1. 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

2. Introduction ●Ecologically important region ●Few studies on the effects of flora on faunal biodiversity ●Goal: provide greater understanding of marine interactions

3. Indian Point

4. Green’s Point

5. Bar Road

6. Ascophyllum nodosum

7. Fucus vesiculosus

8. Polysiphonia lanosa

9. Fauna Littorina obtusataLittorina littoreaThais lapillus

10. Fauna Balanus balanoides Gammarus oceanicus

11. 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

12. Hypothesis 1: ●Amount of plant cover on intertidal regions of the Bay of Fundy is positively correlated with invertebrate density.

13. 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

14. Hypothesis 2: ●Amount of plant cover on intertidal regions of the Bay of Fundy is negatively correlated with invertebrate biodiversity.

15. Materials ●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 Methods

16. Results

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. Conclusion - Our study did not produce concrete results - Overall data is inconsistent - Multiple factors (abiotic/biotic) influence invertebrate density/diversity.