Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Biodiversity action plan wikipedia , lookup
Sacred natural site wikipedia , lookup
Lake ecosystem wikipedia , lookup
Animal genetic resources for food and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Tropical Andes wikipedia , lookup
Community fingerprinting wikipedia , lookup
Biodiversity wikipedia , lookup
Latitudinal gradients in species diversity wikipedia , lookup
A presentation by: Christine Adams, Louise Tunnah, Jen Dwyer, Steven Sutcliffe, Jenn O’Blenes, and Jill Briand The intertidal is broken up into three different zones: supralittoral zone midlittoral zone infralittoral zone Factors affecting zonation Species commonly found Ascophyllum nodosum Mytilus edulis Fucus vesiculosus Semibalanus balanoides Wave Stress creates disturbance events Organisms adaptation Wave stress interacts with substrate Not all substrate equal for organisms Larger rocks such as boulders preferred Medium rocks balance between disturbance and competition/predation (high diversity) 100 Meter transect at each point 50 meter transect on the other side of Greens Point Samples taken every 10 meters using a meter by meter quadrat The meter by meter quadrat was divided into four sections, for time purposes, only one quarter of the quadrat was sampled Rocks within the quarter quadrat were measured and recorded as specific rock type based on the Wentworth Scale Rocks were classified as: Sand – Less than 4mm Pebble - 4mm and 64mm Cobble - 64mm to 256mm Boulder - greater than 256mm Bedrock Invertebrates were then identified and counted on each rock measured For identification purposes, some species were bagged and brought back to the lab Simpsons Diversity Index was calculated for each individual quadrat as well as each entire sampling site One way ANOVAs were then performed to determine the percent cover at each site and the difference between the sampling sites A regression analysis was then done to compare rock type and species diversity at each sampling site To determine the percent coverage of rock in each quadrat: pictures were taken of each quadrat analyzed on the computer program ImageJ. For each image, a scale meter was set using the markings on the quadrat Different sized substrate were measured to determine the Wentworth classification of each Each different substrate was traced and the area was measured. These measurement were used to find the percent cover of each substrate type for each quadrat. 10000 Log # Found 2157 932 1000 439 138 100 71 27 10 8 4 4 3 1 Patellogastropoda Nudibranchia Nuculoida Neogastropoda Mytiloida Neotaenioglossa Mollusca Polycladida Echino heteronemertea Arthro Forcipulatida Decapoda Sessila 1 Nemert Platy Figure 1: Taxonomic distribution of all organisms sampled at Indian Point, Green’s Point 1, Green’s Point 2 and Barr Road. (n=3784). 100 90 Mean %Rock Cover 80 % sand 70 % barnacle 60 % bedrock 50 % boulder 40 % cobble 30 % pebble 20 10 0 Indian Point Greens Point 1 Greens Point 2 Barr Road Figure 2: Mean Rock Composition and relative cover at all four sample sites. Simpson's Diversity Index 1 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 Indian Point Green's Point 1 Green's Point 2 Barr Road Figure 3: Simpson’s Diversity Indices for each of the four sample sites with a non-significant p-value of 0.1389. 70 %pebble/quadrat 60 50 y = 49.019x + 2.25 R² = 0.3972 40 30 20 10 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Simpson's Diversity Index Figure 4: Regression Correlation between diversity and rock type at Green’s Point Sites 1 and 2. a) %Pebble at Greens Point 1 compared to diversity had a significance value of p=0.0402. 120 %bedrock/quadrat 100 80 60 y = -116.04x + 84.013 R² = 0.5841 40 20 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Simpson's Diversity Index Figure 4: Regression Correlation between diversity and rock type at Green’s Point Sites 1 and 2. b) %Bedrock at Green’s Point 1 compared to diversity had a significance value of p=0.0063. 50 45 %boulder/quadrat 40 35 30 25 y = -63.104x + 38.913 R² = 0.825 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Simpson's Diversity Index Figure 4: Regression Correlation between diversity and rock type at Green’s Point Sites 1 and 2. c) % Boulder at Green’s Point 2 compared to diversity had a significance value of p=0.0301. Wide variation in substrate type however no significant difference in diversity Does this relate to exposure? Potential impact on species found? Reasons for relatively low species diversity: Temperature Dissolved oxygen content Exposure Salinity Food supply 10000 2157 Log # Found 932 439 1000 138 100 10 71 27 8 4 4 3 1 Arthro Echino Mollusca Polycladida heteronemertea Patellogastropoda Nudibranchia Nuculoida Neotaenioglossa Neogastropoda Mytiloida Forcipulatida Stability Sessila 1 Decapoda Nemert Platy Diversity vs. Substrate Green’s Point 1 Bedrock low diversity ▪ high exposure Pebble high diversity ▪ protection Green’s Point 2 Boulder low diversity stability and competition Why there was no significant difference found in diversity between all the sites? All within the mid-intertidal zone Low and high wave exposure sites Slope and substrate size 1 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 Indian Point Green's Point 1 Green's Point 2 Barr Road QUESTIONS?