How reliable is the monitoring of permanent vegetation plots? A test with multiple observers

Questions: A multiple plot design was developed for permanent vegetation plots. How reliable are the different methods used in this design and which changes can we measure? Location: Alpine meadows (2430 m a.s.l.) in the Swiss Alps. Methods: Four inventories were obtained from 40 m(2) plots: four subplots (0.4 m(2)) with a list of species, two 10m transects with the point method (50 points on each), one subplot (4 m2) with a list of species and visual cover estimates as a percentage and the complete plot (40 m(2)) with a list of species and visual estimates in classes. This design was tested by five to seven experienced botanists in three plots. Results: Whatever the sampling size, only 45-63% of the species were seen by all the observers. However, the majority of the overlooked species had cover < 0.1%. Pairs of observers overlooked 10-20% less species than single observers. The point method was the best method for cover estimate, but it took much longer than visual cover estimates, and 100 points allowed for the monitoring of only a very limited number of species. The visual estimate as a percentage was more precise than classes. Working in pairs did not improve the estimates, but one botanist repeating the survey is more reliable than a succession of different observers. Conclusion: Lists of species are insufficient for monitoring. It is necessary to add cover estimates to allow for subsequent interpretations in spite of the overlooked species. The choice of the method depends on the available resources: the point method is time consuming but gives precise data for a limited number of species, while visual estimates are quick but allow for recording only large changes in cover. Constant pairs of observers improve the reliability of the records.

Evaluation of cumulative PCB exposure estimated by a job exposure matrix versus PCB serum concentrations.

Although polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have been banned in many countries for more than three decades, exposures to PCBs continue to be of concern due to their long half-lives and carcinogenic effects. In National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health studies, we are using semiquantitative plant-specific job exposure matrices (JEMs) to estimate historical PCB exposures for workers (n = 24,865) exposed to PCBs from 1938 to 1978 at three capacitor manufacturing plants. A subcohort of these workers (n = 410) employed in two of these plants had serum PCB concentrations measured at up to four times between 1976 and 1989. Our objectives were to evaluate the strength of association between an individual worker's measured serum PCB levels and the same worker's cumulative exposure estimated through 1977 with the (1) JEM and (2) duration of employment, and to calculate the explained variance the JEM provides for serum PCB levels using (3) simple linear regression. Consistent strong and statistically significant associations were observed between the cumulative exposures estimated with the JEM and serum PCB concentrations for all years. The strength of association between duration of employment and serum PCBs was good for highly chlorinated (Aroclor 1254/HPCB) but not less chlorinated (Aroclor 1242/LPCB) PCBs. In the simple regression models, cumulative occupational exposure estimated using the JEMs explained 14-24% of the variance of the Aroclor 1242/LPCB and 22-39% for Aroclor 1254/HPCB serum concentrations. We regard the cumulative exposure estimated with the JEM as a better estimate of PCB body burdens than serum concentrations quantified as Aroclor 1242/LPCB and Aroclor 1254/HPCB.