Heavy rainfall throughout the week I conducted the data collection presented challenges in accessing specific elevations or regions for sampling, potentially affecting the distribution of sample points and influencing data collection. The surprising data was that the systematic sampling method revealed a significantly lower abundance of coffee plants in the mid-elevation range (1000 meters above sea level) compared to the adjacent elevations. This unexpected decline in coffee plant population contradicted the initial hypothesis, which suggested that abundance increased consistently with elevation. This unanticipated intervention resulted in an unusual decrease in the expected abundance of coffee plants. Also, I intend to continue using the same technique, it is particularly beneficial for longitudinal studies or observing temporal changes in specific locations. However, if modifications were to be considered, potential approaches might involve:
- Increasing the sample size within each elevation range could enhance data robustness, providing a more comprehensive understanding of species abundance patterns.
- Altering the sampling intervals within the systematic approach or refining the randomization process might offer a more representative sampling across elevations.
- Combining multiple sampling methods, such as systematic and random approaches, could provide a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of species abundance patterns across elevations.
sounds like it is going well. Remember it is ok to have surprising results and as long as you have 5-7 replicates per elevation you don’t need more. Sometimes data is inconclusive.