Efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in Hainan of China

Based on two species of Coastal Mangrove in Hainan of China, Sonneratia Apetala Buch-Ham and Sonneratia caseoli, we estimated the density of the two species to evaluate the efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling (ACS), simple random sampling (SRS) and traditional systematic sampling (SYS). Our init...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Y. Lei, J. Shi, T. Zhao
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences 2012-09-01
Series:Journal of Forest Science
Subjects:
Online Access:https://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/artkey/jfs-201209-0001_efficiency-of-adaptive-cluster-sampling-and-traditional-sampling-for-coastal-mangrove-in-hainan-of-china.php
_version_ 1797898798361477120
author Y. Lei
J. Shi
T. Zhao
author_facet Y. Lei
J. Shi
T. Zhao
author_sort Y. Lei
collection DOAJ
description Based on two species of Coastal Mangrove in Hainan of China, Sonneratia Apetala Buch-Ham and Sonneratia caseoli, we estimated the density of the two species to evaluate the efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling (ACS), simple random sampling (SRS) and traditional systematic sampling (SYS). Our initial experimental designs for ACS consisted of 5 unit areas, 6 initial sampling proportions, 4 initial sample sizes and 5 criterion values in 1,000 repetitions. From the aspect of factors influencing efficiency, we analysed the efficiency of ACS in various designs. We also compared the efficiencies of the three methods on the indexes of the relative error, the variance of density estimator and the relative sampling efficiencies. We found that ACS yielded smaller variance than the traditional sampling methods. ACS was a powerful sampling method when a population was spatially aggregated. We also determined the optimum unit area for the two species studied using the two estimators (HT and HH) of adaptive cluster sampling. They were 20 m2 (2 × 10 m), 15 m2 (3 × 5 m) for S. Apetala Buch-Ham and 25 m2 (5 × 5 m), 15 m2 (3 × 5 m) for S. caseolari, respectively.
first_indexed 2024-04-10T08:19:52Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b978e85e5be44a92b139f508144f2ffc
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1212-4834
1805-935X
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-10T08:19:52Z
publishDate 2012-09-01
publisher Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences
record_format Article
series Journal of Forest Science
spelling doaj.art-b978e85e5be44a92b139f508144f2ffc2023-02-23T03:42:21ZengCzech Academy of Agricultural SciencesJournal of Forest Science1212-48341805-935X2012-09-0158938139010.17221/80/2011-JFSjfs-201209-0001Efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in Hainan of ChinaY. Lei0J. Shi1T. Zhao2Research Institute of Resource Information and Techniques, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing, ChinaAcademy of Forest Inventory and Planning, State Forestry Administration, Beijing, ChinaSchool of Information Science and Technology, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, ChinaBased on two species of Coastal Mangrove in Hainan of China, Sonneratia Apetala Buch-Ham and Sonneratia caseoli, we estimated the density of the two species to evaluate the efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling (ACS), simple random sampling (SRS) and traditional systematic sampling (SYS). Our initial experimental designs for ACS consisted of 5 unit areas, 6 initial sampling proportions, 4 initial sample sizes and 5 criterion values in 1,000 repetitions. From the aspect of factors influencing efficiency, we analysed the efficiency of ACS in various designs. We also compared the efficiencies of the three methods on the indexes of the relative error, the variance of density estimator and the relative sampling efficiencies. We found that ACS yielded smaller variance than the traditional sampling methods. ACS was a powerful sampling method when a population was spatially aggregated. We also determined the optimum unit area for the two species studied using the two estimators (HT and HH) of adaptive cluster sampling. They were 20 m2 (2 × 10 m), 15 m2 (3 × 5 m) for S. Apetala Buch-Ham and 25 m2 (5 × 5 m), 15 m2 (3 × 5 m) for S. caseolari, respectively.https://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/artkey/jfs-201209-0001_efficiency-of-adaptive-cluster-sampling-and-traditional-sampling-for-coastal-mangrove-in-hainan-of-china.phpadaptive cluster samplinghorvitz-thompson estimatorhansen-hurwitz estimatorsimple random samplingsystematic sampling
spellingShingle Y. Lei
J. Shi
T. Zhao
Efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in Hainan of China
Journal of Forest Science
adaptive cluster sampling
horvitz-thompson estimator
hansen-hurwitz estimator
simple random sampling
systematic sampling
title Efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in Hainan of China
title_full Efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in Hainan of China
title_fullStr Efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in Hainan of China
title_full_unstemmed Efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in Hainan of China
title_short Efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in Hainan of China
title_sort efficiency of adaptive cluster sampling and traditional sampling for coastal mangrove in hainan of china
topic adaptive cluster sampling
horvitz-thompson estimator
hansen-hurwitz estimator
simple random sampling
systematic sampling
url https://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/artkey/jfs-201209-0001_efficiency-of-adaptive-cluster-sampling-and-traditional-sampling-for-coastal-mangrove-in-hainan-of-china.php
work_keys_str_mv AT ylei efficiencyofadaptiveclustersamplingandtraditionalsamplingforcoastalmangroveinhainanofchina
AT jshi efficiencyofadaptiveclustersamplingandtraditionalsamplingforcoastalmangroveinhainanofchina
AT tzhao efficiencyofadaptiveclustersamplingandtraditionalsamplingforcoastalmangroveinhainanofchina