User: | Open Learning Faculty Member:
Blog Post 4: Sampling Strategies
Using three sampling strategies in the virtual forest tutorial for the Snyder-Middleswarth Natural Area, the “simple random” sampling technique yielded the fastest sampling time. I would consider more than 24 plots, as I feel more data might yield more accurate results. I feel that the accuracy of the abundance is not enough to form any conclusions-I would increase the number of sample points for both.
(E-T)/E*100=percentage error
Rarest Species:
| Eastern Hemlock | Distance: Simple random | Distance: Systemic | Distance: Haphazard |
| PERCENTAGE ERROR | 53% | 3% | 25% |
| Sweet Birch | Distance: Simple random | Distance: Systemic | Distance: Haphazard |
| PERCENTAGE ERROR | 84% | 82% | 11% |
Most Common Species:
| Striped Maple
|
Distance: Simple random | Distance: Systemic | Distance: Haphazard |
| PERCENTAGE ERROR | 105% | 100%
|
8% |
| White Pine | Distance: Simple random | Distance: Systemic | Distance: Haphazard |
| PERCENTAGE ERROR | 327% | 100%
|
100% |
The most accurate sampling method was haphazard for both the rarest and the most abundant. Accuracy appears to decrease with species abundance.
The haphazard method appears to yield more accurate results. While the times vary considerably:
Random: 1 hour, 24 minutes
Systemic: 4 hours, 59 minutes
Haphazard: 4 hours, 31 minutes
I might consider the random technique if I had a small team and a large distance to cover.
