Month: October 2020

Blog Post 7: Theoretical Perspectives

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The ecological process that underlies my research is reproduction. My hypothesis has changed somewhat throughout the process of gathering my data and literature review, but the main concept of seed pod production varying due to an environmental factor has remained the same. As factors like light availability and disturbance vary, the ability of a plant to thrive and reproduce should also vary. Too much disturbance and the plant fails to reach maturity as a result of being damaged, too little light and the seeds that do get produced may be infertile. A gradient should be identifiable between beneficial and detrimental conditions.

Keywords for my paper would be:  Dog strangling vine, follicle, disturbance.

Blog post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The paper I have chosen is ‘Tree canopy cover constrains the fertility-diversity relationship in plant communities in plant communities of southeastern United States’. This paper has been written by professionals in the field and has gone through peer review as stated in the ‘Acknowledgements’ section of the paper. It also contains a method and result section showing the experimental data collected and different analyses done. In the discussion, the findings are compared to the past literature on the topic as shown by the in-text citations and there is a bibliography at the end of the paper.

Therefore, this paper is an academic peer-reviewed research article.

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecy.3119 

Instructor: Robyn Reudink

Post 3

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Blog#3

Field Research Project

Blog Post 3: Ongoing Field Observations

Create a blog post to document your ongoing field observations. Supplement your blog entry with scanned or uploaded examples from you field journal. Specific points you need to cover are:

 

  1. Identify the organism or biological attribute that you plan to study.

I plan to study poison ivy distribution in a disturbed habitat.

 

  1. Use your field journal to document observations of your organism or biological attribute along an environmental gradient. Choose at least three locations along the gradient and observe and record any changes in the distribution, abundance, or character of your object of study.

 

Location 1

meadow

 Location 2

forested

 Location 3

old field
Distribution none Clumped Clumped
Abundance 0 3 4
Character none Low growing some climbing

 

I visually broke up the area into three zones and followed a transect line along the edge of the trail. I recorded for 1 meter x 1metre plots just off the trail at the start of each zone. The meadow begins at the start of the trail. The forest begins at the same spot on the other side of the trail and the field begins where the forest thins and I can see the open field through the trees.

 

  1. Think about underlying processes that may cause any patterns that you have observed.

 

Other trails in the area, including one only approximately 0.5km down the road did not have any noticeable poison ivy present. This had originally led me to wonder if the heavy equipment presence had anything to do with the abundance on the trail I am researching.

I reviewed research indicating that poison ivy will grow well in disturbed areas, so that may be a factor in why it’s doing well on that trail (Admin, 2016). I still wondered however why the distribution of the poison ivy is concentrated on the left side of the trail, especially since the right side is more disturbed. I had thought that shade may be the factor, however my research indicated that poison ivy does well in both shade and sun, so I don’t think that is the main explanatory variable (Admin, 2016).

After completing the table above, I noticed that the plants tended to grow in clumps, rather than as individuals spread out. The clump in the forest location was growing amongst raspberry bushes and the field clump was climbing up a rock, near an apple tree. There were several species of birds including crows, chickadees, and woodpeckers that I noted. There are many mammals as well such as deer and chipmunks which I have encountered on other walks. According to Brown, several animals eat poison ivy and distribute seed. I am wondering if foraging sites like the apple tree and raspberry bushes will have a higher poison ivy concentration overall. This could be due to dropping seed while feeding (Diane Brown 2018). In fact, I saw a chickadee relieve itself while perched on a tree just a little further down the trail. Another place that I have noticed poison ivy is in the lot next to me. There is an apple tree there, which adds to my suspicion about a connection.

 

 

  1. Postulate one hypothesis and make one formal prediction based on that hypothesis. Your hypothesis may include the environmental gradient; however, if you come up with a hypothesis that you want to pursue within one part of the gradient or one site, that is acceptable as well.

 

My hypothesis is that wildlife may be spreading poison ivy when foraging.

 

One prediction is that poison ivy will be distributed more heavily near abundant forage sources like fruit shrubs and trees.

 

  1. Based on your hypothesis and prediction, list one potential response variable and one potential explanatory variable and whether they would be categorical or continuous. Use the experimental design tutorial to help you with this.

 

One potential response variable is concentrated poison ivy distribution. This is a numerical, continuous variable. We are trying to see how many plants are growing in certain areas.

 

One potential explanatory variable is abundant fruit/forage sources. This is categorical because it is a yes/no if present question.

 

 

References

 

Admin. Poison Ivy. Center for Agriculture, Food and the Environment. 2016 Oct 26 [accessed

 

2020 Oct 13]. https://ag.umass.edu/landscape/fact-sheets/poison-ivy

 

 

Brown D. Identifying poison ivy isn. [accessed 2020 October 14].

 

https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/identifying_poison_ivy_isnt_always_easy_to_do

 

 

Weaver MR, Abrahamson WG. Population/Community Biology : Community Sampling Exercise .

 

Population/Community Biology : Community Sampling Exercise. 0AD [accessed 2020 Oct 13].

 

http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biology/courses/biol208/EcoSampler/

Blog Post 9: Field Research Reflections

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

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.

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The source I have chosen to evaluate is Ecology & Wonder in the Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks World Heritage Site by author Robert William Stanford.

Based on the How to Evaluate Sources of Scientific Information Tutorial presented in module 1, in order to determine whether a paper is academic or not, three criteria must be met. The first is that the text is written by an expert in the field, second is that it includes in-text citations and lastly that it contains a bibliography. With this in mind, while reviewing my chosen study, I can definitely say it is an academic study. A multitude of experts in their field are noted through the text, along with a wide variety of in text references to other material that solidify claims and a bibliography that provides easy to access pathways to the materials referenced in the text to verify their standing as well.

To determine if this text was peer reviewed, I found in the acknowledgements portion a brief summary of the authors peer review process to ensure publication through a university. The author also notes editors and many others who helped revise the text prior to publication. 

To assess if this text is academic material, I am seeking a summary of findings or results. This is a very large text that covers many topics when viewing the ecology of each unique rocky mountain and its history. This means that the findings are listed at the end of every subject covered as opposed to all in one place at the end of the text. I feel that this qualifies the research as academic.

This source is classified as academic, peer-reviewed research material.

References

Sandford, Robert W. Ecology & Wonder in the Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks World Heritage. Edmonton: AU Press, 2014. 

Tutorial: How to Evaluate Sources of Scientific Information [Internet]. Kamloops, BC: Thompson Rivers University [cited 2020 Jul 20]. Available from: https://barabus.tru.ca/biol3021/evaluating_information.html#1

Post 1: Observations

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The study site I have selected is a creek formed by lake overflow down a cliff face into a valley surrounded by wetlands. It is called Peterson Creek and is a recreational green space with many groomed walking paths that are frequented by residents and often off leash dogs. Notable wildlife in the area was sparse, with minimal to no tracks visible, near silent trees with only one high pitched chirp coming from a small bird in the brush and a single brown squirrel in a decaying tree stump. The valley has a steep grade slope upwards that dramatically changes the terrain from lush, well-established greenery, to grasslands and eventually desert approximately 50 meters in elevation from the base.

The area I have selected to study is 2 acres total radiating out from the creek bed and up both sides of the valley. The creek bed is mostly a rock base with sediment at the base of the waterfalls but it does not continue down the creek. The edges of the creek are quite steep as spring flooding erodes a deep scar that it left nearly empty by this time of year. Immediately surrounding the creek is grass, bamboo, and medium sized shrubbery with many types of berries visible. Scattered amongst this is a variety of medium and large trees of varying types.

A few I was able to form an educated guess towards their type were Pine, Birch, willow, maple and poplar. The area is located in the city center directly next to the hospital. It is surrounded by busy streets on each side that are not visible from the trails or audible due to the deep valley and brush positioning in relation to the trails. I made my first observation at the site at 13:00hrs, the temperature was 11 degrees C with a gentle breeze. The skies were completely cloud covered. 

I made many interesting observations during my first trip to the site; the most prominent in my mind were as follows. Does the lack of sediment and the narrowness of the creek bed along with the seasonable variability in water levels affect spawning of fish in the area? I also noticed a randomness to tree type and placement and was curious if these were planted intentionally to add appeal to the area and if so, does this adding of biodiversity in the area create more interest for animal population, or does it drive them away due to creating an abnormal habitat for them? Lastly,  I noticed a lack of debris in the creek. There were no sticks or blockages in the water, which struck me as an unexpected finding as a lake is what feeds the creek via a waterfall. Does the potential cleaning out of the creek for aesthetic purposes contribute to the lack of animal inhabitants?

Blog Post 8: Tables and Graphs

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

I created a table to show the frequency of conk presence and tree species within the three ecotypes I sampled. I sampled 10 replicates in each ecotype resulting in 120 trees sampled. I wanted to see if the data would show a pattern between tree species, tree health and conk presence. I had some difficulty creating a visual representation of the data as I had originally wanted to show a graph, as I feel they are very clear. However, I had many variables I wanted to compare and I was not able to do this in a clean way with a graph. I was able to show conk frequency per ecotype, tree species frequency per ecotype and average tree health per ecotype. The data is showing support of my claim that conks are opportunistic of trees in poor health, however, I think I would need to increase my sample size to show a stronger argument. It is quite difficult to visually represent what you intend when thinking about the data – the process can leave many things lost in translation.

Blog post 6: Data Collection

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Data collection for my study has begun. So far I have collected 7 replicates. There were not any problems this time around. The sampling went according to expectations and there were no surprises in the process. Over the process of the data collection, some further observations of the area have been made. I have noticed that there is some grass cutting occurring in the tall grass areas of my study area which I hadn’t noticed before. This could be a contributing factor to the observed differences in the vine growth so I have begun corresponding with the City to confirm the schedule and extent of the grass cutting through the growing season.

Blog Post Three, continuing Observations

TRU Open Learning 1 Comment

The organism I chose to study are ants. 

Throughout the course I watched where ants were in my yard including in my garden, the part of the yard closest to the house, and the part of the yard that is behind a row of trees that was covered in weeds.

I noticed at first there were a lot of ants in the garden by some of the plants I had planted. There was also an abundance of ants in the yard by the house, despite a pool, a trampoline, and children often playing out there. As time went on, I noticed a shift in where the ants were. There are now less in the garden area and in the yard by the house. However, I noticed that there are now ants in the very back patch where there was none before.

A hypothesis I have about the change in ant location is that the effects of the round-up weed killer has decreased due to lack of use making the back half more hospitable.

One potential response variable is the abundance of ants in certain areas in the backyard (garden, main yard by the house, and the back part). A potential explanatory variable is that effects of the weed killer is wearing off. This would categorical as it will be measured by the absence and/or presence of ants.

Blog Post 4- Sample Strategies.

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The results of the three sampling strategies used in the virtual forest tutorial.

 

Based on the time spent sampling, the Distance Random sampling was the most efficient with 4 hours and 43 minutes, Area Systematic sampling took 12 hours and 37 minutes and Haphazard sampling took 12 hours and 48 minutes. For the common species, the most accurate sampling strategy was the Systematic sampling. The most accurate for rare species was the Random sampling strategy. The accuracy declined for the rare species for the haphazard sampling strategy. 24 was not a sufficient number of sample points to capture the number of species in this community.  No it was not enough sample points to accurately estimate the abundance of these species. The accuracy for the haphazard sampling strategy changed for the common species and rare species. The systematic sampling strategy was more accurate compared to the 2 other strategies.