Systematic sampling (Area): I used 25 samples, and a total of 7 species for 12 hours and 35 minutes.
Systematic Random (Area): I used 25 samples and had a total of 6 species for 13 hours and 16 minutes.
Haphazard sampling (Area): I used 25 samples and a total of 7 species for 13 hours and 8 minutes.
| Systematic sampling | Systematic Random | Haphazard sampling | |
| Eastern Hemlock | 17.43% | 12.32% | 8.11% |
| Sweet Birch | 25.96% | 45.53% | 45.53% |
| Yellow Birch | 17.54% | 50.60% | 21.21% |
| Chestnut oak | 18.86% | 28% | 0.57% |
| Red maple | 14.38% | 71.57% | 4.29% |
| Striped maple | 128.57% | Absent | 54.29% |
| White Pine | 138.10% | 52.38 | 52.38 |
Systematic sampling had the most efficient sampling technique with an estimated time of 12 hours and 35 minutes, followed by Haphazard sampling with 13 hours and 8 minutes, and Systematic random sampling with 13 and 16 minutes. The most common species in the systematic sampling is the Eastern Hemlock, and the rarest species was the White pine, while for the systematic random, the most common was the Eastern Hemlock, the rarest being Red maple, and lastly, the most common for the Haphazard sampling is the Chestnut oak and the rarest is the Striped maple.
The accuracy depends on what you are looking to study if you would like to sample a high-density species then systematic sampling would be more accurate while for a low-density species, Haphazard sampling will give a more accurate result.
Did you see any general patterns with rare species and percent error, this part is missing.