ggr379 poster ii copy
TRANSCRIPT
Paul%Hunter,%Smeet%Panchal,%and%Nicole%Serrafero%%Comparing*Soil*Characteris2cs*at*Three*Different*Ecosystems*
Results*
Methods**
• Soil%samples%were%collected%from%3%sites:%%%%%%%%%%(a)%an%upland%forest%%%%%%%%%%%(b)%a%grassland%%%%%%%%%%%(c)%a%wetland%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%• A%20m%transect%was%set%up%and%three%samples%were%taken%at%each%5m%intervals%and%bagged%into%A%or%B%horizon.%
%
• The%length%of%horizons%were%measured%and%GPS%locaIons%and%recorded%for%each%sample.%
%
• The%soil%samples%were%taken%back%to%lab%and%dried%in%an%oven%(d)%to%determine%their%moisture*content*and%bulk*density.*
• A%combusIon%chamber%(e)%was%used%to%determine%the%carbon*content%of%each%site%using%one%homogenous%samples%we%collected.%
*
Introduc2on*%
The%main%objecIve%of%this%study%was%to%establish%the%difference%in%the*soil*moisture,*bulk*density*and%carbon*content*for%three%different%ecosystems%in%the%vicinity%of%the%UTM%campus.%These%different%ecosystems%have%had%many%anthropogenic%stresses%over%Ime%such%as%deforestaIon%and%the%invasion%of%earthworms.%%
Our%hypotheses%are%outlined%in%the%table%below:%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Highest% Lowest%
Bulk%Density* Grassland% Wetland%
Moisture%Content* Wetland% Grassland%
Carbon%Content* Wetland% Forest%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Forest% Grassland% Wetland%
Moisture*Co
nten
t*(%)*
Ecosystem*
A%horizon%
B%Horizon%
0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1%
1.2%
Forest% Grassland% Wetland%
Bulk*Den
sity*(g/cm3)*
Ecosystem*
8.31%%
3.13%%
9.12%%
0%%1%%2%%3%%4%%5%%6%%7%%8%%9%%
10%%
Forest% Grassland% Wetland%
Organ
ic*Carbo
n*Co
nten
t*(%)*
Ecosystem*
Highest% Lowest%
Bulk%Density* Grassland% Forest*
Moisture%Content* Wetland% Grassland%
Carbon%Content* Wetland% Grassland*
0m%
5m%
10m%
15m%
20m%
Bulk*Density*• Highest%in%the%grassland%as%predicted%due%to%the%greater%amount%of%void%spaces%in%the%sandy%soils.%
%
• Lowest%in%the%forest%as%opposed%to%the%wetland%perhaps%due%to%large*presence*of*deadwood*in%this%site%resulIng%in%higher*bulk*density*of%the%forest%than%the%clay%soils%of%the%wetland.%
Moisture*Content*• As%predicted%the%wetland%had%higher%water%content%in%contrast%the%grassland%had%the%lowest%moisture%content%due%to%high*evapora2on.%
Carbon*Content*• Due%to%lower*decomposi2on*rates,%carbon%content%was%highest%in%the%wetland%as%predicted.%
%
• The%presence%of%deadwood*in%the%forest%site%resulted%in%higher*organic*carbon*content%than%the%grassland.%
%
Conclusion*%
Overall%the%hypotheses%were%supported%by%the%results%except:%• the%bulk*density*was%lowest%in%the%forest.%%• the%carbon*content*was%lowest*in%the%grassland.%
In%order%to%greater%understand%the%soils%of%the%three%sites%in%future%studies%should%include:%• texture%and%colour%analysis.%• organic%ma^er%analysis.%• Longer%and%mulIple%%%%%%transects.%
(a)% (b)% (c)%
(d)%
(e)%
Forest*Grassland*
Wetland*
Figure%1:%Average%moisture%content%with%standard%error%of%A%and%B%horizon%for%the%forest,%grassland%and%wetland%ecosystems.%
Figure%2:%Average%bulk%density%(g/cm3)%with%standard%error%for%forest,%grassland%and%wetland%ecosystem.%
Figure%3:%Average%organic%carbon%content%of%the%three%ecosystems.%
Table%1%–%Hypotheses%for%soil%characterisIcs%in%the%three%different%ecosystems.%
Table%2%–%Results%of%soil%characterisIcs%in%the%three%different%ecosystems.%%%