Recent Posts

Blog Post 4!

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

This post describes the results from the virtual forest tutorial!

Result Summary- All Sampling Techniques (Here is a link to visually show my results).

The shortest estimated time to sample was 4 hours and 49 minutes for the distance, random or systematic.

Comparing percentage error between species for the most and least common species:

Red maple: (distance systematic, area haphazard, area random) 24.8%, 12.5%, 6.3%

White Oak: (distance systematic, area haphazard, area random) 50%, 4.9%, 51%

Yellow birch:(distance systematic, area haphazard, area random) 100%, 100%, 100%

White ash:(distance systematic, area haphazard, area random) 100%, 100%, 100%

Most accurate for the most abundant species: Area, random

Least abundant: American basswood was only picked up on the distance systematic. The accuracy decline with the rare species compared to the more dense species.

I propose that more than 24 sample points would have given a better overview of the area. There were rare species that were not sampled so with 40 points they might have been. 24 was enough sample points to measure the larger species but for the smaller ones more points should be used.

Blog Post 6: Data Collection

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

Due to the size constraint of my backyard, I decided to modify the size of original and additional quadrats. I decided to decrease the size to 0.25m2 in order to prevent the chance of overlap between replicates and to hopefully receive more accurate data in the process. In my initial data collection, I sampled at five locations using 1m2 quadrats. The three locations that I observed for my ongoing field observations are each unique from one another in terms of sun exposure throughout the day, the presence of dead grass and soil moisture. I then decided that the best way to select my first five replicates was to use the Stratified Random Sampling technique. I took one replicate from Location 1, another replicate from Location 2, and three replicates from Location 3. Using these replicates, I measured the percent cover of Common Fern Moss (Thuidium delicatulum) relative to a 1m2 quadrat size and used this data as a measure of abundance for this type of moss. Then, I calculated the mean percent cover of Common Fern Moss in these quadrats to get an idea of the area of my yard occupied by moss. I collected data on five additional replicates and had to recollect data from the original five plots using 0.25m2 quadrats. I had to resample the first five replicates because by decreasing quadrat size, the percent cover was expected to increase relative to the quadrat. This prediction was for the most part correct, as all values for the percent cover increased with decreasing quadrat size except for quadrat 5, where the value remained the same.

At this point, I have noticed a general trend in my data (with a few outliers) that supports my prediction and I have not yet reconsidered my hypothesis. I am seeing that areas in my yard that would typically receive more sunlight throughout the day have a smaller percent cover of fern moss in comparison with quadrats that receive more shade. My second data collection was in my mind successful, however, I hope that I can find a way to measure pH in these 10 and additional quadrats in order to factor in the impact of soil acidity on moss growth- I am sure I will find a way to go about that before my next data collection.

Blog Post 3: Ongoing Field Observations

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

Between March 17 and June 2, 2019, I made 9 visits to my study area, totaling 14.75 hours of field observation and 188 data points with associated covariates; 159 of which were indicative of terrestrial vertebrates.  Where possible, photographs of wildlife or indicators of their presence were taken and stamped with UTM locations, or identified visually or by song.  I was using a cell phone camera and am a poor photographer so frequently I was unable to capture images of animals I observed.  I decided to end my investigations on June 2, given that a significant increase in observed industrial (e.g., water withdrawal and nearby industrial noise, scheduled changes to river flow regime), recreational (e.g., human presence and deposition of wildlife attractants) and transit activity (e.g., off-road vehicles, boating) which had the potential to affect wildlife activity in the direct vicinity of my study area.  This seemed a reasonable if not necessary place to end my field observations.

As I collected data over time (e.g., prior do, during and after spring freshet), the edges of the floodplain and riparian areas became clearly defined and the terrestrial vertebrate community structure within each emerged as evidenced by sightings, audible calls, observations of tracks, animal sign as well as active nests, dams and dens.  Despite the changing seasonal conditions, habitat use by certain species and classes of vertebrates remained relatively consistent in the riparian area and floodplain as well as in and above the open water.  For example, Tundra Swans were only observed in open-water on the Halfway River while Geese were observed everywhere but open-water on the Halfway river (i.e., floodplain, riparian area and open-water on the Peace River); dabbling ducks were only observed on open-water in the Peace River.   Western Toad tadpoles were only observed in pools on the floodplain while both grouse species I observed were in the riparian area.  All of the carnivorous species I observed were on the floodplain.

Given that my study location is at the confluence of a regulated and a non-regulated river, the Peace River and Halfway Rivers respectively, I was presented with a unique opportunity to examine how regulation of river level and discharge could be related to vertebrate habitat use and community structure.  Both rivers are influenced similarly at the confluence by local snow and ice melt, but only the Peace River is regulated by upstream hydroelectric infrastructure.  The area most affected by rising water level and flow rate or discharge is the floodplain, given large areas of it are inundated daily due to fluctuating river level.

Thus, the biological attribute I am interested in examining is vertebrate community structure in discrete areas (i.e., riparian, floodplain, and open-water areas) at the confluence of the Peace and Halfway Rivers.

My hypothesis is that short-term fluctuations in river level and/or discharge affect terrestrial vertebrate habitat use, and thus the community structure of riparian, floodplain and open-water areas of the Peace and Halfway Rivers deferentially.

If the community structure of terrestrial vertebrates is affected by short term fluctuations in river level and discharge, I predict that the species richness and diversity of the floodplain will fluctuate to a greater degree than the riparian and open-water areas relative to hydro metric conditions.

Response Variable: Species diversity; continuous

Explanatory Variable I: River level; continuous

Explanatory Variable II: Area; categorical

 

Note: UTM extraction is proving to take much longer than I had anticipated and will be included at a later time for anyone interested!

 

Date Time Time Spent Area UTM Temperature Precipitation Wind Species Observation Approximate Halfway  Level Approximate Halfway Discharge Approximate  Peace Level Approximate Peace Discharge
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Riparian 6C None Light; west Bald Eagle Nest 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Riparian 6C None Light; west Bank Swallow Nest 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Floodplain 6C None Light; west Canada Goose Scat 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Floodplain 6C None Light; west Canada Goose Visual 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Peace 6C None Light; west Canada Goose Visual 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Overhead 6C None Light; west Common Raven Visual 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Floodplain 6C None Light; west Coyote Tracks 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Floodplain 6C None Light; west Moose Scat 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Riparian 6C None Light; west Mule Deer Visual 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Floodplain 6C None Light; west Mule Deer Scat 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Riparian 6C None Light; west Sharp-tail Grouse Visual 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/17/09 12:00-15:30 3.5 h Floodplain 6C None Light; west Unknown Dabbling Duck Breeding Pair Visual 0.760 m 19.0 m3/s 2.56 m 860 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Floodplain 11C None Light; west Canada Goose Scat 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Floodplain 11C None Light; west Canada Goose Tracks 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Overhead 11C None Light; west Canada Goose Visual 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Peace 11C None Light; west Canada Goose Visual 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Floodplain 11C None Light; west Common Raven Tracks 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Overhead 11C None Light; west Common Raven Visual 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Floodplain 11C None Light; west Coyote Tracks 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Riparian 11C None Light; west Elk Tracks 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Floodplain 11C None Light; west Mouse Tracks 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Floodplain 11C None Light; west Mule Deer Scat 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Floodplain 11C None Light; west Mule Deer Tracks 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Riparian 11C None Light; west Mule Deer Scat 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Peace 11C None Light; west Tundra Swans Visual 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/24/19 13:00-4:30 1.5 h Floodplain 11C None Light; west Wolf Tracks 0.795 m 21.0 m3/s 2.49 m 800 m3/s
03/31/19 12:30-14:30 2.0 h Floodplain 5C Light; rain Light; west Bald Eagle Visual 0.900 m 100.0 m3/s 2.49 m 890 m3/s
03/31/19 12:30-14:30 2.0 h Peace 5C Light; rain Light; west Canada Goose Visual 0.900 m 100.0 m3/s 2.49 m 890 m3/s
03/31/19 12:30-14:30 2.0 h Overhead 5C Light; rain Light; west Common Raven Visual 0.900 m 100.0 m3/s 2.49 m 890 m3/s
03/31/19 12:30-14:30 2.0 h Floodplain 5C Light; rain Light; west Coyote Tracks 0.900 m 100.0 m3/s 2.49 m 890 m3/s
03/31/19 12:30-14:30 2.0 h Floodplain 5C Light; rain Light; west Mule Deer Scat 0.900 m 100.0 m3/s 2.49 m 890 m3/s
03/31/19 12:30-14:30 2.0 h Riparian 5C Light; rain Light; west Mule Deer Scat 0.900 m 100.0 m3/s 2.49 m 890 m3/s
03/31/19 12:30-14:30 2.0 h Riparian 5C Light; rain Light; west Rabbit Visual 0.900 m 100.0 m3/s 2.49 m 890 m3/s
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Floodplain 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Beaver Chewed trees 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Floodplain 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Beaver Visual 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Floodplain 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Canada Goose Visual 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Peace 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Canada Goose Visual 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Overhead 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Canada Goose Visual 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Riparian 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Chickadee Singing 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Overhead 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Common Raven Visual 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Floodplain 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Coyote Scat 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Floodplain 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Coyote Tracks 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Floodplain 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Muskrat Visual 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Riparian 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Ruffed Grouse Drumming 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Riparian 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Unknown Mammal Den 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/15/19 13:00-14:30 1.5 h Riparian 8C Light; rain – Clearing Light; west Unknown Wood Pecker Drumming 0.87 m 90.0 m3/s 2.37 m 650 m3/3
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Canada Goose Tracks 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Peace 11.5 None Moderate; West Canada Goose Visual 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Overhead 11.5 None Moderate; West Common Raven Visual 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Coyote Scat 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Coyote Tracks 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Peace 11.5 None Moderate; West Mallard (breeding pair) Visual 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Moose Tracks 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Mule Deer Tracks 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Mule Deer Tracks 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
04/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Unknown Carnivore Scat 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
4/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Riparian 11.5 None Moderate; West Bald Eagle Visual 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
4/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Squirrel Visual 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
4/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Floodplain 11.5 None Moderate; West Unknown Sparrow Visual 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
4/21/19 13:45-15:15 1.5 h Riparian 11.5 None Moderate; West Unknown Sparrow Nest 1.19 m 140 m3/s 2.33 m 625 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Riparian 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Blue Jay Visual 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Floodplain 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Canada Goose Scat 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Floodplain 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Canada Goose Tracks 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Floodplain 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Canada Goose Visual 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Peace 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Canada Goose Visual 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Riparian 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Common Raven Visual 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Floodplain 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Coyote Tracks 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Floodplain 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Killdeer Visual 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Floodplain 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Rabbit Visual 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Floodplain 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west River otter Tracks 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Riparian 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Ruffed Grouse Drumming 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Riparian 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Snipe Winnowing 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Riparian 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Unknown Sparrow Visual 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
4/29/19 15:48-17:45 2.0 h Floodplain 8.5 rain; clear; snow Light; west Western Flicker Visual 1.01 m 110 m3/s 2.26 600 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Halfway 13.5 None Light; west Bank Swallows Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Black Bear tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Canada Goose tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Canada Goose tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Peace 13.5 None Light; west Canada Goose tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Canada Goose Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Canada Goose visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Chickadee visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Common Raven Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Killdeer visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Moose tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Mule Deer tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Mule Deer visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west River otter tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Robins Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Squirrel visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Tundra Swans tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Halfway 13.5 None Light; west Tundra Swans Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Feline Retractable Tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Mammal tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Mammal tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Songbird tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Songbird Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Songbird Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Songbird Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Floodplain 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Songbird Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Songbird Tracks 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Songbird Visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/13/19 10:45 – 12:15 1.5 h Riparian 13.5 None Light; west Unknown Sparrow visual 1.39 m 175 m3/s 2.97 1340 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none American Robin visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Halfway 10.5 None none Bank swallows visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Halfway 10.5 None none Bank Swallows Visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Beaver dam 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Halfway 10.5 None none Beaver Visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Black Bear Tracks 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Canada Goose scat 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Canada Goose Visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Canada Goose visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Halfway 10.5 None none Canada Goose Visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Riparian 10.5 None none Chickadee song 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Halfway 10.5 None none Killdeer Visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Mule Deer tracks 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Mule Deer Visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Red-winged black bird Visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Riparian 10.5 None none Robins song 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Snipe song 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Squirrel Visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Halfway 10.5 None none Tundra Swans visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Unknown Mammal Tracks 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Unknown Mammal Tracks 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Unknown Mammal Tracks 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Unknown Sandpiper visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Peace 10.5 None none Unknown Sandpiper visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Unknown Songbird song 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Unknown Songbird song 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Unknown Songbird song 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Floodplain 10.5 None none Unknown Songbird visual 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
5/26/19 08:00-09:15 1.25 h Riparian 10.5 None none Yellow Headed Blackbird song 1.49 m 195 m3/s 2.97 1400 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Halfway 16 none Light; west Bank Swallows Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Beaver Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Beaver Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Halfway 16 none Light; west Canada Goose tracks 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Halfway 16 none Light; west Canada Goose Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 peace 16 none Light; west Canada Goose tracks 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 peace 16 none Light; west Canada Goose visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Riparian 16 none Light; west Chickadee Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Common Raven Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Riparian 16 none Light; west Common Raven Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Halfway 16 none Light; west Coyote tracks 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Coyote tracks 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Elk tracks 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Halfway 16 none Light; west Magpie Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Mule Deer Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Mule Deer tracks 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Halfway 16 none Light; west Mule Deer tracks 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Unknown Raptor Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 peace 16 none Light; west Unknown Sandpiper Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 peace 16 none Light; west Unknown Shorebird Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Unknown Songbird song 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Halfway 16 none Light; west Unknown Songbird visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Riparian 16 none Light; west Unknown Songbird Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Riparian 16 none Light; west Unknown Songbird Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Riparian 16 none Light; west Unknown Songbird visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Riparian 16 none Light; west Unknown Sparrow Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s
6/2/2019 10:23-11:36 1.16 Floodplain 16 none Light; west Western Toad Tadpole Visual 1.53 m 200 m3/s 3.04 1424 m3/s

 

 

BLOG POST 9

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

Conducting this field research was a novelty. Identifying which areas to sample was quite challenging as I did not want to introduce bias in my study. I carried out the sampling in July, during the peak summer month where the weather is sunny interspersed with some rainfall. This could have had an effect on the growth patterns of the Allium cernuum plant which I choose for my study. I chose this plant because it is endemic in the area of study and in British Columbia. I had at first difficulties distinguishing this plant due to the presence of another plant species (Cow parsnip). I observed much higher than expected amount of Allium cernuum at the study site closest to the industrial site. This could most likely be due to maximum sunlight availability for plants growing in this area. Other variables such as the amount of rainfall and the wind direction should be taken into consideration in the future. The wind density will determine the amount of heavy metal particulates that are being transported and deposited in the soil in the surrounding area. Rainfall can equally affect plant growth.

BLOG POST 8

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

My data was represented graphically. I calculated the mean of the total number of Allium cernuum samples obtained from the three sites per quadrats, computed the mean and represented it graphically. I think it was best to represent the data in this manner because it will permit a statistical test to be performed which in this case was an ordinary one-way ANOVA test due to the fact that the analysis was being performed across three different data sets. This test will aid in showing the significant differences in terms of the total abundance of the plant relative to the site farthest from the industrial site. I also chose to represent the data in tabular form. In this case, I calculated the density and frequencies of the Allium cernuum plant in each site and represented the values in the table. The density gives a measure of the species abundance while the frequency denotes how often the plant is frequently recorded in a quadrat.

Post 7: Theoretical perspectives

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

My project is studying the effects of clearcutting on species composition along the newly harvested edge. Some ecological process my hypothesis touches on is the rate at which a forest re establishes itself and the successional stages it goes through. Another process that my project touches on is the effects of weather on a newly exposed edge of timber due to clearcutting. This part of the study will be interesting to determine how the now open canopy receives additional resources needed for growth but also is subject to new challenges. Three key words that pertain to my project are Open Canopy, early successional species and site disturbance.

Post 6: Data Collection

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

On july 24th 2019 at 4:29 I began sampling more replicates for my  project. I have sampled an additional 10 sample units at this time. My sample design has been pretty straightforward and easy to replicate. The only problem I have run into is within the forested area some of the deciduous trees that have been observed are dying or recently died. I have decided to include these tree in my samples in a new category as deceased trees. If I observe significant dead trees within the closed canopy forested area I might be able to support my hypothesis with this data. So far my hypothesis “Does clear cutting, causing open canopies, have an increase in the amount of deciduous tree composition along the now exposed timber edge?” seems to be true. I have noticed a larger amount of deciduous trees along the cut block edge rather than within the standing timber

BLOG POST 7

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

My project deals with the effect of heavy metal pollution on soils close to industrial sites and its additional effect on plant density in these areas. This type of research is of great importance due to the fact that there has been an increased incidence of pollution due to poor waste management practices and heavy industrial processes that have led to the contamination of the surrounding soil which is harmful to the surrounding vegetation. My research is centered primarily on the growth tendencies of the nodding onion plant with relation to the effect of heavy metal pollution of the soil. Three keywords with relation to my project are heavy metals, nodding onion, soil.

BLOG POST 6

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

I have started collecting data for my research project whose aim is to study the effect of soil and wind quality on the prevalence of the nodding onion plant in industrial areas surrounding my house. My area of sampling is divided into 15 sections. 5 sections located farthest from the industrial site, where the first to be sampled. The next 5 sections to be sampled was located at the equal-distance farthest and nearest industrial site while the last 5 sections to be sampled was located nearest to the industrial site. Each section consists of a quadrant. Therefore, in total, 15 quadrants were sampled for this project. The random sampling method was chosen to effectuate this study. Each quadrant was estimated to be 0.7×1.2m. At each quadrant, the nodding onion species was recorded and its cover was also measured. So far, I have measured 7 quadrants in this project. 2 quadrants farthest away from the industrial site, 3 quadrants nearest the site and 2 quadrants located at equal distance to the industrial site. I encountered several difficulties during the sampling procedures. Firstly, in some areas farthest from the industrial site, there was a significantly greater proportion of other plants most notably the Cow Parsnip (Heracleum maximum). Given the fact that this plant was taller than the nodding onion plant, it was sometimes difficult to locate this plant within a quadrant and record it.  Access to some sampling areas was difficult, therefore accurate results were not obtained for some of the quadrants. Due to the fact that I recorded higher than expected amounts of the nodding onion species in two out of the 3 quadrants nearest to the industrial measured so far, additional factors such as the amount of sunlight each site receives as well as the proximity of the site to surface water will have to be taken into consideration. At this point, I have not yet fully ascertained which variable has an effect on nodding onion abundance: Soil quality, wind direction, proximity to surface water or sunlight.  My hypothesis is centered on the effect of soil quality and wind direction. However, these other variables listed above will also have to be considered.

BLOG POST 5

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

User:  | Open Learning Faculty Member: 

For the initial collection of data, there were no issues encountered. However, in some areas close to the industrial site, I observed a much denser canopy of the nodding onion plant than expected. In the future, I plan to carry out soil and air quality testing of the presence of heavy metals in these areas at proximity to the industrial site. This might explain the higher than expected amount of the nodding onion plant in some patches of land close to the industrial site.  Areas at proximity to the industrial site might have a higher penetrance of sunlight than areas farthest from the industrial site and this might be a plausible explanation for the denser than expected canopy of nodding onions closest to the industrial site. Additionally, wind direction might be of importance and has to be taken into consideration when performing the sampling of plant species in this area. One change that I will perform in the future will be to determine the prevalence of more plant species other than the nodding onion species described above. This will permit to have a more general overview of all species that might be affected by the presence of heavy metals in the soil.