Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Natalie Williams
Zack Seitz, Zane Gilbert, Israel Cazuela Garcia , and Evan Yatsko
Mrs. Norris
Purpose
Hypothesis
If we compare leaf litter from the Heritage High School construction zone and leaf litter from the
Heritage High School verdant forest, then the litter from the verdant forest will be more diverse. This because
Aranae 2 -- 2
Collembola 2 2 --
Hymenoptera 7 7 --
Pauropoda 1 -- 1
Acarina 15 -- 15
Diptera 2 2 --
Thysanoptera 1 -- 1
Total 32 11 21
Species Richness 7 3 4
Table 1: The chart contains the numbers of animals per species and the Simpson’s Index of each area.
Fig 1: The amounts of animals per species in the construction zone area of Heritage High School.
Fig. 2: The amount of each species in the verdant forest of Heritage High School.
Conclusion
TABThe expected results were that the macroinvertebrates in the verdant forest would be more biodiverse than
the macroinvertebrates in the construction zone. The results may have been different then what we thought
because there could have been human error with counting and recording the macroinvertebrates. We may have
got the results we got because of the errors we could have made when recording the macroinvertebrates. These
results explain that the construction zone was more biodiverse than the verdant forest. The construction zone
had a .42 Simpson's Index and the verdant forest had a .50 Simpson’s Index. The closer the number to zero the
more biodiverse the community is. This data disproves the hypothesis because we thought the verdant forest
was going to be more biodiverse than the construction zone. The data however proves that the construction zone
The method of obtaining the macroinvertebrates could be more improved by using a carton of milk with
a cap on it until we get inside, because some of the macroinvertebrates could of got out while walking back to
the classroom without a cap. This error could have been avoided by using a cap or something that would cover
the bottom of the bottle so that no macroinvertebrates could escape. We could have also made sure there was
an equal amount of leaf litter and not one test subject had more than the other test subject. In the case of
contamination, we could have controlled it better by not having the same person and hand grab both the leaf
litter to test. The equipment used could have been more precise in regards to being able to identify and see the
The purpose was to quantify the biodiversity of macroinvertebrates, and we were able to do that by
taking two samples of leaf litter and comparing how many of each species of macroinvertebrates there were.
The results of the Simpson's Index gives us the biodiversity of the macroinvertebrates, which was the purpose in
doing the experiment. The other group however had samples from deep in the forest and right next to the
school. Both the areas were greatly diverse and they were only different by .01 in the Simpson’s Index. The
results may have been different because we got two different types of samples from two different locations.
They got their results from deep in the forest and right next to the school. As we got our samples from the in the
In conclusion the results we got were that the macroinvertebrates were more biodiverse in the
construction zone than in the verdant forest. However David G. Haskell investigated the effects of road
construction on macroinvertebrates fauna of the soil. What he found is completely different than what we found
in our experiment. Haskell wrote, “ Road significantly depressed both the abundance and richness of the
macroinvertebrate soil fauna. Roads also significantly reduced the depth of the leaf litter layer” (David G.
Haskell). Haskell found that the construction decreased the abundance and richness which goes against what we
found which was that the construction zone had a high species abundance and richness. B.J. Erhart R.D.
Shannon, and A.R. Jarrett found that the sedimentation basin discharge from construction zones did not
significantly change the number of macroinvertebrates individual present. In the article it states, “There was no
discharge,.”( B.J. Erhart R.D. Shannon, and A.R. Jarrett). This goes against David Haskell’s findings and helps
our findings by this showing that the construction does not necessarily decrease the species richness or
Haskell, David G. “Effects of Forest Roads on Macroinvertebrate Soil Fauna of the Southern Appalachian
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99232.x/full.
STREAM ECOSYSTEMS.” Transactions of the ASAE, American Society of Agricultural and Biological
elibrary.asabe.org/abstract.asp?aid=8833.
Do not remove or mark below. This rubric is for grading purposes.
Rubric
1 = Poor 2 = Above Average 3 = Excellent
Categories
The report identifies an The report identifies an The report situates the
overly broad or simplistic adequately focused area of student’s investigation of
area of investigation and/or investigation based upon the complexities of a
Understand
shows little evidence of purpose of lab and appropriate problem or issue based
Context
research. hypothesis upon purpose of lab and
appropriate hypothesis
The report identifies few The report identifies The report discusses a range
Understand and perspectives that are multiple perspectives from of perspectives and draws
and Analyze vastly oversimplified from sources, making some explicit and relevant
Perspective sources. general connections among connections among those
those perspectives perspectives
The report includes many The report attributes and The report attributes and
In-text errors in attribution and accurately cites the sources accurately cites the sources
Citations in-text citation used with few minor mistakes used. (in-text)
(in-text)
Works Cited is incomplete The Works Cited accurately The Works Cited
references sources using a accurately references
Works Cited
consistent style with a few sources using a consistent
minor mistakes style
The report contains many The report is generally clear The report communicates
flaws in grammar that often but contains some flaws in clearly to the audience
interfere with grammar that occasionally (although may not be free of
Grammar
communication to the interferes with errors in grammar and style)
audience. communication to the
audience