ABSTRACT
This article presents models to predict the time until mechanical failure of in-ground wooden test specimens resulting from fungal decay. Historical records of decay ratings were modelled by remotely sensed data from ERA5-Land. In total, 2,570 test specimens of 16 different wood species were exposed at 21 different test sites, representing three continents and climatic conditions from sub-polar to tropical, spanning a period from 1980 until 2022. To obtain specimen decay ratings over their exposure time, inspections were conducted in mostly annual and sometimes bi-annual intervals. For each specimen’s exposure period, a laboratory developed dose–response model was populated using remotely sensed soil moisture and temperature data retrieved from ERA5-Land. Wood specimens were grouped according to natural durability rankings to reduce the variability of in-ground wood decay rate between wood species. Non-linear, sigmoid-shaped models were then constructed to describe wood decay progression as a function of daily accumulated exposure to soil moisture and temperature conditions (dose). Dose, a mechanistic weighting of daily exposure conditions over time, generally performed better than exposure time alone as a predictor of in-ground wood decay progression. The open-access availability of remotely sensed soil-state data in combination with wood specimen data proved promising for in-ground wood decay predictions.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge support by the Open Access Publication Funds of the University of Göttingen, the IRG-WP durability database and all of its contributors, as well as Joshua Rabke and Antonia Möller, for their role in converting wood decay data from the IRG-WP durability database into a common format.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Author contributions
Conceived and designed the analysis: B.N.M., M.S., and P.B.vN.
Collected the data: B.N.M., P.B.vN, and C.B.
Contributed data or analysis tools: B.N.M., M.S., P.B.vN, J.N., and C.B.
Performed the analysis: M.S., P.B.vN., and B.N.M.
Visualisation: M.S., B.N.M., and P.B.vN.
Wrote the paper: B.N.M., M.S., and P.B.vN.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Data availability statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, B.N.M., upon reasonable request.
Supplementary material
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/22797254.2023.2264473.