Systematic sampling along a gradient was the most time efficient method, taking approx. 12 hrs. 08 mins.
12 hrs. 50 mins – random sampling
12 hrs. 57 mins – haphazard sampling
| SPECIES | SYSTEMATIC (error %) | RANDOM (error %) | HAPHAZARD (error %) |
| East Hemlock | 2.7% | 5.13% | 7.21% |
| Red Maple | 30.53% | 19.18% | 36.08% |
| Sweet Birch | 11.01% | 18.47% | 18.30% |
| Yellow Birch | 41.20% | 3.31% | 22.87% |
| Chestnut Oak | 40.30% | 14.29% | 4.00% |
| Striped Maple | 0.60% | 66.90% | 54.29% |
| White Pine | 0.02% | 100% | 100% |
(arranged from most common to rarest species)
Systematic sampling was most accurate for common species with a percentage error of 2.7% for East Hemlock (most common)
Systematic sampling was most accurate for rare species with a percentage error of 0.02% for White Pine (rarest)
Accuracy certainly declined with rare species overall with all sampling methods, with the rarest species with the highest percentage error in all sampling methods. 24 sample points may have a low percentage error, but the accuracy can be further increased by having more sample units more than or equal to 30.
24 sample points may have been sufficient to capture the number of species but not accurately estimate the abundance of all species.
Some species that are more abundant may be better represented or more accurately represented with a sample size of 24 but this may not represent rarer species.