Category: Post 9: Field Research Reflections

This was a completely new process for me. Developing and implementing my experiment came with many challenges. I was often second guessing myself and certain stages of the experimental design took much longer then anticipated. I also realized that at a certain stage there is no turning back even if you are not pleased with everything. A lot of time goes into a good field project. I ended up doubling the amount of samples I collected because I realized that I did not initially have enough to minimize bias.

I have gained an appreciation for the amount of effort, time, and hard work that goes into a successful research project. This came as somewhat of a surprise to me, considering the simplicity of my project in comparison to other research work. I was reminded that ecological theory takes time to develop and it is only as good as the relevant work from other ecologists. This point highlights the need for quality and quantity of literature in order to speak of any given topic with a reasonable level of certainty.

Some of the challenges that I experienced during the research project was that the amount of different species that was being collected was too many to accurately tabulate my findings. I had to modify my hypothesis to only focus several specific species of vegetations to avoid getting lost in the data.
One thing that I struggled with and still do but not as much was with identifying plants and vegetation. I found it difficult trying to figure out what plant species I was looking at or looking for.
Another challenge was that the soil samples were collected in one day and therefore will only reflect the soil moisture on that given and will not represent an average moisture content for a season or month.
A speed bump that happened for me was that some of my data was collected over time as I tried to space it out but in October in Calgary we experienced a fair amount of snow which covered the ground for about 2 weeks in Fish Creek. So this snow coverage prevented me from gathering some of my data until a little later than expected. It also killed and wilted some vegetation we made species a little more difficult to identify and tabulate as some species were now laying dead on the ground instead of upright.
I think if I was enrolled in this class in spring and had collected my data during April or May, I would have seen a more distinct response of vegetation to the flooding being experienced as it would have been more common with the consistent melting of snow.

Initially, I had a lot of issues with carrying out my project. I entered this course with a fairly basic knowledge of ecological theory. However, having made it through the course material and reviewing the literature necessary for my final project, I now feel like I (finally) understand the data that I was collecting. As time went on: the course equipped me with the knowledge to relate my observations to an increasing amount of theory. This did not result in me changing my sample design (aside from my initial changes from haphazard to randomly placed quadrats to transects – more information is available on this switch in Blog Post 6); however, it did result in me changing how I viewed my data.

Having noticed that forb species tended to change drastically over a small area, I originally set out to just characterize the forb species that reside along a riparian slope (and was completely ignorant of the patterns or processes that I should have expected to see). Following this, reflection on the underlying mechanisms led me to think that soil moisture would be the single largest factor contributing to forb distribution. I was (partially) correct in that assessment, but had an incomplete picture. As I began to dive deeper into the literature and the course work, the Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis kept coming up. I then related what I had learned concerning this to my study area. It allowed me postulate that I would likely see a “hump-shaped” relationship of richness and diversity along the elevational gradient of my study. The reason for this was because I expected that the inundation of the river caused disturbance; therefore, the region of maximum disturbance would be at the lowest elevations of my study area, the areas of least disturbance would be at the highest elevations of my study area and the highest richness and diversity would occur somewhere in the middle. However, yet again, I was (partially) correct. Examination of my data revealed a biphasic pattern of richness and diversity (in which there were two peaks). I now understand that this is because disturbance was being exerted on both ends of my study area: river inundation at the lowest reaches, and anthropogenic at the highest reaches. Therefore, the area of lowest disturbance resided in the center of my study area, and areas of maximal disturbance resided at both margins.

As the result of journeying through the development, implementation and analysis of my project: I now have a great appreciation for ecological theory and just how complicated it can be to develop and study. At first glance, my project seemed simple: just go out and count the forbs. However, the amount of variables that were responsible for the patterns that I was seeing are overwhelming. I feel that I have managed to capture a few of the most important ones related to forb distribution along an elevational gradient in a riparian zone; however, I now know that I have only scratched the surface.

I concluded that participating in the field research helps gain deep knowledge of the terrestrial diversity and roles offered by the insects. Many insects that I viewed in the field were easily identified using simple identification keys. I also learned that entomologists always investigate insects’ functional traits to solve problems such as deforestation and climate change that are facing the world today.  The interactions between the plants and the insects are important to understand since they form the basis for increasing local environmental awareness and conservation.

Reflecting on the process of designing a field experiment and then carrying it out, I can say that it was very beneficial to my learning process. It wasn’t without some challenges though. I struggled to narrow down a pattern to observe and as a result chose an organism (fungi) that lead to a rather large experimental design. I needed to sample trees and this increased my study area vastly. I ran into some issues grasping sampling methods and procedures and I realized quite quickly, that the energy you put into planning while in the ‘office’ can make for an easy and seamless field visit. I had to return to the field as I had not pre-planned accordingly. I also realized that bias was throughout my study as it depends on the competence of the researcher (me) and my ability to comprehend sampling strategies and also species identification.

I found certain aspects of this process challenging, but I also learned what I could do better in the future. I found it really important to understand the way in which you preferentially learn. I really enjoy learning from another person in the field, rather than a document online. I believe that face-to-face teaching in the field for tree sampling would simplify the technical jargon I felt I was wading through in online procedures and literature. I did also appreciate that an online classroom took me outside, which is not common.

This process allowed me a much deeper and better understanding of the development of ecological theory. It’s one thing to ponder about the natural world, it is a completely different thing to engage in applied science to answer that question. My limited grasp of this, makes me believe that those who possess strong qualities for ecological theory, not only understand large concepts but can narrow down their thinking to minuscule interactions while being analytical thinkers and possessing much creativity.