Table 1 Most dominant tree species for biomass and growth calculations

1

Acer campestre, Acer platanoides, Acer sp.

12.9

Equation 2, Acer saccharum [99]

\(202.9173*(1 - e^{{\left( {age\,*\, -\,0.0019} \right)}} )^{0.7992}\); 5.48

2

Aesculus hypocastanum

13.4

Table 1, Aesculus indica [100]

\(175.5828*(1 - e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0042} \right)}} )^{0.8958}\); 6.57

3

Fagus sylvatica

10.4

Appendix A, Equation 89, Fagus sylvatica [101]

\(202.9173*(1 - e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0019} \right)}} )^{0.7992}\); 6.15

4

Pinus sylvestris

11.3

Table 3, Pinus sylvestris [102]

\(135.4549*e^{{\left( { - \,3.1143 \,*\, e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0152} \right)}} } \right)}}\); 4.74

5

Platanus hispanica

1.9

Volume of Platanus acerifolia, gravity of Platanus [103, 104]

\(170.5888*(1 - e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0047} \right)}} )^{0.913}\); 4.95

6

Populus nigra, Populus alba

1.8

Populus tremula [101]

\(93.5402*(1 - e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0152} \right)}} )^{1.1518}\); 10.77

7

Quercus robur, Quercus rubra, Quercus sp.

8.6

Table 3, Quercus sp. [102]

\(70.2797*e^{{\left( { -\, 2.8528 \,*\, e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0289} \right)}} } \right)}}\); 4.03

8

Tilia cordata, Tilia × vulgaris, Tilia platyphyllos

13.2

Appendix A, Equation 607, Tilia cordata [52, 101]

\(56.4678*(1 - e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0182} \right)}} )^{1.053}\); 5.71

9

Betula pendula

/

Appendix A, Equation 31, Betula pendula [101]

\(199.1001*(1 - e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0029} \right)}} )^{0.8865}\); 4.48

10

Robinia pseudoacacia

/

Table 2, Equation 6, Robinia pseudoacacia [105]

\(116.6451*e^{{\left( { - \,3.1542\, *\, e^{{\left( {age \,*\, -\, 0.0198} \right)}} } \right)}}\); 5.40

Mix

Mix of dominant species above

26.5

Average of equations listed above

Average of equations listed above