IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i11p1194-d672901.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of the Effect of Six Methods of Analysis and Different Sample Sizes for Biomass Estimation in Grasslands of the State of Puebla, Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Efraín Velasco-Bautista

    (Sustainable Forest Management, National Institute of Forestry, Agriculture and Livestock Research, Mexico City 04010, Mexico)

  • Martin Enrique Romero-Sanchez

    (Sustainable Forest Management, National Institute of Forestry, Agriculture and Livestock Research, Mexico City 04010, Mexico)

  • David Meza-Juárez

    (Senior Environmental Consultant, Private Business, Texcoco 56226, Mexico)

  • Ramiro Pérez-Miranda

    (Sustainable Forest Management, National Institute of Forestry, Agriculture and Livestock Research, Mexico City 04010, Mexico)

Abstract

In the assessment of natural resources, such as forests or grasslands, it is common to apply a two-stage cluster sampling design, the application of which in the field determines the following situations: (a) difficulty in locating secondary sampling units (SSUs) precisely as planned, so that a random pattern of SSUs can be identified; and (b) the possibility that some primary sampling units (PSUs) have fewer SSUs than planned, leading to PSUs of different sizes. In addition, when considering the estimated variance of the various potential estimators for two-stage cluster sampling, the part corresponding to the variation between SSUs tends to be small for large populations, so the estimator’s variance may depend only on the divergence between PSUs. Research on these aspects is incipient in grassland assessment, so this study generated an artificial population of 759 PSUs and examined the effect of six estimation methods, using 15 PSU sample sizes, on unbiased and relative sampling errors when estimating aboveground, belowground, and total biomass of halophytic grassland. The results indicated that methods 1, 2, 4, and 5 achieved unbiased biomass estimates regardless of sample size, while methods 3 and 6 led to slightly biased estimates. Methods 4 and 5 had relative sampling errors of less than 5% with a sample size of 140 when estimating total biomass.

Suggested Citation

  • Efraín Velasco-Bautista & Martin Enrique Romero-Sanchez & David Meza-Juárez & Ramiro Pérez-Miranda, 2021. "Assessment of the Effect of Six Methods of Analysis and Different Sample Sizes for Biomass Estimation in Grasslands of the State of Puebla, Mexico," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:11:p:1194-:d:672901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/11/1194/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/11/1194/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:11:p:1194-:d:672901. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.