Three of the sampling strategies were used in the virtual forest tutorial which were: random sampling, systematic sampling, and haphazard sampling. I chose area-based method throughout the exercise and 26 reading were taken for Snyder-Middleswarth Natural Area. The technique with the fastest estimated sampling time is the systematic sampling which was 13hrs and 14 mins. While random and haphazard timing weren’t also not too off in terms of timing such that they were 13hrs 50min and 13 hrs 25 mins respectively. The fastest sampling still was the systematic sampling. The other two were close.
Eastern Hemlock and the Sweet Birch were the two most common species while the Stripped maple and White Pine were the two rarest species. The following is the percentage errors for four of the species for their respectively sampling techniques.
| Random | Systematic | Haphazard | |
| Eastern Hemlock | 14.6% | 9.9% | 12.9% |
| Sweet Birch | 17.9% | 10.9% | 21.1% |
| Stripped Maple | 40.7% | 164% | 9.7% |
| Wine Pine | 54.7% | Absent | 36.9% |
The accuracy of sampling strategy was clearly based on the species abundance such that the common species (Eastern Hemlock & Sweet Birch) had the lowest percentage errors when compared to the rarest species (Stripped Maple & Wine Pine).
The systematic sampling method looks more accurate as compared to others as it has the smallest errors. Considering the error value of 164% for Stripped Maple which looked a bit off and an outlier, also suggesting limitation in accuracy for rare species. I would say still go with the systematic sampling method.
Great!