My recent data collection went relatively well however there were a few learning lessons to be had from this experience. My sampling sites will be low-elevation, mid-elevation and high elevation. First off, I originally was only going to do 5 quadrats on the transect line however once I was at the site sampling, I felt that 5 quadrats on the transect line was not a sufficient amount of sampling points to be representative of the area. I immediately switched it up and expanded to 10 quadrats per transect line and will continue to do this at my other sites. I also found it more difficult than anticipated to keep my transect line straight. I do believe that I need to pre-mark my transect lines with flagging tape before starting to keep it straight, as I was visually just trying to keep my transect straight. Having the transect line pre-marked should avoid the potential bias of going off-course of the transect line towards an area that seems to be more rich in plants. Additionally, I think I might settle on 3 transect lines for each area along my gradient to ensure that my data is representative of the entire area. The transects will run parallel to the creek so that I can keep them straight. The data that I collected was not really surprising and aligned with my initial observations. I think that my method will prove to be good if I increase my sample sizes as described. Additionally, the hill top way higher up from the creek than I previously anticipated. Instead of considering the high-elevation point as being the highest portion of the hill, I am going to pre-measure the mid and high-elevation points as being X meters away from the creek which is the lowest point of the hill.
Overall, I do think my sampling went well and that if I increase the sample size, my data will be more representative of each area on the gradient. I plan to continue my initial approach with the few modifications that I’ve mentioned.