The fastest estimated sampling time was systematic sampling at 12 hours and 36 minutes Systematic and random sampling percent errors were low for common species and very high for rare species. Subjective sampling had a high percent error for common species and a lower percent error for rarer species than other sampling methods. It appears that the accuracy increases with species abundance. I would say if you were looking at a common species systemic sampling would be the most accurate. Where if I were focusing on rarer species I would want to seek them out and use systemic sampling to ensure accuracy.
Systematic
%error eastern hemlock= |(548.0-469.9)/469.9| x100%= 16.6%
%error red maple=|(148.0 – 118.9)/118.9| x100%= 24.5%
%error white pine=|( 0-8.4)/8.4 |x100%= 100%
%error striped maple=|(0-17.5)(17.5)|x100%= 100%
Random
%error eastern hemlock= |(308.3-469.9)/469.9| x100% =34.4%
%error red maple=|(200.0-118.9)/118.9|x100%=1.41%
%error white pine = |(0-8.4)/(8.4)|100%= 100%
%error striped maple= |(0-17.5)/17.5|x100%= 100%
Subjective
%error eastern hemlock= |(608.3-469.9)/469.9|x100%=29.5%
%error red maple= |(162.5-118.9)/118.9|x100%=36.7%
%error white pine= |(0-8.4)/8.4|x100%=100%
%error striped maple= |(25-17.5)/17.5|x100%=42.9%
While one is usually faster they are all pretty close showing that you don’t save much time by skipping random sampling