% and between 23 and 35 m³/ha with a statistical certainty of 95%.

The 95% confidence interval is larger than the 68% confidence interval. This results in higher statistical certainty with the 95% confidence interval.

Example 3: Visualisation of the 68% and 95% confidence intervals

Data: see example 2

When interpreting the results, one must define the level of statistical certainty that one would like to apply to the statement.

The 68% confidence interval is generally used in the National Forest Inventory (NFI).

top

3. When are two results statistically different?*

This can be checked by comparing the confidence intervals of two estimated values:

If the 68% confidence intervals of two estimates do not overlap, it can be assumed with some certainty that the two populations differ.
If the 95% confidence intervals of two estimates do not overlap, it can be assumed with high certainty that the two populations differ.

Example 4: Interpretation of two results from the same inventory

NFI5
growing stock (stemwood)
ownership (2 categories)
regional demarcation: production region
unit: m³/ha
evaluation area: accessible forest without shrub forest
grid: 1.4 km grid, subgrids 1-5
state 2018/26
	production region
	Jura		Plateau		Pre-Alps		Alps		Southern Alps		Switzerland
ownership (2 categories)	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%
public	331	3	311	3	405	4	300	3	256	5	314	2
private	387	5	432	4	454	4	348	4	285	6	398	2
total	345	2	363	2	431	2	314	2	262	4	343	1

	case 2						case 1

case 1

Question
Is the growing stock per hectare greater in the Alps than in the Southern Alps?

Procedure

Calculate the absolute standard errors
Calculate the confidence intervals depending on the desired level of statistical certainty:
- 68% confidence intervals (some certainty; absolute standard error)
- 95% confidence intervals (high certainty; twice the absolute standard error)
Assess whether the confidence intervals corresponding to the desired level of statistical certainty do not overlap

Answer

ownership (2 categories)	growing stock NFI5
	Alps					Southern Alps
	estimated value	standard error		confidence interval		estimated value	standard error		confidence interval
		relative	absolute	68%	95%		relative	absolute	68%	95%
	m³/ha	±%	±m³/ha	m³/ha	m³/ha	m³/ha	±%	±m³/ha	m³/ha	m³/ha
total	314	2	6	308-320	302-326	262	4	10	252-272	242-282

Neither the 68%-confidence intervals nor the 95%-confidence intervals overlap (pairs of values in ).

In this case, the level of statistical certainty selected has no influence on the result.

Overall, this means that there is high statistical certainty that the growing stock per hectare is greater in the Alps than in the Southern Alps.

Case 2

Question
Is the growing stock per hectare greater in the Plateau than in the Jura?

Procedure

See case 1.

Answer

ownership (2 categories)	growing stock NFI5
	Jura					Plateau
	estimated value	standard error		confidence interval		estimated value	standard error		confidence interval
		relative	absolute	68%	95%		relative	absolute	68%	95%
	m³/ha	±%	±m³/ha	m³/ha	m³/ha	m³/ha	±%	±m³/ha	m³/ha	m³/ha
total	345	2	7	338-352	331-359	363	2	7	356-370	349-377

The 68%-confidence intervals do not overlap (pairs of values in ).
In contrast, the 95%-confidence intervals overlap (pairs of values in ).

In this case, the level of statistical certainty selected has an influence on the interpretation of the results. At the 68% confidence interval level, the conclusion is that the growing stock per hectare is higher in the Plateau than in the Jura. At the 95% confidence interval level, however, this conclusion cannot be drawn.

Considering both confidence interval levels, it can be said that there is some, but not high, statistical certainty that the growing stock per hectare is greater in the Plateau than in the Jura.

The confidence intervals can also be used to determine whether a value estimated with a sample from the National Forest Inventory (NFI) deviates from a target value (e.g. from Swiss forest policy) or whether a change between two inventories is statistically certain.

Example 5: Interpretation of two results from different inventories

ownership (2 categories)	growing stock Plateau*
	NFI4		NFI5
	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%
public	340	3	309	3
private	447	4	432	4
total	386	2	363	2
* accessible forest without shrub forest NFI4/NFI5

Question
Has the growing stock per hectare in the Plateau decreased from NFI4 to NFI5?

Procedure

Calculate the absolute standard errors
Calculate the confidence intervals depending on the desired level of statistical certainty:
- 68% confidence intervals (some certainty; absolute standard error)
- 95% confidence intervals (high certainty; twice the absolute standard error)
Assess whether the confidence intervals corresponding to the desired level of statistical certainty do not overlap.

Answer

ownership (2 categories)	growing stock Plateau*
	NFI4					NFI5
	estimated value	standard error		confidence interval		estimated value	standard error		confidence interval
		relative	absolute	68%	95%		relative	absolute	68%	95%
	m³/ha	±%	±	m³/ha	m³/ha	m³/ha	±%	±	m³/ha	m³/ha
public	340	3	11	329-351	318-362	309	3	11	298-320	287-331
private	447	4	16	431-463	415-479	432	4	17	415-449	398-466
total	386	2	8	378-394	370-402	363	2	9	354-372	345-381
* accessible forest without shrub forest NFI4/NFI5

The 68%-confidence intervals do not overlap in the public forest (pairs of values in ), but they do in the private forest and the total forest (pairs of values in ). At the certainty level of the 68% confidence intervals, it can be concluded that the growing stock per hectare in the public forest of the Plateau has decreased. For the private forest, as well as for the total forest, the decrease is not statistically certain at this level.

The 95%-confidence intervals overlap in all three categories. At the certainty level of the 95% confidence intervals, it is therefore not certain that the growing stock has decreased, even for the public forest.

See also examples 6 and 7, in which changes between two inventories are interpreted using the more sensitive metric of net change.

For many target variables in the NFI, it is possible to determine whether a change between two inventories is statistically certain, not only by comparing the states in the two inventories (see example 5), but also by analysing the net change** between the two inventories.

To do this, one must first define the level of statistical certainty that one would like to apply to the statement (as done above):

A net change has occurred with some certainty if the relative standard error is less than 100% or if the confidence interval calculated with the absolute standard error (68% confidence interval) does not include the value 0.
A net change has occurred with high certainty if twice the relative standard error is less than 100% or if the confidence interval calculated with twice the absolute standard error (95% confidence interval) does not include the value 0.

Example 6: Interpretation of net changes with the relative standard error

ownership (2 categories)	change in growing stock from NFI4 to NFI5, Plateau*
	estimated value	standard error
	m³/ha	±%
public	-34	30
private	-9	147
total	-23	34
* accessible forest without shrub forest NFI4/NFI5

Question
Has the growing stock per hectare in the Plateau decreased from NFI4 to NFI5?

Procedure

Define the level of statistical certainty (68% or 95% confidence interval)
Determine whether:
- the relative standard error is less than 100% (certainty level of the 68% confidence interval)
- twice the relative standard error is less than 100% (certainty level of the 95% confidence interval)

Answer

ownership (2 categories)	change in growing stock from NFI4 to NFI5, Plateau*
	estimated value	standard error
		single	double
	m³/ha	±%	±%
public	-34	30	60
private	-9	147	294
total	-23	34	68
* accessible forest without shrub forest NFI4/NFI5

The single relative standard error is less than 100% for both the public forest and the total forest (highlighted values). For the private forest, however, it is greater than 100% (highlighted values). At the certainty level of the 68% confidence interval, it can be concluded that the growing stock in the Plateau has decreased in the public forest and in total. For the private forest, on the other hand, the decrease in stock is not statistically certain at this level.

The same conclusion is reached in this example with the certainty level of the 95% confidence interval, as twice the relative standard error is again less than 100% for both the public forest and the total forest.

Overall, this means that there is high statistical certainty that the growing stock per hectare has decreased in the public forest in the Plateau, as well as overall. For private forests, on the other hand, the decrease in stock is not statistically certain (as twice the relative standard error and the relative standard error are both less than 100%).

Example 7: Interpretation of net changes with the absolute standard error

ownership (2 categories)	change in growing stock from NFI4 to NFI5, Plateau*
	estimated value	standard error
	%	±
public	-10	3
private	-2	3
total	-6	2
* accessible forest without shrub forest NFI4/NFI5

Question
Has the growing stock per hectare in the Plateau decreased from NFI4 to NFI5?

Procedure

Define the level of statistical certainty (68% or 95% confidence interval)
Calculate the confidence interval based on the defined certainty level
- 68% confidence interval with the absolute standard error
- 95% confidence interval with twice the absolute standard error
Determine whether the corresponding confidence interval does not include the value 0

Answer

ownership (2 categories)	change in growing stock from NFI4 to NFI5, Plateau*
	estimated value	standard error		confidence interval
		single	double	68%	95%
	%	±	±	%	%
public	-10	3	6	-13 to -7	-16 to -4
private	-2	3	6	-5 to +1	-8 to +4
total	-6	2	4	-8 to -4	-10 to -2
* accessible forest without shrub forest NFI4/NFI5

Neither the 68% nor the 95% confidence interval includes the value 0 for the public forest or for the total forest. At both certainty levels, this leads to the conclusion that the growing stock in the Plateau has decreased in the public forest and in total. For the private forest, on the other hand, the decrease in stock is not statistically certain (as the confidence intervals include the value 0).

Net changes can be interpreted using the absolute or relative standard error (see examples 6 and 7). It is advisable to use the absolute standard error if the estimated value in the table is shown as a percentage (%; as in example 7), and the relative standard error if the estimated value in the table is shown in absolute terms (m³, m³/ha, pc, m²; as in example 6). This means that the standard error can be taken directly from the table and does not need to be converted.

To assess whether a change is statistically certain, it is advisable to analyse the net change between the two inventories wherever possible. Net changes are more sensitive than status comparisons, which makes it easier to detect differences statistically. See examples 6 and 7 (net change) and 7 (comparison of two results from different inventories).

top

4. When is it not sufficient to consider only the standard error?

The National Forest Inventory (NFI) is a sample-based large-scale inventory whose sample areas are arranged on a grid with a mesh size of 1.4 km × 1.4 km. The NFI was designed in such a way that the growing stock for Switzerland as a whole can be predicted with a maximum standard error of 1%.

If results are requested for individual regions or for individual classes, the standard error quickly becomes much larger. This is because the number of sample areas and subjects (e.g. sample trees, young forest plants, pieces of deadwood) analysed for the queried combination of variable expressions* is considerably lower than for the total.

Example 8: Standard error and combination of variable expressions

region	growing stock
	total		maple		sycamore		Norway maple
	estimated value	standard error	estimated value	standard error	estimated value	standard error	estimated value	standard error
	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%	m³/ha	±%
Switzerland	343	1	12	5	11	5	1	20
production region "Plateau"	363	2	15	10	14	11	0	50
Canton of Aargau	289	7	15	20	13	20	1	63

The standard error increases as the level of detail increases.

Large standard errors are to be expected if:

forest districts are selected as the regional demarcation or results for small cantons (e.g. Appenzell Innerrhoden, Nidwalden) are queried,
a classification variable with many classes is selected (e.g. tree species in 56 classes),
several classification variables are combined with each other (e.g. main tree species and development stage).

Large standard errors are an indication that the estimate may have been based on too small a number of sample areas or subjects and that the result of the estimate therefore may not be reliable.

For the target variable “number of stems of young forest plants with browsing damage” (browsing intensity), an uncertain estimate is not necessarily recognisable by a large standard error. This is because this target variable is a quotient estimator**, which is – due to the survey method – only based on a small number of assessed young forest plants for rarer tree species (e.g. pine, larch, Arolla pine, oak, chestnut). Accordingly, for this target variable one should always check how many young forest plants were assessed for the individual estimates. As a rule of thumb, at least 30 young forest plants per estimate should have been assessed for browsing in order to obtain a reliable estimate.

top

5. Two types of changes?

There are two types of changes in the National Forest Inventory (NFI):

The first type of change involves specific target variables for change components such as increment, fellings or mortality. These target variables are only available for two consecutive measurement cycles, e.g. NFI4 to NFI5. When change components are analysed, the classification variable expression of the second measurement cycle is generally assigned to the first measurement cycle. These analyses therefore do not take into account any change in the expression (e.g. from private to public ownership) from the earlier to the later measurement cycle.
In the second type of change, the difference in target variables, such as stem number, growing stock or forest area, is used to calculate the net change between two measurement cycles. These target variables are usually used to represent states, e.g. that in NFI5, but can also show the net change between any two measurement cycles, e.g. between NFI1 and NFI5. In these net change analyses, the change in expression is taken into account for some of the classification variables, including “tree condition” and “forest, non-forest”. In this way, it can be seen, for example, that the forest area has increased. For the remaining classification variables, the expressions are regarded as static. This means that the most recent state – whether it was assessed in a measurement cycle (e.g. “primary forest function NFI5”) or taken from an external data source (e.g. “protection forest [2022]”) – is assigned to all measurement cycles.

top

6. Change analyses: When are the results (not) additive?

The results are:

additive if they are reported as the total change between two measurement dates. For example, the fellings for the various production regions reported in cubic metres (m³) can be added together to obtain the total fellings for Switzerland.
not additive if they are reported as a change per year (e.g. m³/year). For example, the fellings for the various production regions reported in cubic metres per year (m³/year) cannot be added together to obtain the total fellings for Switzerland.

Example 9: : Additivity/non-additivity of changes

	growing stock: total change between NFI4 and NFI5 (in 1000 m³)*
	Jura		Plateau		Pre-Alps		Alps		Southern Alps		Switzerland
higher/lower altitude zone	1000 m³	±%	1000 m³	±%	1000 m³	±%	1000 m³	±%	1000 m³	±%	1000 m³	±%
lower altitude zone	-3759.0	28	-4909.1	36	-1025.2	133	-317.1	195	3464.1	31	-6546.3	42
higher altitude zone	574.3	117	-328.0	62	1093.0	123	7128.4	21	666.7	93	9134.3	24
total	-3184.7	40	-5237.1	34	67.9	2805	6811.3	23	4130.8	30	2588.1	136
	* accessible forest without shrub forest NFI4/NFI5
	additive

	growing stock: annual change between NFI4 and NFI5 (in 1000 m³/year)*
	Jura		Plateau		Pre-Alps		Alps		Southern Alps		Switzerland
higher/lower altitude zone	1000 m³/year	±%	1000 m³/year	±%	1000 m³/year	±%	1000 m³/year	±%	1000 m³/year	±%	1000 m³/year	±%
lower altitude zone	-421.1	28	-560.6	36	-115.7	133	-35.9	195	389.5	31	-740.7	42
higher altitude zone	64.7	117	-38.3	62	122.4	123	810.4	21	74.9	93	1032.7	24
total	-357.3	40	-598.4	34	7.6	2805	773.8	23	464.4	30	292.7	136
	* accessible forest without shrub forest NFI4/NFI5
	not additive

The non-additivity of changes expressed per year arises because the total change is divided by the average number of years between the two measurement dates in the domain* under consideration, and this average number of years varies slightly depending on the domain.

Example 10: Average number of years per domain

domain		mean number of years*
production region	higher/lower altitude zone
Mittelland	-	8.75
Plateau	higher altitude zone	8.56
Plateau	lower altitude zone	8.76
Southern Alps	-	8.90
Southern Alps	higher altitude zone	8.90
Southern Alps	lower altitude zone	8.89
* between the NFI4 and NFI5 measurements in the accessible forest without shrub forest

top

7. Why is a dot (“.”) sometimes given in the cells for standard error or estimated value?

In the calculation of a results table, data is not always available for all combinations of variable expressions*. In most cases, this indicates that the variable estimated with the relevant target variable does not occur or only occurs very rarely. The value 0 is then usually used. However, as this value is not based on any direct measurements, a dot (“.”) is given for the associated standard error. If reference is made to the assumed value of 0 in the calculation, e.g. in the case of percentages or certain change estimates, no value can be used. In this case, a dot (“.”) is given for the estimated value and the standard error.

For example, no Arolla pines have yet been found and measured in the Plateau in the National Forest Inventory (NFI) (growing stock of Arolla pine by production region). It can therefore be assumed that the values are missing because the Arolla pine actually does not occur in the Plateau, and therefore the growing stock in that region must be 0.

top

8. Why are no standard error values shown in some tables?

The data in these tables originates from a complete survey and not from a sample inventory. Accordingly, it is not necessary to specify a standard error because there is no uncertainty due to sampling.

The forest road network survey that the National Forest Inventory (NFI) periodically carries out with the local forestry services is an example of such a complete survey.

top

9. Negative values for growing stock, increment or fellings?

A negative value is possible if the result could only be calculated on the basis of a few trees. The estimate is therefore not reliable. This is also reflected in the standard error, which is usually extremely large for negative stock, increment or felling values.

Negative values can occur because, when the stemwood volume of the tally trees is determined, the volume estimated solely on the basis of the diameter at breast height (DBH) (tariff volume) is adjusted using the volume of the tally trees estimated on the basis of DBH, diameter at 7 m height and tree height. This procedure enables an unbiased and more accurate calculation of the stemwood volume. However, it can lead to negative values for all target variables that are based on the stemwood volume of the tally trees (e.g. growing stock, increment, fellings) if the number of tally trees in the selected combination of variable expressions* is small.

top

NFI5
total number of stems with two most important forms of damages
altitude (in 200 m classes) · type of damage to trees (13 classes)
regional demarcation: biogeographical region
unit: 1000 n
evaluation area: accessible forest without shrub forest
grid: 1.4 km grid, subgrids 1-5
state 2018/26
		biogeographical region
		Jura		Plateau		Northern Alps		Western Central-Alps		Eastern Central-Alps		Southern Alps		Switzerland
altitude (in 200 m classes)	type of damage to trees (13 classes)	1000 n	±%	1000 n	±%	1000 n	±%	1000 n	±%	1000 n	±%	1000 n	±%	1000 n	±%
n/a	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	exposed wood core	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	crack, woundwood rib	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	stem breakage	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	defoliation >50%	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	canker	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	bark necrosis	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	resinosis	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	inclusion	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	stag-headedness	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	other type of damage	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	lying living trees	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	dead trees	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
>1800 m	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	0	.	0	.	1615	42	5848	16	11475	12	4137	17	23075	8
	exposed wood core	0	.	0	.	161	46	1475	18	2418	16	1044	23	5098	10
	crack, woundwood rib	0	.	0	.	0	.	78	46	107	41	132	49	317	27
	stem breakage	0	.	0	.	0	.	154	39	192	33	209	44	555	23
	defoliation >50%	0	.	0	.	18	100	0	.	53	58	76	59	147	39
	canker	0	.	0	.	0	.	59	44	164	37	144	30	368	22
	bark necrosis	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	resinosis	0	.	0	.	358	40	1751	22	2727	18	1106	24	5941	11
	inclusion	0	.	0	.	23	72	85	47	86	44	40	100	234	30
	stag-headedness	0	.	0	.	35	71	14	71	167	41	34	71	250	31
	other type of damage	0	.	0	.	42	61	209	31	186	28	282	40	720	20
	lying living trees	0	.	0	.	0	.	140	56	452	39	93	49	684	29
	dead trees	0	.	0	.	477	54	1827	21	2936	16	934	27	6175	11
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
1601-1800 m	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	0	.	0	.	7917	18	6195	18	8940	14	5210	17	28262	8
	exposed wood core	0	.	0	.	1660	22	1069	22	1138	19	962	26	4829	11
	crack, woundwood rib	0	.	0	.	0	.	49	54	0	.	7	100	56	49
	stem breakage	0	.	0	.	136	45	211	38	135	41	181	33	663	19
	defoliation >50%	0	.	0	.	94	93	69	100	101	53	64	100	329	42
	canker	0	.	0	.	202	36	54	49	168	42	292	39	716	22
	bark necrosis	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	18	100	18	100
	resinosis	0	.	0	.	1910	19	1650	20	2289	15	946	27	6795	9
	inclusion	0	.	0	.	172	57	230	51	104	40	43	58	549	29
	stag-headedness	0	.	0	.	61	52	95	65	87	66	64	47	307	31
	other type of damage	0	.	0	.	220	33	74	45	196	36	183	32	674	18
	lying living trees	0	.	0	.	158	55	50	54	53	74	34	71	294	34
	dead trees	0	.	0	.	2229	23	2167	26	1450	18	731	22	6577	12
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
1401-1600 m	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	1065	29	0	.	14984	11	5329	18	9290	14	8166	16	38834	7
	exposed wood core	276	36	0	.	3206	14	892	23	1595	20	1456	18	7425	9
	crack, woundwood rib	0	.	0	.	0	0	53	58	88	45	25	77	166	32
	stem breakage	19	100	0	.	295	26	155	48	127	35	160	39	757	18
	defoliation >50%	7	100	0	.	305	46	91	50	36	71	37	71	477	32
	canker	7	100	0	.	156	30	25	100	39	61	253	30	480	20
	bark necrosis	0	.	0	.	15	100	0	.	0	.	0	.	15	100
	resinosis	94	42	0	.	3425	13	1028	23	2145	16	882	27	7573	9
	inclusion	0	.	0	.	293	39	585	86	62	43	56	56	996	52
	stag-headedness	0	.	0	.	248	25	72	62	43	62	44	72	408	21
	other type of damage	8	100	0	.	284	27	183	34	137	32	461	25	1073	15
	lying living trees	0	.	0	.	234	43	181	65	70	61	119	47	605	28
	dead trees	185	63	0	.	4860	14	1212	23	1944	21	1981	24	10182	9
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
1201-1400 m	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	5841	16	18	100	17408	9	5450	20	4416	19	5148	18	38280	6
	exposed wood core	790	20	9	100	4841	12	1281	28	1194	23	1434	19	9548	8
	crack, woundwood rib	7	100	0	.	61	62	0	.	35	71	78	48	181	33
	stem breakage	124	48	0	.	406	27	18	100	108	44	14	71	670	20
	defoliation >50%	213	47	0	.	327	29	230	74	25	78	72	61	868	26
	canker	133	48	0	.	399	23	113	62	109	48	373	31	1126	16
	bark necrosis	0	.	0	.	64	53	0	.	55	100	8	100	127	51
	resinosis	370	24	0	.	2351	14	398	27	1278	26	707	23	5103	10
	inclusion	27	77	0	.	461	33	61	58	68	65	136	56	753	24
	stag-headedness	92	45	0	.	226	28	211	49	15	100	50	54	594	22
	other type of damage	120	43	0	.	452	22	18	100	115	44	436	29	1141	15
	lying living trees	0	.	0	.	255	54	78	47	35	100	125	39	493	31
	dead trees	828	26	0	.	5315	13	1214	23	1397	22	1133	24	9886	9
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
1001-1200 m	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	12946	9	1091	34	20177	9	3439	21	3199	25	6668	16	47520	6
	exposed wood core	2368	13	118	42	4977	11	874	32	1275	28	2060	17	11672	7
	crack, woundwood rib	34	64	0	.	86	42	8	100	25	79	91	44	244	25
	stem breakage	175	38	9	100	791	24	71	50	157	57	188	36	1391	17
	defoliation >50%	203	43	0	.	443	32	0	0	112	66	261	63	1019	24
	canker	162	34	13	100	464	24	46	59	63	73	194	29	943	16
	bark necrosis	0	.	0	.	49	55	0	.	0	.	16	71	65	45
	resinosis	694	20	129	41	2342	15	308	45	587	37	197	39	4257	11
	inclusion	75	42	15	100	320	39	15	71	36	71	111	44	572	25
	stag-headedness	134	40	0	.	367	33	77	46	42	62	151	43	771	20
	other type of damage	78	44	0	.	521	24	129	39	208	44	468	34	1405	16
	lying living trees	0	.	0	.	201	47	139	66	18	100	169	60	527	32
	dead trees	1581	17	416	76	4324	11	974	29	726	29	1274	24	9295	8
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
801-1000 m	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	13889	10	7721	17	19574	9	2766	26	2266	25	6670	22	52887	6
	exposed wood core	3518	15	1050	21	5131	12	745	34	682	31	2511	20	13637	7
	crack, woundwood rib	28	72	7	100	28	64	0	.	35	71	58	57	155	32
	stem breakage	204	37	101	42	293	26	0	.	37	70	93	72	728	19
	defoliation >50%	218	36	28	78	484	22	63	74	114	44	402	51	1309	20
	canker	119	40	106	37	595	19	55	75	45	61	63	49	982	14
	bark necrosis	7	100	0	.	8	100	0	.	0	.	7	100	23	58
	resinosis	823	24	259	29	1163	17	209	46	485	28	93	57	3032	11
	inclusion	183	46	0	.	257	36	22	100	11	100	56	58	530	25
	stag-headedness	186	36	30	100	366	33	80	80	68	73	443	49	1174	23
	other type of damage	252	27	29	63	592	23	90	59	167	44	189	32	1319	14
	lying living trees	0	.	0	.	141	41	18	100	18	100	204	58	382	35
	dead trees	1966	15	607	25	4357	13	730	31	507	26	1945	24	10111	8
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
601-800 m	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	13732	11	25520	8	9854	13	1150	47	2315	24	4541	19	57111	5
	exposed wood core	2806	13	3788	10	2987	16	281	49	746	29	2674	20	13281	7
	crack, woundwood rib	73	44	80	58	35	71	17	100	0	.	35	82	240	29
	stem breakage	193	33	390	21	240	31	0	.	38	83	86	46	947	15
	defoliation >50%	230	31	655	25	691	41	87	66	83	59	872	35	2618	17
	canker	70	42	336	24	221	52	62	77	37	54	123	50	848	19
	bark necrosis	55	63	106	79	26	77	0	.	18	100	40	100	246	42
	resinosis	335	29	1926	18	368	28	25	76	50	54	8	100	2711	14
	inclusion	52	58	23	76	79	45	25	76	25	77	7	100	211	27
	stag-headedness	241	29	133	45	197	40	17	100	25	76	754	31	1367	19
	other type of damage	249	25	354	22	278	27	7	100	57	48	654	63	1599	27
	lying living trees	35	100	71	50	83	47	36	71	7	100	98	44	330	25
	dead trees	2899	14	2281	13	2018	17	455	38	552	35	2317	21	10522	8
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
=600 m	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	8340	13	38307	5	3780	22	696	52	113	76	6550	18	57786	5
	exposed wood core	1650	18	6283	7	1067	38	72	59	0	.	2904	17	11976	7
	crack, woundwood rib	16	71	123	32	55	58	0	.	0	.	18	100	212	26
	stem breakage	225	30	585	18	148	59	17	100	0	.	85	48	1060	15
	defoliation >50%	376	37	960	20	103	52	12	100	0	.	628	36	2080	16
	canker	59	48	336	25	92	44	39	83	0	.	206	45	731	19
	bark necrosis	0	.	110	42	21	100	0	.	0	.	58	57	189	32
	resinosis	215	34	2086	13	133	50	25	100	0	.	60	100	2519	12
	inclusion	51	75	158	38	18	71	0	.	0	.	128	46	356	26
	stag-headedness	320	31	467	21	49	87	12	100	0	.	822	28	1670	16
	other type of damage	234	27	745	15	162	35	7	100	0	.	274	33	1423	12
	lying living trees	79	46	184	30	41	61	0	.	0	.	323	41	627	24
	dead trees	1957	18	4157	10	793	24	229	62	0	.	3335	17	10471	8
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
total	n/a	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.	0	.
	no visible damage	55814	4	72656	4	95309	4	30873	7	42013	6	47091	5	343756	2
	exposed wood core	11407	6	11248	5	24030	5	6688	10	9048	8	15045	6	77467	2
	crack, woundwood rib	158	29	210	29	264	26	205	28	289	24	445	22	1571	11
	stem breakage	940	16	1085	13	2309	12	626	21	794	18	1016	16	6770	6
	defoliation >50%	1247	17	1643	15	2466	16	553	37	525	23	2413	19	8846	8
	canker	549	19	791	15	2129	11	453	25	626	20	1648	13	6195	6
	bark necrosis	62	57	217	44	184	30	0	.	74	79	146	39	682	21
	resinosis	2530	11	4400	10	12050	6	5393	11	9559	8	3999	12	37931	3
	inclusion	388	27	197	33	1622	16	1023	51	393	21	577	21	4200	15
	stag-headedness	973	16	630	19	1548	14	578	26	447	25	2363	16	6540	8
	other type of damage	941	13	1128	12	2553	10	719	17	1067	15	2947	16	9355	6
	lying living trees	114	44	254	26	1113	20	643	27	653	29	1166	19	3943	11
	dead trees	9415	7	7461	8	24372	5	8808	10	9512	8	13650	7	73219	3
	total	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.

Table citation

Abegg, M.; Ahles, P.; Allgaier Leuch, B.; Cioldi, F.; Didion, M.; Düggelin, C.; Fischer, C.; Herold, A.; Meile, R.; Rohner, B.; Rösler, E.; Speich, S.; Temperli, C.; Traub, B.,
2023: Swiss national forest inventory - Result table No. 1267406. Birmensdorf, Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL

zurück