The Virtual Forest Tutorial employed three sampling techniques: stratified haphazard sampling, random sampling of quadrats, and area-based systematic sampling along a topographic gradient. Among these techniques, area-based systematic sampling along a belt transect was found to be the fastest, requiring a total time commitment of 12 hours and 35 minutes. The Virtual Forest Tutorial provided valuable insights into the effectiveness of different sampling techniques. While all three techniques yielded accurate results, area-based systematic sampling along a belt transect stood out as the most efficient method. However, it is worth noting that there was a slight error of 4.5% in the random sampling of Striped Maples, which may have impacted the overall accuracy of the results. When compared to actual density values of the most common tree species, the Haphazard sampling method proved to be the most accurate and time-efficient when compared to alternative approaches.
Even though one was more efficient, they are usually all pretty close and demonstrate you don’t save that much time by a specific sampling method. What about error of the rare species?