220 likes | 332 Views
The effect of plant coverage on macro-invertebrate density and diversity in the intertidal zone. Sarah Park, Bailey Shuttleworth Cucinelli, James Holobow, and Jenna Shaw. Introduction. Ecologically important region Few studies on the effects of flora on faunal biodiversity
E N D
The effect of plant coverage on macro-invertebrate density and diversity in the intertidal zone Sarah Park, Bailey Shuttleworth Cucinelli, James Holobow, and Jenna Shaw
Introduction • Ecologically important region • Few studies on the effects of flora on faunal biodiversity • Goal: provide greater understanding of marine interactions
Fauna Littorina littorea Littorina obtusata Thais lapillus
Fauna Balanus balanoides Gammarus oceanicus
Invertebrate Density • L. obtusata and G. oceanicus live in patches of seaweed • L. littorea feed on algae • B. balanoides and T. lapillus seek shelter from wave action • Large and aggregated vegetation shelter greater number of invertebrates
Hypothesis 1: • Amount of plant cover on intertidal regions of the Bay of Fundy is positively correlated with invertebrate density.
Invertebrate Biodiversity • High biodiversity → stable and productive communities • Schooner (1974): niche diversification/complex habitats may increase species richness • quantify habitat complexity? • Gunnill (1982): artificial increase and diversity may decrease with increased plant cover
Hypothesis 2: • Amount of plant cover on intertidal regions of the Bay of Fundy is negatively correlated with invertebrate biodiversity.
Materials Methods • line transect • 1 m quadrat • 25 cm quadrat • plastic collection bags for samples • ten sites over 100 m • constant altitude • surface species were collected • identified in the lab
Discussion Indian Point • Lowest plant cover (3.9 samples/m2) • Second largest fauna density (173.1 samples/m2) • Second highest diversity (H’=0.307) Hypothesis 1: Not Accepted Hypothesis 2: Accepted
Discussion Green’s Point • Largest plant cover (42.8 samples/m2) • Lowest fauna density (97.2 samples/m2) • Greatest diversity (H’=0.683) Hypothesis 1: Not Accepted Hypothesis 2: Not Accepted
Discussion Bar Road • Second Highest plant cover (7.2 samples/m2) • Largest fauna density (275.8 samples/m2) • Lowest diversity (H’=0.088) Hypothesis 1: Accepted Hypothesis 2: Accepted
Sources of Error • hard to distinguish holdfasts in high density of plants • distance from the water’s edge was not measured • inconsistent tide phase • time restriction
Conclusion - Our study did not produce concrete results - Overall data is inconsistent - Multiple factors (abiotic/biotic) influence invertebrate density/diversity.