Recent Posts

Blog Post 8. Tables and Graphs

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Species richness as a daily value per observation site. This value is defined as a number of distinct species recorded on each visit. McArthur island park A is a site on the western exit from the park, and B is on the eastern. Riverside park A is located on southern entrance and B is located at the northwest shore. McDonald Park contained a single observation site, therefore, no data representing B site is present.

 

Before using any statistical analyses, it was important to see whether collected data had variation, in order to be a viable representative. I chose the scatterplot to show the distribution of means representing number of individual species observed at one visit. The pattern that can be seen on this graph is that the sites located in the same park have similar values for species richness. But the values between parks differ. Because these parks are located in three different urban environments, effects of urbanization were further compared with distribution patterns. One paper that I read stated that bees usually stick to one site even if a better one present within short range. This means that sites A and B for both parks should be assessed as independent even though the data seems very similar.

Because this graph was not supposed to have an actual x value, excel was not able to create it. MiniTab16 was used instead as it allows to set x value while changing y value.

Blog post #4 – Virtual sampling tutorial

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

For my virtual forest sampling tutorial I used the area-based method. All my sampling times were similar in length and quite long:

Systematic: 12 hours 37 mins

Random: 12 hours 41 mins

Haphazard: 12 hours 26 mins

It is difficult for me to draw a conclusion on fastest time since they are all so similar. I assume the haphazard would’ve been faster if I had chosen a criteria rather than just randomly sampling without bias all over the whole map. This probably made it similar to the random technique time.

Here are the percent errors of the two most common and rarest species for each technique:

Systematic:

Common: 13.2% and 48.9%

Rare: 31.4% and 186.7%

Random:

Common: 3.5% and 45.3%

Rare:22.6% and 45.3%

Haphazard:

Common: 8.17% and 9.96%

Rare: 197.1% and 4.57%

When I calculated the mean error of each technique systematic had the highest mean error followed by haphazard, and the random technique had the lowest mean error.

As for accuracy related to species abundance, it does appear that the rare species had a higher rate of error.

Post #3 – Ongoing field observations

TRU Open Learning 1 Comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

After revisiting my site, I have decided to focus my study on a pond in the area. The pond is not fed by the natural spring. The pond is mostly surrounded by paper birch (Betula papyrifera) with some white spruce (Picea glauca). The pond receives quite a bit of direct sunlight. I observed cattails (Typha latifolia), mare’s-tail (Hippuris vulgaris), northern watermilfoil (Myriophyllum sibiricum) common duckweed (Lemna minor), and bladderwort (Utricularia minor). I have drawn a picture of the location of the plants around the pond in my field journal. I estimate the pond is about 10m wide by 30m long.

I spent my time observing the aquatic insects in the pond. I am not practiced at identifying them (I’m more of a plant guy), but I did recognize a water strider, water boatman, and a snail. There were other small insects swimming in the pond that I could not identify. These aquatic insects are the organisms I am going to study. I took me awhile to figure out what I wanted to study about them. In looking for a pattern I noticed a lot of activity near the edges of the pond. When I disturbed the water with a stick they would swim towards the center of the pond. I wonder if they would be more numerous closer to the edge due to more light and plant growth. The limitation is that I am unable to comment much on what aquatic insects were present deeper in the pond, as the pond is dark towards the middle. But I researched aquatic food webs and since plants and algae provide shelter and a food base it stands to reason that most insects will be located near the edges of the pond. Another factor is that there may be insects burrowed into the soil which will need to be taken into consideration when sampling.

So, I hypothesize that the aquatic insect population will be mostly dispersed along the edges of the pond. The response variable is the dispersion of aquatic insects. The explanatory variable is distance from the edge/pond shore. I believe both variables are continuous.

Blog Post 7. Theoretical Perspectives

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

Almost every secondary school student, would be able to recognize basic importance of bees. As a whole, pollinators community contribute to reproduction of almost 180,000 flowering plant species and many crops. In fact different sources indicate that they are responsible for 20-35% of worlds food production. Most of recent studies indicate a drastic decline in pollinators community, which is associated with anthropogenic changes. Because we are so dependent on pollinators, it is greatly important to maintain their number at equilibrium. First step in establishing such equilibrium is defining the reasons behind the decline and specifying patterns that underline it. One of such reasons is urbanization that is constantly increasing its level, which leads to fragmentation and loss of habitat. Therefore, it is important to find the patterns of pollinators community distribution in response to urbanization gradient. Further down the line, specific patterns preferred by the community could possibly be recreated in the highly disturbed areas and maintain the population preventing it from decline. Specifically in my study, I would like to evaluate not only impervious surface effects but also incorporate the encounters with anthropogenic objects as one of the factors effecting the distribution.

Keywords

Pollinators, Urbanization, Conservation

Blog Post 6. Data collection

TRU Open Learning 1 Comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

The data collection was performed at three city parks: Riverside Park, McDonald Park and McArthur Island Park. The counting would start at 10 a.m. and would last 1 hour where 5 counts were done 20 minutes apart. This procedure was conducted for all of the sites. Both Riverside Park and McArthur Island Park contained two flowerbeds, but the whole territory of McDonald Park contained only one. This meant that haphazard sampling will be used and sites are subjectively chosen as no other opportunity of pollinators observation was present. Therefore, no problems appeared in implementing sampling design. On the duration of five non-continuous days’ counts were done with rotation of order of sites visited. The time of 10 a.m. was chosen by a recommendation of local beekeeper who stated that at 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. I could observe adult individuals and then from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. I could observe the training flights of the young. Rotation of times for visit was implemented in order to avoid errors occurring because some species could appear at the site at later times of the day. Species observed were counted and described in the field journal and later identified using COMMON POLLINATORS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Visual Identification Guide that could be found at http://borderfreebees.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/common-pollinaotrs-of-bc-v40.pdf

The only problem I found is that sometimes description I provide in the field is not specific enough to be identified as a single species but fits a few, and therefore will be excluded from the further analysis unless representing unique species. Few additional patterns were noticed during data collection. Wasps appeared to be dependent on the outside temperature as encounters were observed only at the hottest timeslots. No wasps were observed in a suburb McDonald Park even though it has almost no shade by big trees. The gardener who was servicing the park told me that it is very common for local wasps to build their nests under the rooftops of the houses which could explain their absence in this park.

Blog Post 7: Theoretical Perspectives

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

Blog Post 7: Theoretical Perspectives

Since my last blog post I have completely changed by study focus and sampling design. For my new project I will be looking at how sun exposure effects the growth of Fescue grass (Festuca L.). The study area for this project is the same as the previous study, which is the Student Services Building (SSB) courtyard at Durham College (DC) located in Oshawa, Ontario.

Seeing that my study aims to examine factors influencing the growth of grass, some ecological processes that my study may touch on may include photosynthesis, soil composition and rainfall. There are many factors and processes that effect the growth of grass and sun exposure is only one factor to consider. During my observations and data collection so far, the effects of sun exposure do have significant impact on the growth of fescue grass.

Three key words that could be used to help identify this work could include: Festuca L., sun exposure, grass growth

Blog Post 5. Design Reflections

TRU Open Learning 1 Comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

The first day I went counting is not included in the dataset as the count was made at 6 p.m. In order to avoid intense heat during the day I decided that it will make sense to do the counts later in the afternoon, but only a few species were found. I found a forum for beekeepers which stated that flights appear from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. and then training flights of the young can be observed from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. First two days I used total number of individuals at the moment of observation counts. But for results to be more statistically significant and to avoid errors, further observation included hour counts at the site divided in 5 sets 20 min each which allows me to find the mean value for further analysis.

The data collected so far is consistent with widely accepted hypothesis that urbanization gradient effects abundance and richness of pollinators community, but studies which compare urban and suburban areas rarely include remote suburban areas like McArthur island park and it appears that both values are higher in this park.

Blog Post #9: Field Reserach

TRU Open Learning 1 Comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

My field research was a great learning experience where I was immersed in a theoretical aspect of field research. This was new to me and therefore my field research project came with a few teething pains, so to say.

At first I had wanted to study two sites for the duration of the 58 day study, however that did not seem sufficient once I started to collect data. I then set about picking ten randomized sights through out the game reserve. This allowed me to sample a number of different areas with different elevations and vegetation profiles. Increasing my number of sites monitored did not increase my overall number of elephants captured in my study. This could have been due to seasonal movements and the amount of water left in natural pans and dams.

Overall it was a great experience, I had first hypothesized that a majority of the Elephants would drink during the heat of the day. This however was not the case and a majority drank around 20 degrees C. Comparing that temperature to the times of the day it was evident that the Elephants preferred to drink in the hours after the hottest part of the day.

A great learning curve with many different things to take from the experience but the biggest lesson is that research is not as easy as taking a few observations and putting pen to paper.

Blog Post 4. Sampling

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

In the virtual forest tutorial presented in the module 3 tutorial I chose Mohn Mill forest. The tree sampling techniques I used were Area: Sampling along a topographic gradient, Random sampling and Haphazard or subjective sampling. Sampling along a topographic gradient appears to be the fastest one a and took 12 hours, 36 minutes and Random sampling was the slowest and took 13 hours, 10 minutes. Even though, the time spent on sampling was almost equal Haphazard technique had shown significantly lower percent error for the most common species.

 

Species           Technique used             Estimated                Actual              Percent error

Red maple        Systematic sampling        420                        403.74             4.04%

Random                               416                        403.74             3.05%

Haphazard                     404                      403.74          0.075%

Which hazel     Systematic sampling        140                         142.4               1.7%

Random                                76                         142.4               45.2%

Haphazard                     149                       142.4               4.7%

 

Systematic technique appears to have the most precise data for the rarest species.

 

Species              Technique used             Estimated                Actual              Percent error

 

Downy              Systematic sampling       8                      9.9                  19.2%

juneberry         Random                                 20                        9.9                   102%

Haphazard                              4                         9.9                   59%

Black Tupelo   Systematic sampling     24                      35                    31.4%

Random                                  26.9                     35                    23.14%

Haphazard                             60                         35                    71.4%

 

 

 

Blog Post 3. Ongoing Field Observations

TRU Open Learning 3 Comments

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

I visited the site continuously two days in a raw for continuous observations on July 25th and July 26th. As I mentioned in my first blog entry a specific interest was drawn to the local pollinator community. By the recommendation of local bee farmer, the time frame for observation was chosen to be between 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. to observe adult individuals and then 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. to observe the training flights of the young.

The second flower garden was also observed on the territory of the island, as well as two other parks belonging to Kamloops were observed in order to formulate an adequate hypothesis. Two additional sites were the city parks. McDonald park is located in a suburb area without any corridors separating it from suburbs. Riverside park is located beside the business district and is a highly disturbed area with the busy railway tracks adjacent to the park. Species richness and abundance varied among the sites, but points within the site seem to correlate with each other in richness. It seems like there could be an interesting correlation between pollinators abundance and richness, and the surrounding area of the park where data is collected. Therefore, hypothesis to be tested is that Pollinators abundance and richness will vary among the sites that represent different levels of urbanization. With the higher level of development (concrete to green cover ratio, amount of human disturbance) pollinators communities are going to have decreased abundance and richness. One point to be noted is that there are many studies present about bees being attracted to the suburb areas because of high density of flowering plants in gardens. Therefore, it will be specifically interesting to see the pollinators response to the fact that one of the parks is separated from the suburbs by 4-meter stream and therefore is an island. The response variable will be the number of species observed at a site and number of individuals within each species. This variable is continuous.

The explanatory variable in this case will be the amount of development adjacent to the site, it will be a categorical variable consisting of two parameters concrete to green cover ratio, amount of human disturbance and will be represented on the scale from high and low.