1 / 15

Digital Analysis of Quadrats to Determine Percent Cover of Metaphyton in Conesus Lake, NY

Digital Analysis of Quadrats to Determine Percent Cover of Metaphyton in Conesus Lake, NY. Alternate method for accurate determination of percent cover. Michael Pagano Dr. Sid Bosch State University of New York at Geneseo Summer 2003. Problem at Conesus Lake- Metaphyton.

strom
Download Presentation

Digital Analysis of Quadrats to Determine Percent Cover of Metaphyton in Conesus Lake, NY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Digital Analysis of Quadrats to Determine Percent Cover of Metaphyton in Conesus Lake, NY Alternate method for accurate determination of percent cover Michael Pagano Dr. Sid Bosch State University of New York at Geneseo Summer 2003

  2. Problem at Conesus Lake- Metaphyton • Correlation between growth of metaphyton with nutrient loading from streams

  3. Problem with determination of percent cover • Metaphyton biomass hard to estimate • Entangled in Milfoil, can’t separate • Percent Cover best estimation

  4. Traditional Method • Visual determination of cover • Stationed off side of boat • Dependant on researcher • Lack of precision

  5. Alternate Method • Construction of new quadrat (.5x.5m) to enable use of digital camera to capture image of algae • Camera mounted Tri-pod • Polarized lens used to reduce glare

  6. Alternate Method • Digital Pictures (3.2mp) uploaded onto computer • Images enhanced using Kodak Photo Enhancer

  7. Alternate Method • Images then analyzed using Image J to determine percent cover Percent Cover= Total Cover Total Area

  8. Results ANOVA p<0.05 Error bars indicate one standard deviation above and below mean Bars above represent results of Tukey’s Statistical Analysis

  9. Results 32 35 24 25 37 40 15 14 6.5 30 27 29 21 7 Graywood 2003, Cottonwood 2002, Sandpoint 2002, & Sutton 2002 not used due to sampling error which included date and condition of weed beds. Numbers above bars represent one standard deviation

  10. Results P=0.06 No loading data for McPherson, Graywood Gully not used for statistical purposes because unrepresentative sampling period; Error Bars (+/- 1 S.D.) to small to see

  11. Metaphyton Cover Determination • Is Digital Analysis more accurate than traditional visual estimation?

  12. Results • Coefficient of Variation • CV= S.D./Mean • Measure of Relative Variability

  13. Mean C.V. 2001= 0.883319 +0.385 2002= 0.979605 + 0.110 2003= 0.397958 + 0.137 Alternate Method

  14. Conclusions • No consistent trends seen between weed beds • Correlation seen between metaphyton percent cover and summer SRP loading, 2003 • Alternate method more accurate for determination of percent cover, but more replicates needed

  15. Special Thanks • Dr. Sid Bosch, Mentor and Project Advisor • Megan Mongiovi, Jamie Romieser, Evan Zynda, Student Researchers • SUNY Geneseo Biology

More Related