The goal is to explore the diversity and health of plant species in a designated area, from 6 define main areas, of 10 square meters that are broken into approximately 1-meter squares. The criteria for evaluation were species abundance, plant health, and species count. To ensure a reliable observational analysis, I used the three different sampling methods that we learned from the course: haphazard, systematic, and randomized sampling.
One of the initial challenges faced was the subjective nature of haphazard sampling. I realized that my notions about the “best” sample areas could introduce bias, affecting the reliability of the data. Therefore, using systematic and randomized sampling techniques added a layer of credibility to the study, which allowed for more accurate representation of the area.
Handling the data from multiple sampling methods required to find a way to present it as readable as possible. I averaged the values obtained from all three sampling techniques for each criterion. This aggregation provided a quick summary, which was then tabulated for better interpretation.
I also utilized PowerBI to create graphs that compare different areas based on the averaged values for each criterion. These visualizations helped to clearly see how each area stacks up against the others.
Overall, the results are within expectations. However, the parking lot area was interesting. Contrary to the assumption that the parking lot would exhibit poorer plant health due to human activity (and vehicles), it turned out that, while species abundance and count was lower, the health of the plants was relatively average (based on this projects criteria). This result suggests that there are factors at play in this environment that needs further investigation like:
- The varying levels of human activity, wherein different areas have different activities happening.
- Soil and Water quality testing.
- Seasonal surveys.