A. nepalensis.
Our estimates of stands biomass across the basal area gradient demonstrated that tree biomass increased with the basal area of stands. Meanwhile, our results revealed present biomass estimation (10.02-284.48 Mg ha-1) was on the range recorded by earlier work on the oak forest in central Himalaya. Tree biomass carbon storage of AMOM, AMR and AMOO stands (228.05, 237.5, 284.48 Mg ha-1respectively) were same as other central Himalayan oak forests, while tree biomass carbon storage of AER, APDF and ALR stands (10.02, 148.28, 134.96 Mg ha-1 respectively) were much lower than the central Himalaya oak forest(Rawat& Singh 1988; Adhikari et al., 1995; Sharma et al., 2011). We found AMOM, AMR, and AMOO stand had, on average, higher biomass carbon than other stands, supporting our hypothesis that suggests A. nepalensis abundance is a key driver of biomass storage in the central Himalaya forest. However, despite that studies stands may fellow multiple succession pathways, our study suggests that succession trajectory may have a strong effect on total biomass carbon storage (Gough et al., 2016). In the present study, the aboveground biomass storage/belowground biomass storage ratio increased with a stand basal area this indicates that below ground carbon storage positively correlated to the basal area. Understory vegetation (shrubs, herbs) biomass carbon not increased with a basal area of stands but litter biomass carbon increased with stand basal area. The understory vegetation (shrubs and herbs) biomass carbon ranged from 2.11-3.26 Mg ha-1, which is the same as reported for the central Himalayan oak forest (Rawat& Singh 1988; Adhikari et al., 1995). Litter biomass carbon ranged from 0.32-3.56 Mg ha-1 were close to reported values for oak forest litter biomass in the central Himalayan forest (Rawat & Singh 1988; Adhikari et al., 1995; Joshi & Garkoti 2020).