Respected Oudhia Sir
Thanks a lot for the response.
Coming to your queries.
The study area was whole of Jharkhand  We used Stratified Random
Sampling. Stratification was done on the basis of presence of more
than 10 orchids in the region and the habitat, i.e., sampling was done
exclusively in those areas where we had more than 9 orchids.

1. In the present article I didnt talk about the vegetation
composition of each of the 5 habitats.
2. When you do random sampling you are likely to miss species of
orchids as well as host trees, as you can see out of 11  had only 7
species in the plots.
3. Pterocarpus marsupium was undoubtedly there, but I never found
orchid in it, and I never found so much of it in the plot, i.e., it
was not as dominant as other tree species to classify a habitat on its
basis. Infact acording to my findings, orchids were present in the
areas were sal is (w.r.t.) more than 9 orchids. How did I chose.9
orchids? I made some preliminary survey and found the most common ones
which were around 9 in numbers.
4. On Terminalia chebula I did find some orchids, but no Dendrobiums
and this tree was also not as dominant as the other counterparts in a
habitat. Some Vanda tessellata, V. testaceae, Aerides multiflora, if I
remember correctly I found on this.
4. Yes, I never found an epiphytic orchid in Shorea - terminala alata
forests. This doesnt mean, that I didnt find epiphytic orchids on
Shorea or T. alata (I did find them) but not in an area where these
trees formed the major vegetation, in my area, may be because they
were too dense.
5. When you do random sampling, you have to maintain the ramdomness
otherwise you cant calculate the densities and abundance accurately.
6. To prove that, I used species area curve to check if my sampling
effort was adequate, and frankly speaking in all the habitats yes the
curve saturated much before my last plot.

I really appreciate posting your queries.
Regards
Pankaj

Reply via email to