Blog Post 4: Sampling Strategies
Which technique had the fastest estimated sampling time?
Random gradient had the fastest estimated sampling time at 12 hours and 7 minutes.
What was the most accurate sampling strategy for common species?
The most common species, the eastern hemlock, had the lowest percentage error when measured through random samplings.
However, all other common species; sweet birch, yellow birch, chestnut oak, and red maple all had the lowest percentage error when the random gradient technique was utilized.
What was the most accurate for rare species? Did the accuracy stay the same or decline for rare species?
For the two rare species sampled, the stripped maple and the White pine. Random Sampling had the lowest percentage error for striped maple, however for white pine both random and gradient sampling failed to capture any of the species in its counts and by default haphazard sampling had the lowest percentage error. The accuracy rate of measuring rare species was on average much higher when compared to the accuracy rate for more common species.
Was 24 a sufficient number of sample points to capture the number of species in this community?
Considering that 24 sample points failed to pick up white pine when calculated through random and gradient sampling I would suggest that the sample points were not sufficient for calculating the presence of rare species.
Was it enough sample points to accurately estimate the abundance of these species?
Again, the accuracy rate for rare species being so high, I would suggest that more sample points be taken to get a more accurate measurement of the abundance of species.
What was the most accurate sampling method and least accurate sampling method?
On completion and review of the three different sampling methods, random gradient was the most accurate on average while haphazard was the least accurate on average.