the coefficient of variation for the l-cm samples is the same as that for the 5-cm samples at Site II. The alternate hypothesis is that the coefficient of variation for the l-cm samples is not the same as that for the 5-cm samples. The t~ statistic for comparing the two coefficients of variation is 6.21 with four degrees of freedom. The critical value at the 95 percent confidence level is 3,18. Therefore, the ruling hypothesis is rejected and the alternate hypothesis is accepted. Site III The sampling coefficient of variation for the l-cm sampling was 0.390 as compared to 0.29 for the 5~cm samples. The ruling hypothesis is that the coefficient of variation for the l-cm samples is the same as that for the 5-cm samples at Site III. The alternate hypothesis is that the coefficient of variation for the 1-cm samples is not the same as that for the 5-cm samples. The t* statistic for comparing the two coefficients of variation is 2.33 with four degrees of freedom. The critical value at the 95 percent confidence level is 3.18. Therefore, the ruling hypothesis is not rejected. Site IV The sampling coefficient of variation for the l-cm sampling was quite large, at 0.428 compared to the small value of 0.191 for 5-cm sampling. Again, the ruling hypothesis is that the coefficient of variation for the 1-cm sampling is the same as that for the 5-cm samples. The t” Statistic for comparing the two coefficients of variation is 6.71 which is larger than the critical value at the 95 percent confidence level of 3.18. Therefore, the ruling hypothesis is rejected and the alternate hypothesis that the coefficients are not equal is accepted. SUMMARY Assessment of the coefficients of variation of sampling depths, treating each plot independently, and using t~ seems to indicate significance in some sites, not in others. Considering the clouded validity of using t*, an alternate method of assessment of the coefficients of variation was considered. For paired samples (in this case, the paired coefficients of variation for each site), the Wilcoxon signed rank test (Gibbons, 1976; pp. 131-137) can be helpful in defining a possible level of significance to the count of the direction of differences in paired data. In this case, the probability that only one data pair out of four pairs indicates a differ- ence in a direction opposite of the other three (i.e., Cs > C, (Site II) as opposite C, > Cs (Sites I, III, and IV)) is 0.25. Even if all pairs had been in the same direction (i.e., C; > C5 in all cases), the 678