Precision and relative efficiency of sampling methods in teak
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4336/2015.pfb.35.83.638Keywords:
Forest inventory, Forest plantations, Tectona grandisAbstract
This study aimed to compare three sampling methods: fixed area, Bitterlich, and Prodan, regarding accuracy and relative efficiency to estimate the variables: diameter at 1.30 m above soil level (DBH), number of trees, basal area, and volume. The limit of error established was 10% at probability level of 95%, using 30 plots for each method. Circumference at 1.30 m above soil level was measured, for conversion in DBH, with total time counted since the plots installation until the last tree measured. The most accurate sampling was the fixed area method, for estimation of DBH and number of trees per hectare, whereas the Bitterlich method was the most accurate for estimation of basal area and volume. Bitterlich method proved to be more efficient for estimation of all variables. It can be concluded that the accuracy is not directly associated with relative efficiency, and that less usual sampling.Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
PFB reserves the right to edit manuscripts to correct grammar/spelling, improve clarity, and comply with the journal’s standards while maintaining the style of the authors.
The final version will be sent to the corresponding author for approval.
Published articles become the property of PFB.
Manuscripts may be used after publication without prior authorization from PFB, as long as the journal is credited.
Warning: figures published in PFB may only be reused with prior authorization from Embrapa Forestry.
All content in PFB is licensed under Creative Commons attribution (type BY-NC-ND).
The opinions and concepts expressed in manuscripts are the sole responsibility of their respective authors and not PFB.


