DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1190643.v1
title: Woodlock Transect_Lab_02_BIOL2050

description: Introduction: There are several ways to measure and identified species in a particular geographical areas. Measuring and identifying grassland quadrats, grassland transects, woodlot transects and woodlot adult and sapling pairs were few of them. By using various methods to find out the population number of each species in a quadrats and in transects at the same geological location and comparing these values later on will justify the experiment even more as they are giving plenty of data to be compared with. In this particular experiment each groups were performed four different methods to collect data such as grassland quadrats, grassland transects, woodlot transects and woodlot adult and sapling pairs. One of the group member was responsible for each set of data. The data presented in this particular report was collected from woodlot transects. Method: A particular woodlot was selected by the TA which was located right beside the grassland in where the other set of data on grasslands were obtained. In the woodlot, tree, paired up with other tree were identified in random manner. Since there weren’t much trees found in transect in the cross section of the woodlot, a pair of trees identified randomly. Trees weren’t selected from the same species or same family. They weren’t even selected for adult or young and big tree and small tree. But very young trees and saplings were avoided. Once a pair was identified, trees were set to have the letter grade randomly. They were in no particular in the letter grade. If one tree was named “A” and then the second one received letter “B” in order to make the data more accessible and explainable. The diameter of the first tree was measured in cm as well as the second tree followed by the first one which was in a linear line to the first one at any sides of the first tree. The second tree could be in the left, right, front or at the back side of the first tree. Only the linear manner pattern was considered nevertheless the sides. They weren’t looked up for a particular distance such as considering an average distance from each set of trees. The distance was measured according to the pair of trees as soon as the pair was identified. The distance was measured in between the trees from the trunk to trunk. They weren’t measured from the beginning of the first tree to the end of the second tree. When considering the diameter, it was measured as the tree facing the chest level. Error: There could be several errors occurred during this experiment. All the measurements were taken by using meter tape. When measuring the diameter of the tree, they were in different lengths from cm to m. As reading these measurements, there were possibilities to measure them wrong as eye level differs. Since the land is not leveled off, not a particular trunk level identified. Diameter was measured by looking at the tree and reading was taken at the largest part of the trunk as the measurement taker assumed it as the larger diameter of the tree. Same in measuring the distance between trees. Distance was measured in between the trees from the trunk to trunk. They weren’t marked for a particular center at the trunk of the tree. It was measured as the measurement taker marked a spot in his/her mind to start from the first tree to the second tree as he/she marked in the second one. Therefore possibilities for error in measurements would’ve occurred if the meter tape wasn’t on a straight line. Conclusion: By collecting the data from lots of individuals would minimize the errors which possibly occurred at this types of experiments.