id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentences	flesch	summary	cache	txt
work_c3pk7zjjvnbv7kt2y37edf3lkq	Brice Hanberry	Revisiting historical beech and oak forests in Indiana using a GIS method to recover information from bar charts	2018	11	.pdf	application/pdf	4216	357	58	were in 6% of Indiana, resulting in beech and/or oak dominance in 84% of the state. How to cite this article Hanberry (2018), Revisiting historical beech and oak forests in Indiana using a GIS method to recover information from bar charts. re-transfer data from the historical tree surveys to a GIS layer, with current methods, so that information about beech and oaks alone is sufficient to describe forests (Hanberry Potzger & McCormick (1956) in the bar graph legends (i.e., oak then hickory, or beech then Maximum predicted composition values by township for oaks (99% of all trees), beech 17 prairie townships, oaks were 27% of all trees (area-weighted mean), beech was 25%, The beech-oak-maple-hickory forest type did not Figure 3 Distribution of historical oak (A) and beech (B) forests overlaid on available water capacity. historically dominant tree species or genera in Indiana (Potzger, Potzger & McCormick,	./cache/work_c3pk7zjjvnbv7kt2y37edf3lkq.pdf	./txt/work_c3pk7zjjvnbv7kt2y37edf3lkq.txt