Assessing five field sampling methods to monitor Yellowstone National Park's northern ungulate winter range: the advantages and disadvantages of implementing a new sampling protocol

Abstract

The five field sampling methods tested for this study differed in richness and Simpson's Index values calculated from the raw data. How much the methods differed, and which ones were most similar to each other, depended on which diversity measure and which type of data were used for comparisons. When the number of species (richness) was used as a measure of similarity, the historic method captured significantly fewer species than the Daubenmire, modified-Whittaker, or Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) methods but similar numbers as the small-scale nested circular plot. When Simpson's Index was used to compare similarities, only the large-scale modified Whittaker method showed significantly greater values than the small-scale nested circles; no differences were observed among the other methods. If frequency data instead of cover data were used to compare similarities among methods, the historical method had significantly higher evenness, skewness, and kurtosis on average than all other methods. If a correspondence measure based on diversity was used, the historic method was most similar to the Daubenmire protocol.

Citation

Sikkink, Pamela G.; Renkin, Roy; Sikkink, Art. 2013. Assessing five field sampling methods to monitor Yellowstone National Park's northern ungulate winter range: the advantages and disadvantages of implementing a new sampling protocol. Final Report: Assessing Sampling Methods YNP 2013. 41 p.