Is the difference meaningful for conservation practice, and is there statistical evidence for it?
Is the difference large compared to measurement uncertainty?
Is there evidence the two means are genuinely different?
At first sight, the question seems simple: Are these two RH measurements different?
In practice, this can mean two different things.
This is a statistical question. The tool uses Welch's t-test to assess whether the observed difference could plausibly arise from normal variation in the measurements.
This is a practical question. Even if a difference is statistically detectable, it may be small compared with measurement uncertainty and therefore of limited importance for conservation decisions.
A difference can be statistically significant but too small to be practically important. Equally, a potentially important difference may not reach statistical significance if only a small amount of data is available.
For this reason, the tool reports both:
The overall interpretation combines these two perspectives to support conservation decision-making.