Category: Nancy Elliot

Blog Post 7: Theoretical Perspectives

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

My research project focuses on dabbling duck habitat selection within Colony Farm Regional Park. I predicted that dabbling ducks (specifically mallard and wood duck) found within the constructed drainage channels that border the existing dyke network would select channels with increased emergent vegetation cover. I tested this hypothesis by assessing waterfowl abundance within drainage channels that contained varying amounts of emergent vegetation cover.

My research primarily focuses on waterfowl habitat selection and whether emergent vegetation cover within aquatic habitats affects habitat selection by waterfowl. Relevant literature indicates that emergent vegetation cover provides several benefits to dabbling ducks, including habitat complexity and reduced predation risk. These aspects will also be discussed as part of my research project. Three keywords that I could use to describe my research project are emergent vegetation, habitat selection and dabbling ducks.

Blog Post 6: Data Collection

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

I used the point count method to assess the abundance of waterfowl (dabbling ducks) within selected drainage channels within Colony Farm Regional Park. Eight point count locations were chosen along the existing dike network in the park based on channel visibility and varying cover of emergent vegetation (yellow pond lily, Nuphar sp.). Each point count was considered one replicate (sample unit). Selected locations (8) were visited on 6 separate occasions (sampling events), with 48 total replicates sampled. Percent cover of yellow pond-lily was visually estimated within each channel section, to a maximum distance of 80 metres. Channel sections were strategically selected on the basis that they varied in percent cover of yellow pond-lily (from 0% to approximately 75% cover) to provide a representative sample. Drainage channels chosen were fairly uniform in terms of their topography, hydrology, surrounding vegetation, and overall width.

I spent five minutes at each point count location observing dabbling duck species, specifically mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and wood duck (Aix sponsa), within the selected channel sections.  Total number, species, and approximate life stage of observed waterfowl within the channels were recorded. Other information I recorded included the start and end time of each point count, weather conditions, date, start and end time of each sampling event, and other notes including the presence of other wildlife and/or predators in the area. All point counts were collected between the hours of 1800 – 2000 hours (prior to sunset at 2030 hours), as this was the time of day that waterfowl within the park were observed to be the most active. Randomization was incorporated into the study by using a random number generator (between numbers 1 to 8) to decide the order in which point count locations were visited during each sampling event.

One problem that I encountered while carrying out my sampling design was the low number of dabbling ducks observed within the channels for the duration of the data collection. To combat this, I visited the site more frequently (i.e. sampled more replicates) to ensure that I would have adequate data to analyze later on.  If I were to collect data in the future, I may choose to do so in the fall months when waterfowl occur in greater numbers. A second issue that arose had to do with the site conditions. Connectivity between channel sections led me to realize that not all replicates would be independent of one another. After reviewing relevant literature related to point count methodology, point count locations are suggested to be located greater than or equal to 250 metres apart. Based on the limitations of the study area, and in order to reduce variables between selected drainage channel sections, spacing of the point count locations at this minimum distance was simply not possible. Despite this, the layout of the study area allowed for ample visibility, which prevented double counting of birds and reduced bias among point count locations.

Initial summation of the total number of waterfowl within each channel has lead me to believe that my hypothesis may be rejected. The numbers did not indicate a strong preference of heavily vegetated channels by waterfowl, versus those channels with sparse emergent vegetation cover. This will be subject to further analysis.

Post 3: Ongoing Field Observations

TRU Open Learning 1 Comment

For the ongoing field observations, I intend to document the creosote bushes of the Sonoran scrublands. The creosote bushes are one of the most frequent scrubland vegetations in this community.

I picked three 10m x 10m plots, 50m, 20m and 5 meters from a man-made oasis in Papago Park.

Area 3 (50m from water source):

Creosote plants are about about 1.5m evenly spaced from each other. The plants have grown to a height of about 2.2m tall on average. There are 46 individual plants in the plot with a wide band of separation around the outside of the plot where no plants are found. Each creosote plant is a pale green in colour with moderate foliage.

Area 2 (20m from water source):

The Creosote plants are about 1.1m evenly spaced from each other. The plants have grown to a height of about 2.4m tall on average. There are 61 individual plants in the plot with no band of separation around the outside of the plot. Each creosote plant is a pale green in colour with moderate foliage.

Area 1 (5m from water source):

The creosote plants are about 0.6m but unevenly spaced from each other. The plants have grown to a height of about 2.6m tall on average. There are 12 individual plants in the plot with wide bands of separation around each grouping of individuals. Each creosote plant is dark green in colour with heavy foliage.

My hypothesis is that creosote plants compete heavily with each other for soil moisture. I predict that creosote plants are adept at monopolizing soil moisture in a given area around themselves but either do not compete well with other plants at high soil moistures or prefer the rocky soil with better drainage farther from the water source.

A response variable: Creosote productivity (amount of mass per plot)

An explanatory variable: Soil moisture

Both variables would be continuous as they are prone to measurement and change.

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The article Ecology and population genetics of Sonoran Desert
Drosophila was published in the journal Molecular Ecology is a peer-reviewed academic research article.

The authors are professional researchers from the University of Arizona in the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology department.  The authors include their methods and results of their study in a satisfactory manner and expand on the cited knowledge when necessary. They provide dates of submission and extensive references and citations. All of their donations and contributors are acknowledged and made public in the acknowledgements section of their paper.

Citation:

Pfeiler, E., Markow, T. A. (2001). Ecology and population genetics of Sonoran Desert Drosophila. Molecular Ecology. 10, 1787 – 1791. Retrieved from http://labs.biology.ucsd.edu/markow/articles/EcologyandPopulationGenetics.pdf

Post 1: Observations

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The area I have decided to to observe is the Sonoran desert scrublands around Scottsdale in Arizona, USA. The area is quite large comprising about a quarter of the state (~74 000sqkm) although I will be observing a conservative amount of the area at around a square kilometer. The topography is flat, sandy scrubland with occasional stand-alone mountains jutting out of the ground. The vegetation is comprised of mostly succulents and small, shrub like trees. The density of this plant life is quite sparse, with large amounts of dust and sand between any two individual plants forms.

As I am visiting the area in winter, the weather and temperature are quite temperate. The day of observation saw partially cloudy skies and a max temperature of 17 degrees celcius. I spent the largest amount of time observing Papago Park at about noon to 3pm.

I am most interested in seeing whether vegetation cover improves closer to the man-made waterways that go through the park, whether the mountains themselves affect vegetation (by providing shade or alternative rocky substrate) and whether or not the mountain caves provide shelter for different kinds of vegetation or animal life relative to the open Sonoran scrublands.

Elevated view of the open scrublands.
The type of mountains that appear in the scrublands.
Man-made waterways that supply water to the region.

On going field observations

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The last few weeks I have made repeated trips to my study area. This time of the year most trees, shrubs and grass vegetation is dormant with all the snow coverage in the park. One of the few organisms that stays around during the winter months is the black capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus). They are very abundant in the area I am studying and based on initial observations I inquired to myself where these birds like to spend most of their time in the winter months. The city park I chose has noticeable environmental variances: A large grass fielded area when not covered in snow, grouped coniferous trees, and a denser mixed vegetative with coniferous trees and deciduous trees and small shrubs. (Please see attached photos below.) My hypothesis is that Poecile atricapillusspecies spend more time in realtivly dense vegetation environments to protect them from the elements and from larger birds that prey on them. My response variable would be the Poecile atricapillus.This would be a continuous variable. The predictor variable would be the vegetation environment type and this would be continuous as well. The experiment design would be regression. This experiment could provide valuable feed back to  city planners when developing parks as to what kinds of vegetation lay out is beneficial to these small non migratory birds that live in the urban environment.

 

 

 

Blog Post 4 – Virtual Forest

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

According to the sampling strategies I conducted in the virtual forest tutorial the systematic sampling technique had the fastest estimated sampling time at 12 hours and 36 minutes and Haphazard had the slowest estimated sampling time at 13 hours and 2 minutes. All 3 strategies used the area based methods.

Species  Systematic  Random  Haphazard 
Eastern Hemlock  1  14  25% 
Sweet Birch  31  3  56% 
Striped Maple  37  100  242% 
White Pine  42  100  42% 

As species abundance increase sampling accuracy increased or in other words the percentage error is lower.

Based on the results I obtained during the haphazard sampling indicated that one of the rare species percentage of error was 242 percent. The results from the virtual forest had estimated 60 striped maple and the actual was only 17.5. It appears to me that the systematic sampling method produced more accurate estimates than the other two methods.

Blog Post 9: Field Research Reflections

TRU Open Learning 1 Comment

Throughout this research project I found things I did and didn’t like about my experiment. This forced me to have to act as a real researcher and alter my strategies so I would get good and reliable data. For my final project, I wanted to determine whether or not the amount of shelter provided had any correlation to the amount of birds within that area. More specifically, I had predicted that I would find the greatest number of birds using an area that had the most shelter compared to areas with little shelter or areas with intermediate amounts of shelter. Initially this was not exactly what I had thought about hypothesizing, but the longer I carried on with my project the more I realized how important detail was and that a more specific hypothesis and prediction would give me better focused results. Once I focused on the certain variables I felt were important to me, my research was conducted better and I believe there was less room for uncertainty and error.

Since I was working with mobile organisms, I decided that the point count station was the best sampling strategy to use. Every day I went and visited a different station. I had chosen 5 different point count stations. This way I was able to keep it consistent. I did try and go at approximately the same time every day so that the temperature would be roughly the same and I did go only in the morning, since bird activity is usually higher early on in the day. I only record the amount of times I saw a bird using the area. This did not take into account bird calls or any birds that flew by. Only the birds that were actually using the area. I would watch the birds within the space for a total of 10 minutes and then observe the data I had collected. Some of the areas were not urbanized, slightly urbanized and completely urbanized. Some areas had lots of tress and some areas had no trees. The level of development between point count stations varied; all varying in the amount of shelter provided for the birds as well.

My final data was somewhat surprising to me. The largest amount of birds I observed were in the areas with intermediate shelter and intermediate urbanization where the birds could find bird feeders, water and shelter. I was expecting that the birds would have wanted to avoid human interaction and would have preferred areas that were fully covered in trees with lots of shelter. This suggest to me that the birds have learned to adapt to this new lifestyle and prefer to be in areas that are both urbanized and contain some forest. I think a large part of this adaptation is because of the bird feeders that attract the birds to these areas as well. This experiment kept me thinking the whole way through and the data I expected was not the data I received! For me, this added an element of further curiosity. Perhaps this will be something I revisit next summer and just continue to observe the birds within my back yard!

I feel as though this was a valuable learning experience for me. This project challenged me and forced me to pay attention to the fine detail. I learned a lot of new strategies and techniques that can be used within this field. I also believe I have a better appreciation for how quickly organism are able to respond to change and adapt to new environmental conditions.

Blog Post 9 – Field Research Reflections

TRU Open Learning 1 Comment

It was definitely an interesting class, one that has taught me much about ecological theory and it’s development. I would say my biggest challenge was not so much the field experiment – as I found that part fairly straightforward – but more the scientific wording throughout the assignments. Throughout my post-secondary education, I developed interests in subjects other than Sciences which switched my brain and mindset from being categorically logical (black and white) to more philosophical. So, heading into higher level BIOL classes for my BSc, I started having trouble wrapping my brain around the more complex scientific logic. This could perhaps explain why I am now working permanently in a Human History museum 😛 Nevertheless, this paper was really fun to make! It was my first time venturing in the world of Botany, so it was especially challenging. Field-wise, I probably had the most trouble identifying the mosses in my study areas. I did the best I could! I did have to make changes along the way, tweaks here and there to make it all come together nicely. I do think that perhaps the scientific wording in the assignments lead me astray from time to time. I spent a LOT of time trying to figure out how to categorizing my predictions and variables, but also making it work for the final report. That part was most confusing. But in the end, I hope that my work is up to standards!

Blog Post 8 – Tables and Graphs

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Organizing my data was surprisingly easy to do. I focused on gathering data that was exactly relevant to my predictions. That proved to be very useful as it truly was a breeze to put together. The outcome was fairly similar to what I expected. I did expect there to be more moss in the areas with more sunlight. So that was accurate. Perhaps I should actually add that as a proper prediction in my final report. I have been slightly confused whether a variable should be used as a prediction in the introduction as well, or if that is completely different that should be used in the discussion only. It will all come together nicely though. Evidently, that is the purpose of these blogs.

My data definitely gave me ideas of further exploration. I have limited time, resources and knowledge, so it would absolutely be interesting to gather soil samples to calculate the moisture, for example. I was going to calculate soil moisture, however, winter creeped up on me faster than expected. The soil is frozen now. It would be interesting to see how moisture can affect the directional growth of moss. It could be good to see if moss grows in the same places and trees each year. Of course, it would be perfect to go much more in depth to see the relationship between which moss grows on which tree to see if that affects anything. It would be good to do some kind of wildlife survey, see if there are any moss-eating creatures that perhaps prefer moss on the south side of trees, leaving the northern side lush of moss. There are so many interesting research ideas that could grow from this introductory study that examines an urban legend.