Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:35:30.036Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Population studies with wheat: I. Sampling

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. G. Hudson
H. G. Hudson
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The design and field technique of two large scale experiments, laid down to investigate the problems of sampling and “propinquity”, are described in detail. These experiments were designed so that the plant number, stem number, ear number, straw weight and grain weight for 7200 lengths of 6 in. of drill row, together with the position of each observation, might be obtained.

The lowest sampling error, expressed as a percentage of the mean, is obtained by using the smallest sampling unit, but the large number of sampling units of this size that would have to be taken make it impracticable. The optimum sampling unit consists of 6 ft. of drill row, taken as 3 ft. of two adjacent rows. The size of the sampling unit is of greater importance than the shape in determining its accuracy, and little s lost by using sampling units of 18 in. of five adjacent rows.

The nature of the observation affects the degree of sampling. In the experiments examined the plant number, stem number and ear number require very similar sampling, but grain weight requires a sample which is about twice as large as that required by the other observations.

The percentage of the plot that must be taken as a sample (the sampling percentage) to obtain any given accuracy is related to the size of plot: the larger the plot, the lower the sampling percentage necessary. To obtain an error of 5% of the mean the sampling percentage for grain weight is approximately 5% in 1/20 acre plots, 15% in 1/100 acre plots and 43% in 1/600 acre plots if the plots are not subdivided. These percentages are similar to those calculated from various randomized block experiments in Cambridge.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 1939 , pp. 76 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1939

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Christides, B. G. (1931). J. agric. Sci. 21, 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clapham, A. R. (1929). J. agric. Sci. 19, 214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clapham, A. R. (1931). J. agric. Sci. 21, 376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochran, W. G. (1938). J.R. Statist. Soc. Suppl. 5.Google Scholar
Comrie, L. J. (1937). J.R. Statist. Soc. 4, 210.Google Scholar
Engledow, F. L. & Ramiah, K. (1930). J. agric. Sci. 20, 261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairfield-Smith, H. (1937). Bull. Coun. sci. industr. Res. Aust. 109.Google Scholar
Kalamkar, R. J. (1932). J. agric. Sci. 22, 783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercer, W. B. & Hall, A. D. (1912). J. agric. Sci. 4, 105.Google Scholar
Wishart, J. & Sanders, H. G. (1935). Principles and Practice of Field Experimentation. London: Empire Cotton Growing Corporation.Google Scholar
Yates, F. & Zacopanay, I. (1935). J. agric. Sci. 25, 545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar