We will use the preliminary experiment to see where we went wrong which will hopefully increase the accuracy of our experiment and make it easier to carry it out. The preliminary work should highlight many points for improvement that we should aim to stamp out if at all possible or that we should consider when recording results.
Fair test
I aim to keep the experiment fair by whatever means possible and therefore must thoroughly check the following constantly for fairness:
- The measurements recorded must be as accurate as possible; in the smaller quadrant, we will not discard a substance if the squares are not full, we will record them by adding it to other half full squares
- When we are using the metre quadrant and flipping it over, we will make sure the flip goes only as far as it should, and that the measurements are recorded to a degree of accuracy of 0.5
Safety
To keep the experiment as safe as possible, the following guidelines should be met:
- Walking boots or Wellington boots should be worn to tackle the rough terrain to prevent causing damage to feet or other footwear
- Running should be avoided as slipping is very likely
- The quadrant should be flipped over carefully
- Waterproof clothing should be sported to protect from rain
- When lifting animals such as craps, handle and lift them the correct way as not to get hurt by its pincers
Variables
The variables we will be using in this experiment are the locations of transects that we are making. One transect will be made alongside a groyne, while another will be made down the middle of the beach. These variables should therefore show us the difference in environments due to different factors, as well as zonation.
Dependant variables will be factors such as substrates, seaweed and animals in the areas investigated. These should hopefully differ throughout each transect and in comparison to each other.
Preliminary work
For my preliminary work, I carried out the plan mentioned above in the method. The results found along with the procedure planned should help me in planning, doing and analysing my main experiment.
The results are on separate sheets.
The results I found are very inaccurate due to the 1.5metre gap between each quadrant measured. This must have made the test very unfair since the animals could have been quite randomly located therefore we might have missed a lot.
Hypothesis
I predict that the outcomes of the two line transects will be different due to their locations. Being beside the groyne will have an effect on the biotic and abiotic factors present. There may be more of a particular substrate by the groyne than there is down the middle. A certain type of seaweed may also be prominent at a certain area. This could be due to the substrate present or the tidal zonation. The groyne provides more shelter therefore more wildlife may be present.
Due to zonation, and the characteristics it possesses, I can predict, using scientific knowledge and understanding, that there will be less animals in the middle zone. There would be more chalk on the lower zones of the beach since it is more commonly found in water, and therefore, more flint would be present on the upper zones. I know that bladder wrack should be found in the middle zone and on flint mostly because it needs to come to the surface of the water for light as often as possible, so being uncovered for longer is better. Therefore, the green seaweed that should also be found should be more common on the chalk substrate. I predict that there would be more of the animals that prefer less water, like crabs, on the upper shore, while there would be fish found occasionally on the lower shore since they need less oxygen due to their gills. Limpets, I know and can say will have thicker shells on the upper shore and thinner shells on the lower shore. They have these adaptations for the sake of preventing desiccation.
Results
The results I have found have been processed into tables and graphs on separate pieces of paper.
Analysis
The results we have gathered contain many identifiable trends. These include the locations and coverage of the substrates, seaweed and wildlife. First I will examine the results down the middle of the beach
Middle of the beach transect
Seaweed
- Starting from the top of the graph, we can see serrated wrack has no clear pattern but could assume that it is usually found in the presence of flint, as there is a slight similarity in the positioning of both. It is spread throughout the entire transect, although sparse
- The sea lettuce is found only in the lower tide meaning it prefers to be under water often. It seems to be coinciding with chalk
- The bladder wrack population, like the serrated wrack, is ideally suited to the conditions that consist of flint. It prefers the upper zones since it needs to respire above water; this is why it has the bladders
- The corolina is found only at the lower tidal zone. This follows a similar trend to chalk, as it is the substrate found here most commonly
- Entermorpha Linza is the most popular form of seaweed. There are lots of it found ranging from the lower tide to the upper zone. It is found in coincidence with chalk and sand
Substrate
- Chalk is the most common substrate, It is found throughout almost the entire transect. Its habitats have relations to those of Entermorpha Linza and sea lettuce
- Sand is found vastly in the splash zone and also frequently in the lower zone. The pattern of Entermorpha Linza can be found within that of the sand
- Flint is often present in the middle and upper zones. It usually can be seen to house bladder wrack and serrated wrack. It is the niche for these two different species
Wildlife
- Rough periwinkles were not very common. They appeared most in the upper zone but not with a particular substrate in our transect
- There was only one crab in my transect, meaning they were rare or not found commonly, in the middle of the beach. This could also be an anomaly
- Barnacles were in a wide range of positions. They were spread sparsely from the lower to the upper zones
Transect by the groyne
Seaweed
- There is little seaweed by the groyne. The groyne’s functions must be the cause for this; it provides more shelter
- The Bladder wrack has a very wide range and is scattered with no particular pattern
- There is hardly any sea lettuce by the groyne, only a small patch was found in the lower zone
- Serrated wrack is found from the middle to the upper zone. It is found in conjunction with flint mostly
Substrate
- There is very little chalk by the groyne. The only small traces found are in the lower zone. The groyne makes it a more sheltered zone, making worse conditions for the chalk
- Sand is fairly common by the groyne. The majority of it is found at the bottom of the beach, reaching up to the lower zone. It is then quite sparse, dotted throughout the transect, apart from a large patch on the upper and splash zones
- There is a small patch of flint at the bottom of the beach, but apart from that, the flint is almost totally covering the area from the lower to the splash zones, making this location a very good one for the flint to inhabit
Wildlife
- There is a reasonably high population of Barnacles by the groyne. They are spread throughout the entire transect. They are more consistent at the upper zone, but there is one single fairly high measurement at the lower zone
- It is more likely that Beadlet Anemones would be found at the upper zones, according to our results, as this is where we found them
- There was only ever one dog whelk found on this transect and this was between the middle and upper zones
- A few limpets were found at the upper zone, although they weren’t very common
- There are only two mussels, found at the upper zone
- Rough Periwinkles are very common by the groyne. They are found right the way through the transect
Overall analysis and comparison
The transect that was made down the middle of the groyne has a very varied content of substrates. They are all common but not especially. The seaweed is very substrate-specific. There is lots of it and they all have ideal habitats. Wildlife is quite sparse.
The transect that was made by the groyne has one very dominant substrate, Flint, which covers most of the area. Sand is fairly common in comparison, and chalk is almost nonexistent. There isn’t much seaweed by the groyne. The wildlife on the other hand is very prosperous since this location is much more sheltered.
While down the middle there is more seaweed, there is more wildlife by the groyne. Flint is a lot more dominant by the groyne than in the other transect, and chalk is a lot less common by the groyne also. These are the main differences I found in my experiment.
Conclusion
If I compare my hypothesis to my results I can realise that my primary and general predictions were accurate in saying that the two transects would differ due to location. I can identify that more wildlife is present by the groyne due to shelter. However, more seaweed and chalk are present down the middle of the beach due to better-suited conditions.
I was also correct in predicting that different seaweed would have different niches. For example, Bladder Wrack prefer upper zones because they need air more, explaining the bladders, which help them reach the surface.
Zonation, as I forecasted, affected the locations of different substrates and seaweed, chalk preferring the lower zones, while flint prefers middle and upper zones.
Evaluation
The procedure I carried out was successful due to many reasons. The planning was very well considered and the preliminary work helped a great deal to improve the efficiency of my final experiment.
The results I gathered, although accurate could have been improved upon. To do so, I could have repeated the experiment over and over, identifying anomalies and improving accuracy each time. It would help find a more accurate mean results table.
One problem with the transects I made with the quadrant were that they were quite inaccurate due to the thin line that we actually measured. This left great margin for error. Since the line was so thin, I could have measured a unique, abnormal set of results that did not match the true nature of the beach’s ecology. I could have measured a much larger area by doing, for example, a transect along the beach that was 10 metres wide. This would account for a more accurate experiment.
An anomaly I encountered was within the wildlife of the transects. The crabs in particular were quite anomalous since only one was found but outside the transect I found quite a few crabs.
Due to all of the above, although the evidence is very reliable, it could be improved a lot through repetition. To be as accurate as possible, all the suggestions above would need to be taken in to account.
To further improve the experiment, I would do other transects at different parts of the beach, which encompass different biotic and abiotic factors.
