Post 6: Data Collection

I collected my data from two different transects. One located on Elbow River in Kananaskis, AB, the other from Ing’s Mine- across the highway from Elbow River. The Elbow River transect is located on a steep South-West facing slope with no canopy or other forest cover. The Ing’s Mine site is well shaded with a medium density canopy and underbrush. At each transect five separate kinnikinnick plants were randomly selected. There were four separate branches/trails from each selected plant that were measured for length of branch in inches. The Elbow River was measured in absence of canopy with direct sunlight where as the Ing’s Mine site was measured with presence of canopy with indirect sunlight. One problem that occurred with implementing my sample design was finding Kinnikinnick plants at the Ing’s Mine site that were not encroaching on each other (patchy distribution found under the canopy). A pattern found at the Elbow River transect was that the branch lengths were commonly around 22″ and the Ing’s Mine transect they were commonly around 7.5″. These patterns help show on a very small scale research site that my hypothesis: Forest canopy will negatively affect the growth rate of Kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi) has potential proof.