Blog 4, Sampling Methods

Mohn Mill, sampled 10 quadrants using haphaᴢard, Area method:  total time was 5 hr.s 20 minutes.  Red Maple was the highest frequency species, error rate with red maple frequency was 61.5%.

Mohn Mill, sampled 10 quadrants using random/systemic, Area method:  total time was 5 hr.s 19 minutes.  Red Maple was the highest frequency species, error rate with red maple frequency was 12.09%

*Random/systemic Area method was 1 minute faster and much more accurate of the two.                                     ______________________________________________________________

Mohn Mill,  10 samples using haphaᴢad, Distance method:  total times was 2 hr.s 0 minutes.  Red Maple was the highest frequency species, error rate with red maple frequency was 23.1%

Mohn Mill, 10 samples using random/systemic, Distance method:  total time was 2 hr.s 2 minutes.  Red Maple was the highest frequency species, error rate with red maple frequency was -9.9%.

*Random/systemic Distance method still had a higher accuracy but was 2 minutes longer of the two.

_______________________________________________________________

At 30 quadrants, Mohn Mill, Area, Haphaᴢard method  had an error rate of -6.50%, measuring Red Maple frequency.

At 30 quadrants, Mohn Mill, Area, Random/Systemic method had an error rate of -2.198%., measuring Red Maple frequency.

At 30 samples, Mohn Mill, Distance, Haphaᴢard method had an error rate of 1.2%, measuring Red Maple frequency.

At 30 samples, Mohn Mill, Distance, Random/Systemic method had an error rate of -2.6%, measuring Red Maple frequency.

*Haphaᴢard Distance Method had the lowest error rate with Red Maple frequency at 1.2%, using 30 samples which seems unusual seeing that the Random/Systemic Area and Distance error rates were -2.198 and -2.6, quite similar and quite low.  You would have expected the Random/Systemic methods to have superior accuracy even with the larger sample areas.  But this was just one species and one variable, Red Maple frequency; more species, more variables, more quadrat, and more samples would be needed to draw more definite conclusions.

 

 

 

Blog Post 3-Ongoing Field Observations

Upon reading the academic journal on territory, dispersal, and density of red squirrels, I discovered that the area they use in the forest is much smaller than what I have observed with my own squirrel  Depending on habitat quality (food sources, aerial walkways, low predation rates, nesting sites), forest squirrels have a mean average siᴢe of <1 ha, but much larger 1.6-4.8 ha in times of food scarcity.  As you will see in the photos, the red squirrel has an abundance of food sources, from spruce cones, douglas fir cones, pine cones, gardens, fruit trees, chicken coops (grain), maple trees (seeds), walnut tree, not to mention fungi, bird’s eggs, invertebrate, and juvenile mice.  The sex of the squirrel is unknown but males and females are similar with the males being slightly larger.  This squirrel has been here 2 years but I have not seen any young, yet.  There is an abundance of trees for aerial walkways and and these trees also aid in protection from…

predation.  Squirrels create “middens” throughout their territory and have one central “midden” where they store an abundance of food cache for winter.  Predation is by weasel, martin, coyote, cat, dog, and all aerial predators (hawks, owls).  I believe my woodpile is the central “midden” in this area.

I have broken up the territory into 4 environmental quadrants all ranging in siᴢe of approximately 1.5 ha.  Taking into account where I have seen the squirrel travel, I would say his/her territory encompasses about 5 ha.

I have decided to focus on why the squirrel has chosen my woodpile in quadrant B, to make as his central ‘midden’.  I will show  it is the density of the conifer trees in this quadrant that brought this squirrel to be in my woodpile and not in woodpiles in the other quadrants.

The response variable for my project will be my woodpile.  The predictor variable will be the conifer trees in the squirrel’s 5 ha territory.  My hypothesis will be that the red squirrel chose my woodpile  as his central “midden” because of the number of cone bearing trees in quadrant B.

Red Squirrel Density in an Urban Environment

Post 2, Elliot  Academic Sources.

I will be using these two academic peer-reviewed articles in my study of the red squirrel population density in an urban environment.  I will be focusing on the food sources available and what in particular attracted this red squirrel to my wood pile.

“Does Density Reflect Habitat Quality for North American Red Squirrels during a Spruce Cone failure”  by Mathew Wheatley, Karl W. Larsen, Stan Boutin.  Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 83, Issue 3, August 1, 2002.  Pages 716-727.

“Species Habitat model for Red Squirrel’  Original model and ratings table prepared by Nicola Tribal Association, Edited by Les Gyug, Okanagan Wildlife Consulting, January, 2008.

 

.

Red Squirrel Living in my woodpile

Elliot, Post 1.

My observations are on a red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) that has taken up residence in my woodpile.  The squirrel arrived here 3 years ago and appears to be staying.  The squirrel was busy in the fall gathering walnuts, maple leaf seeds, green pine cones, fall sunflower seeds, and nuts to store in the woodpile next to my home.  He was also active in the  fall chewing on wood for its pulp and stripping cardboard boxes to insulate his home for the winter.  The squirrel is now very active and can be heard during the day and seen munching pine cone seeds.  He appears to like eating sitting on top of certain posts as is evidenced by the pine seed shells underneath these poles.  I have observed him travelling certain corridors that occur mainly on trees but also on roofs like my own home and garage.  I have heard him make different calls and am wondering if each call has a certain significance.

Questions

Why has the squirrel left the forest to come live in an urban community?

Why has the squirrel chosen this particular woodpile?

What else does this squirrel eat?

What are its predators?

Are squirrels becoming a pest in urban environments?

What is the squirrel’s territorial range?

Are these squirrels an abundant species or a threatened species?

Blog Post #2 — Cameron Purdy

Academic Peer Reviewed Research Paper

Title:  Terminal Nerve GnRH3 Neurons Mediate Slow Avoidance of Carbon Dioxide in Larval Zebrafish

Source: Koide T, Yabuki Y, Yoshihara Y. Terminal nerve GnRH3 neurons mediate slow avoidance of carbon dioxide in larval zebrafish. Cell Reports, 2018 DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.01.019

Link: http://www.cell.com/cell-reports/pdf/S2211-1247(18)30036-6.pdf

 

The following paper is an Academic Peer Reviewed Research Paper for the following reasons:

a) The paper is written by experts in the field. Koide, Yabuki, and Yoshihara are all associated with the Laboratory for Neurobiology of Synapse in Japan. It was published in the journal “Cell Reports” which publishes high quality peer-reviewed material.

b) The paper contains a bibliography citing additional sources used as information. These sources are cited in text throughout the article. (Ex.  “This fast escape response is mediated by reticulospinal neurons, including the large, morphologically conspicuous Mauthner cells” (Gahtan et al., 2002; Liu and Fetcho, 1999; O’Malley et al., 1996).)

c) Acknowledgements thank two editors for their critical reading of the manuscript indicating that the paper had gone through the peer review process. This is further supported by the journal the article is posted in.

d) The paper is formatted as a research paper as it contains an introduction, results and discussion. The experimental methods were included within the results section. We can see that there are multiple intervention levels further leading us to believe that the paper is experimental in nature. *(See below)

(To examine what chemosensory signals affect behaviors of larval zebrafish, we applied various chemicals to the head of fish at 5 days post-fertilization).

Blog Post 1: Observations

Blog Post #1: Initial Observations of Study Area

Cameron Purdy – T00028679

January 31, 2018


Address:  33844 King Rd, Abbotsford, BC, V2S7M7

Coordinates: 49.0291° N, 122.2854° W. ~40m above sea level

Weather: Light rain showers, ~ 4ºC.

Seasonality: Winter

Time: 3:20PM


Description of Study Area:

The area(s) I have decided to observe are two separate ecological islands on the University of the Fraser Valley campus. Prior to UFV being built, the location was comprised of mainly farmland. Historically, the Fraser River had a much larger footprint and had floodplains that covered much of Abbotsford including areas surrounding UFV. 

Location A is a temperate deciduous forest with area (A=440m²). It is bordered to the north by the Abbotsford Entertainment and Sports Center, and surrounded by parking lots to the east, west, and south. The general topography of the forest is flat, however there is a slight slope coming down from the parking lot on the east most side. The most prevalent vegetation found includes Convallaria majalis, Oemleria cerasiformis, Maianthemum racemosum, and Trientalis borealis. Additionally, tree canopy cover in this forest is quite dense and filters out much of the sunlight. Few species of birds could be seen flying amongst the trees. 

From left to right:

  1. Forest A looking north from the south. Parking lot can be seen to east with the slight slope leading down into the forest.
  2. Forest A looking north from south. Parking lot can be seen to west, Abbotsford Entertainment Center can be seen at the north end of forest.
  3. Forest A looking north from south. Proposed transect line through middle of forest.

 

Location B is also a temperate deciduous forest with area (A=540m²). It is bordered by buildings and a walkway to the west and south, and grass fields to the north and east. Centrally located in the forest is a small pond (A~200m²) that is surrounded by marshy wetlands. The general topography is relatively flat, with a slight slope on the east most side of the forest. The pond situated within the forest collects water that runs off the slope, and has a small stream that exits the forest to the south. The most prevalent vegetation found includes Rubus spectabilis, Rubus idaeus, Oemleria cerasiformis. The tree canopy cover in this forest is less dense than that of location A. While no wildlife was seen, frogs could be heard from the pond. 

From left to right:

  1. Forest B looking north from south. Open grass field can be seen to east, ground slopes downward towards the west.
  2. Forest B looking north-east from south-west. Pond and marshy surrounding areas seen.
  3. Forest B looking south-west from north-east. Proposed transect line through middle of forest.

Follow up Questions: 

1) What leads to the difference in vegetation among the two forests. How could they have a significantly different prevalence of plant species when they are located so close to each other?

2) While we know the vegetation differs between the two sample forests. How does the fauna differ between the two. Is there a higher prevalence of specific invertebrates in one forest over the other?

3) What are the differences in soil composition? If there are differences, could these in fact be linked to the the prevalence of specific flora and fauna in their respective forests.

Post #4

Systematic, random and haphazard sampling techniques were compared in the virtual forest tutorial.

Systematic had the fastest estimated sampling time (12 hours and 7 minutes). Haphazard sampling was second fastest (12 hours 34 minutes) and random was the slowest (12 hours and 42 minutes).

The percent error is summarized in table 1. Systematic and haphazard produced similar percent error values for the two most common species (eastern hemlock and red maple).  Systematic sampling produced errors of 7.3% for eastern hemlock 15.6% for red maple. Random sampling yielded percent error of 1.57% for eastern hemlock and 51% for red maple.

White pine and striped maple were the least common. However, no method sampled either of these trees. The next least common were yellow birch and chestnut oak. Haphazard yielded the smallest percent error (4.3% for yellow birch and 5.13% for chestnut oak). Systematic was second best (14.8% for yellow birch and 15% for chestnut oak). Random had the highest percent error (33.9% for yellow birch and 61.5.0% for chestnut oak).

It appeared that systematic sampling became more slightly more inaccurate as species abundance decreases. Haphazard sampling was more stable, however it randomly had a very high error for sweet birch. Random produced the smallest error in entire tutorial for the most common species (eastern hemlock 1.57%), but produced more inaccurate results for all other less abundant species.

 

Table 1. Percent error produced by systematic, random and haphazard sampling in a virtual forest tutorial

System Random Haphazard
Species Actual Density Data Density Error (%) Data Error

(%)

Data Error (%)
Eastern Hemlock 469.9 504.2 7.3 462.5 1.57 550 17.0
Sweet Birch 117.5 112.5 4.3 141.7 20.6 183.3 56.0
Yellow Birch 108.9 104.2 4.3 145.8 33.9 125 14.8
Chestnut Oak 87.5 66.7 23.8 33.3 61.5 75 14.3
Red Maple 118.9 137.5 15.6 58.3 51 125 5.1
Striped Maple 17.5 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A
White Pine 8.4 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A

 

 

 

post 9

My field research project has made me appreciate the traditional ecological knowledge I have received from my community, grandparents, culture and previous job experience in cultural heritage resources. It also made me appreciate the education journey I am on learning and studying new western science and ecology. It is truly inspiring and reassuring of the journey I am on to raise awareness and make a different in the Forestry Practices/ Land Management regimes of this generation. It is only the very beginning for me and I have tons to learn still but this project was fun and awakening!

I believe that all Land Managers/Forest Professionals can work better together with First Nation Communities and exchange these traditional teachings and traditional ecological knowledge for the benefit of our beautiful land. Its no secret that our land is experiencing change from invasive non-native species, over-grazing and over-logging. This is the time we can conduct these studies and incorporate traditional land management strategies with current and bring back climax community in all of our ecosystems, watersheds and backyards.

Thank you for this opportunity in my early studies of school! only my second year of college, good luck to everyone else!