Presentation on theme: "The effect of plant coverage on macro- invertebrate density and diversity in the intertidal zone Sarah Park, Bailey Shuttleworth Cucinelli, James Holobow,"— Presentation transcript:
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
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 ●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
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.