AI-GEOSTATS Dear list, I've little problem concerning the use of spatial information when it comes to averaging data.
I've measured 13 datapoints (a vegetation parameter) in a regular grid as shown in the bottom part of this figure: http://users.pandora.be/requested/images/site.jpg There is no spatial relation what so ever between them (tested for it, in every possible way). So, just averaging this data wouldn't be wrong. Now comes into play extra data collected in the field that complicates it all. I also have real coverage for the data as shown in this picture: http://users.pandora.be/requested/images/vegetation-cover.jpg (black is vegetation covered ground) Is there a way to merge the measured data with the coverage data in a correct way? What I've done sofar is that I've taken all the measurements (38x 13 datapoints) and made an average (best fit for this population/group of data) and used this average and the percentage cover within every 20x20m box -as depicted in the second figure- to get a better estimate then I would get by just averaging the measured data within every 20x20m box. Is it wrong to do and if so, is there a way to incorporate the extra information (being the coverage) to make my local 20x20m averages more accurate? Best regards, Koen -- Koen Hufkens, Phds Department of Biology Research Group of Plant and Vegetation Ecology (PLECO) University of Antwerp Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610 Wilrijk, Belgium [EMAIL PROTECTED] + To post a message to the list, send it to [email protected] + To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@ jrc.it with no subject and "unsubscribe ai-geostats" in the message body. DO NOT SEND Subscribe/Unsubscribe requests to the list + As a general service to list users, please remember to post a summary of any useful responses to your questions. + Support to the forum can be found at http://www.ai-geostats.org/
