User: | Open Learning Faculty Member:
I made several graphs in an attempt to both learn Excel and to convey multiple analyses of the data. In total I made ten usable graphs and six test graphs as learning exercises. My first two graphs assess the height and abundance of rose bushes in disturbed and undisturbed areas across gradients of light (graph 1) and moisture (graph 2). Both size and abundance appear to correlate with light, which was not surprising, but they also seem to correlate with moisture, which I wasn’t certain about as I suspected moisture and light might have an inverse relationship. My next eight graphs plot the abundance of pioneer or climax species alongside the abundance and size of rose bushes across gradients of light (graphs 3-6) and moisture (graphs 7-10) in disturbed areas (graphs 3, 5, 7, and 9) and undisturbed areas (graphs 4, 6, 8, and 10). In the disturbed area graphs, I was surprised to see that the rose bush height and abundance both tended towards an inverse correlation with abundances of pioneer species as well as climax species. With the undisturbed area graphs, the data suggests a slight correlation between rose bush abundance and both pioneer and climax species abundances, which would also be somewhat surprising, but the data is fairly noisy and I’m not sure how useful it is to read too much into it at this point.
Deciding on a graph format took some thought, along with trial and error, to convey the information in the most efficient and accessible way. For the eight graphs illustrating species relationships, I opted for multiple line graphs so that comparisons could be easily demonstrated. For the two graphs measuring height and abundance of rose bushes in disturbed and undisturbed areas across an environmental gradient, I opted for combination bar and line graphs in order to keep the height and abundance visually distinct but easily comparable. I am satisfied with the result, but I may experiment with other forms of graphs later.
*Update: the first two graphs were incorrect because of how I organised out my data tables in Excel. After correcting the errors, the graphs reveal that rose growth seems to increase with light exposure in disturbed areas and decrease with light exposure in undisturbed areas; the former follows my predictions while the latter deviates from them. Rose growth seems to increase with moisture in disturbed areas, and not much difference is seen in undisturbed areas. Consistent with my predictions, roses were generally found to be more abundant in disturbed areas.
