Skip to main content
Log in

Studies in sampling technique

I. Estimation of whitefly (Aleurolobus Barodensis) incidence in sugarcane

  • Published:
Proceedings / Indian Academy of Sciences

Summary of Conclusions

  1. (i)

    The incidence of white-fly is highly variable and the maximum variation occurs in leaves. The variations between the clumps and the canes if and when they exist are of a much lesser magnitude. Therefore, increase in the number of leaves alone in a sample is pre-eminently effective in the reduction of error of an estimate.

  2. (ii)

    In a field where the infestation is either high or fairly high (puparia per square inch of the affected area more than 5.00), Nested sampling has to be adopted so as to ensure the equitable representation of clumps, canes and leaves in a sample. In such a field, 10–13 per cent, of the 3 ft. units should first be selected and then Nested sampling done in each unit in that particular form of the alternatives, which gives the larger number of leaves in the sample, namely 2 clumps × 2 canes × 5 leaves per unit or 20 affected leaves equitably representing the clumps and canes in a unit as far as possible or 18–20 per cent, of affected leaves (i.e., about one in every five) equitably representing the clumps and canes in a unit.

  3. (iii)

    In a plot of low or mild infestation, Nested sampling is not essential. Only the leaves as a whole may be subjected to random selection, other requirements being the same as mentioned under number (ii) above.

  4. (iv)

    For a required error percentage, a medium infested field (puparia, 2.00–5.51 per square inch) requires a smaller sample size than that needed in a plot of high infestation or of an infestation which is fairly high. A difference in the sample size in the number of leaves by even about 75% gave the same efficiency. This suggested inherent homogeneity in variation occurring in mild form of infestation.

  5. (v)

    If in each leaf, 10 random inch units (about 25% of the total inch units) be taken instead of enumerating the whole leaf, the estimate of the incidence will be fairly reliable with a very slight additional error; but for practical consideration and working convenience, the complete enumeration of a leaf may be preferred to counting puparia in 10 random inch-units.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cochran, W. G. “Some difficulties in the statistical analysis of replicated experiments,”Emp. Jour. Exp. Agri., 1938,6, 157–75.

    Google Scholar 

  2. — “The use of the analysis of variance in enumeration by sampling,”J. Amer. Statist. Assn., 1939,34, 492–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Khanna, K. L.Bull 6,Department of Agric., Bihar, 1935, 17.

  4. Roy, S. N., and Banerjee, K. S. “On Hierarchical sampling, Hierarchical variances and their connection with other aspects of statistical theory,”—Science and Culture, 1940,6, 189.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Yates, F., and Zacopanay; I. “The estimation of the efficiency of sampling with special reference to sampling for yield in cereal experiments,”J. Agric. Sci., 1935,25, 545–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Khanna, K.L., Nigam, L.N., Sehgal, B.R. et al. Studies in sampling technique. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. 28, 107–130 (1948). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03049953

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03049953

Keywords

Navigation