User: | Open Learning Faculty Member:
In the virtual forest sampling simulator the random sampling was significantly faster than systematic and haphazard sampling.
Systematic – 12 hours, 35 minutes
Random – 4 hours, 24 minutes
Haphazard – 12 hours, 30 minutes
| Common Species | Rare Species | |||
| Sampling Technique
% error |
Eastern Hemlock | Sweet Birch | Striped Maple | White Pine |
| Systematic | 17.2% | 30.0% | 126.8% | 138.1% |
| Random | 16.6 | 28.2% | 100.0% | 25.0% |
| Haphazard | 8.2% | 31.2% | 18.9% | 99.0% |
In comparing the percent error of the three sampling techniques with the exception of white pine in the random sampling, the percent error increased with decreasing species abundance. Based on this sampling simulator, the haphazard sampling technique is the most accurate. Although, it should be noted that the random sampling technique had similar percent error values. Systematic sampling had notably higher percent errors for species with low abundances.
