The Lincoln Index Answers
Sample Calculation of the Lincoln Index: n1= number of individuals initially caught, marked and released (in this case 30) n2= total number of individuals caught in the second sample (in this case 126) n3= number of marked individuals in the second sample (in this case 2)
Therefore the population of seeds in this case was:
Note: All the answers were rounded.
Sample Calculation for finding an Average:
Use the data of the Lincoln Index Answers. Add together all estimates of each trial for each individual column. For example, when using the column with the Lincoln index answers for the six trials of the handful size with 90 marked seeds and the number of marked seeds that were recaptured, all the answers of the trials of the 90 marked …show more content…
Firstly, the average estimation answer for the handful size with 30 marked seeds resulted in 2998, which had a percentage error of 44.5 % to the actual amount of seeds of 5403 which were in the bag. This indicates that a smaller sample size is a less accurate representative of the actual population. Furthermore, the average estimation answer for the handful size with 60 marked seeds resulted in 4672, which had a percentage error of 13.5 % to the actual amount of seeds of 5403 in the bag. This indicates that the handful size with 60 marked seeds is more accurate than the handful size with 30 marked seeds because the percentage difference is clearly lower for the handful size with 60 marked seeds than for the handful size with 30 marked seeds. Additionally, the average estimation answer for the handful size with 90 marked seeds resulted in 7843, which had a percentage difference of 45.2% to the actual amount of seeds of 5403. The average estimation answer of 7276 for the handful size with the 120 marked seeds had a percentage difference of 34.5% to the actual amount of seeds of 5403 in the bag. Lastly, the average estimation answer of 6123 for the handful size with 150 marked seeds had a percentage difference of 13.3 % to the actual amount of seeds of 5403 in the …show more content…
Furthermore, the largest percentage error of 45.2 % occurred with a handful size of 90 marked seeds, which is clearly higher than the percentage error of 44.5% for the handful size of 30 marked seeds and higher than 34.5% for the handful size of 120 marked seeds. Therefore, it can be verified that the largest sample size of a handful with 150 marked seeds resulted in the most accurate representation of the actual population of 5403 with a percentage error of 13.3%, but it has to be mentioned that also a smaller sample size with 60 marked seeds resulted in an accurate representation of the actual population of the seeds with a percentage error of 13.5%. Also, the highest percentage error to the actual population did not occur for the smallest sample size with 30 marked seeds it indeed occurred for the sample size of a handful with 90-marked seeds. Overall, the prediction that the largest sample size will result in the most accurate representation of the actual amount of seeds in the bag is true to some extent, because there was also an average estimation answer of the handful size with 60 marked seeds, which was close to
Therefore the population of seeds in this case was:
Note: All the answers were rounded.
Sample Calculation for finding an Average:
Use the data of the Lincoln Index Answers. Add together all estimates of each trial for each individual column. For example, when using the column with the Lincoln index answers for the six trials of the handful size with 90 marked seeds and the number of marked seeds that were recaptured, all the answers of the trials of the 90 marked …show more content…
Firstly, the average estimation answer for the handful size with 30 marked seeds resulted in 2998, which had a percentage error of 44.5 % to the actual amount of seeds of 5403 which were in the bag. This indicates that a smaller sample size is a less accurate representative of the actual population. Furthermore, the average estimation answer for the handful size with 60 marked seeds resulted in 4672, which had a percentage error of 13.5 % to the actual amount of seeds of 5403 in the bag. This indicates that the handful size with 60 marked seeds is more accurate than the handful size with 30 marked seeds because the percentage difference is clearly lower for the handful size with 60 marked seeds than for the handful size with 30 marked seeds. Additionally, the average estimation answer for the handful size with 90 marked seeds resulted in 7843, which had a percentage difference of 45.2% to the actual amount of seeds of 5403. The average estimation answer of 7276 for the handful size with the 120 marked seeds had a percentage difference of 34.5% to the actual amount of seeds of 5403 in the bag. Lastly, the average estimation answer of 6123 for the handful size with 150 marked seeds had a percentage difference of 13.3 % to the actual amount of seeds of 5403 in the …show more content…
Furthermore, the largest percentage error of 45.2 % occurred with a handful size of 90 marked seeds, which is clearly higher than the percentage error of 44.5% for the handful size of 30 marked seeds and higher than 34.5% for the handful size of 120 marked seeds. Therefore, it can be verified that the largest sample size of a handful with 150 marked seeds resulted in the most accurate representation of the actual population of 5403 with a percentage error of 13.3%, but it has to be mentioned that also a smaller sample size with 60 marked seeds resulted in an accurate representation of the actual population of the seeds with a percentage error of 13.5%. Also, the highest percentage error to the actual population did not occur for the smallest sample size with 30 marked seeds it indeed occurred for the sample size of a handful with 90-marked seeds. Overall, the prediction that the largest sample size will result in the most accurate representation of the actual amount of seeds in the bag is true to some extent, because there was also an average estimation answer of the handful size with 60 marked seeds, which was close to