Minnamurra Mangrove Ecosystem Report

Hypothesis: Abiotic factors in the ecosystem will affect the distribution and abundance of biotic features in the same environment.

Purpose (Aim): To determine the relationship between some abiotic factors and the distribution and abundance of the plant species of a River Mangrove Ecosystem.

Material and methods: 1. Below is a detailed map of the area of study:

2. The samples that were collected include: River water Sarcocornia soil Mangrove soil Casuarina soil Sporobolus soil

The water was relatively clear with not much turbidity. The Sarcocornia soil was damp and lighter in colour than the others. It was collected far from the river and therefore was not very wet. The Sarcocornia soil has coarse grains and has the texture of wet sand. The mangrove soil was muddy and very darkly coloured. The texture of the Mangrove soil is a mix between fine grains and coarse, sandy grains. It has a medium amount of humus and is the dampest of all the other soils because it was the closest to the river. The Casuarina soil has lots of humus and is much drier than the Sarcocornia and Mangrove soils as it is farthest from the river. It is also light in colour. The Casuarina is also a mix between sand and soil. The Sporobolus is very dry and has a lot of humus. It has a fine texture and is dark in colour. The Sporobulus and Casuarina were collected further from the river than the Sarcocornia and were drier because of that.

Results:

pH of Water and Soil Samples

8.6 8.4 8.2 Soil Acidity (pH) 8 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 Mangrove Sarcocornia Sporobolus Casuarina Soil Types Water Individual Group Results Class Average Results

Key: pH7 is neutral pH<7 is acid pH>7 is alkaline

Salinity of Water and Soil Samples

3 2.5 Soil Salinity 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Individual Group Results Class Average Results

Soil Types

Key: 0 1 2 3 No precipitate Light precipitate Substantial precipitate Heavy precipitate

Percentage of Water Content

30.00% 25.00% Percnet of Water content 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Mangrove Sarcocornia Sporobolus Casuarina Soil Types

Individual Group Results Class Average Results

Percentage of Organic Matter

16.00% 14.00% Percnet of Organic Matter 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Mangrove Sarcocornia Sporobolus Casuarina Soil Types Individual Group Results Class Average Results

1. Attach final vegetation profile

Discussion: 1.

River Mangrove

White-faced heron

prawn

Crab Leaves, detrirus

Pelican

Mollusc

fish

Fishing human

2.

One example of a trophic interaction is how Galls are found in Mangrove leaves. Insects lay their eggs in the leaves of the Mangroves and this is a form of parasitism. Parasitism refers to how the insects benefit from the Mangroves, but harm the Mangroves growth. The insects lay their eggs in the leaves to allow their babies to grow and eventually eat the leaf that they were born in. This causes abnormal growth in the Mangrove leaves and this harms the Mangrove by affecting its photosynthesis rate detrimentally. The insects are provided with food and shelter, while the mangrove is being harmed and not able to carry out its natural processes healthily (1). Some of these insects also feed on detritus and decaying vegetation (2). Another interaction is between the insects and the animals that eat them. Birds, fish and other mammals eat these small insects.

3.

The River Mangroves live in a low moisture and high salinity environment. This forces them to adapt overtime to be able to survive in this harsh environment that many other plants cannot survive in. Firstly, the River mangroves have special salt excreting glands in their leaves which continuously excrete salt, helping keep their salinity levels low. Their environment contains a lot of salt and the Mangroves need to find a way like this to get rid of salt (3). Mangroves have roots that come out of the mud to breathe the oxygen from the air and store it in their tissues for times of high tides when the roots will be submerged in water. Mangroves breathe in oxygen at night and this is why they have to store oxygen for hard times. This will help resist the high concentration of salt to avoid suffocation. Thirdly, mangroves can turn their leaves depending on sun exposure to control the amount of water they lose. The Mangroves turn their leaves at a certain angle that makes less surface area exposed to the sun to reach. The sun dries the plant and the less exposure to the sun, the less water the Mangroves will lose (3). Mangroves also have far-reaching exposed roots which provide structural support in the soft ground.

4. Soldier Crabs have adapted well to the Australian mangrove ecosystem. Firstly, they are able to bury themselves very quickly in the soil in case of danger. For example, if a bird is nearby looking for prey, the Soldier Crabs are able to bury themselves in a very fast corkscrew-like motion. In addition to that, Soldier Crabs are also amphibious which means they are able to live both on land and in

water. They have lungs and gills which enable them to breath in both dry and wet conditions. This is very useful when they need to escape underwater for long. Secondly, Soldier Crabs travel in big groups to disorientate predators such as birds and other land creatures. During the hesitation time of the predator, the crabs are able to quickly bury themselves in the soil and avoid harm. Also, crabs only come out during low tides and this enables them to avoid river creatures because they come during high tide.

5.

Firstly, humans have built structures around and across the river that impact the ecosystem. For example, there is a bridge that has been built by humans across to river that affects the river. It harms the plants and animals homes that are around the river and destroys the local environment. The bridge may be standing on plants and either kill them or badly affect their growth. This could disturb the natural food chain because some animals may not find enough plants to eat anymore because they are dead and just not enough to feed the whole population. There is also a train nearby that constant makes sound pollution and possibly could disturb the animals. Secondly, pollution is another big factor that affects the mangrove ecosystem. People throw rubbish on the ground and this pollutes the environments of animals and plants and could detrimentally affect their lives. Diesel boats that go past also pollute the river. There is also a nearby garbage tip that pollutes the water and consequently the soil. This causes the plants to not have good quality soil to grow in and therefore affects the quality and lives of the plants and consequently the animals that eat them. Thirdly, humans step on visible plants and animals in the ecosystem. For example, we were trampling on them when we went for our field study of the ecosystem. This affects the lives of the flora and fauna and can kill them. All of these human impacts on the mangrove ecosystem contribute to the lives of the flora and fauna and can change their pollution, abundance and distribution too.

6. a. An estimating method was used to determine abundance of plants in the mangrove ecosystem. Firstly, a 20m rope was measured across the mangrove area perpendicular to the river. 1m squared quadrats were then placed along each metre of the transect rope and the abundance of each plant was measured by making rough estimates using a percentage cover guide.

b.

A drying and weighing method was used to calculate the % of water content. The soil was first weighed and recorded with the evaporating basin and the basin was weighed separately to find the weight of the soil. The soil was left on the bench to dry or put in an oven for all the water to evaporate overnight. The soil was weighed and recorded again to find the difference lost by the water evaporating. The soil was then dried again and weighed again to make sure all the water was lost. This was repeated until the weight of the soil was constant. The water content was calculated by simply subtracting the end weight of the soil from the original weight of the soil. The organic matter was calculated similarly. After evaporation, the dry soil was burnt with a bunsen burner to burn off all the organic matter. The soil was weighed again and burnt again until the weight was constant; indicating that all the organic matter has gone. The percentage was calculated by subtracting the new mass from the mass of the soil before burning and dividing it by the original soil mass. Then it was multiplied by 100. c. The method used to determine the abundance of plants in the mangrove ecosystem was not as accurate as that of calculating the % of water and % of organic matter. In the mangrove ecosystem, approximation was used instead of exact measurements. It was just measured by the human eye. Quadrats were used as samples, although they are not exactly representative of the whole ecosystem. In the lab, however, scales were used to get accurate measurements and the soils were constantly weighed to ensure that the procedures were correct and valid. d. The methods used to measure the percentage of water and organic matter in the soil samples were more accurate than the method for measuring the abundance of plants in the mangrove ecosystem. The plants were measure using qaudrats and the human eye, whereas the percentages were calculated repeatedly by using scales. This shows that the percentages method was much more reliable than the plant abundance. Also, the place where the soil was dug out could make a difference in the percentages of the water and organic matter content. Same soil samples taken from different depths may have different organic matter and water percentages. This is a flaw associated with the percentages method that can be avoided by using a digging tool with a constant depth. 7. The salinities of the different soils were not very close together. The mangrove soil had the highest salinity of 2.5 while the Casuarina had the lowest salinity of 1.7. This can be understood because the mangrove soil was the closest to

the river. These measurements show that the closest the soil is to the river, the higher the salinity will be because of the river water. The Casuarina was the furthest from the river; therefore it had the lowest salinity. The pHs of the different soils were actually very close and the range was only about 0.4. The mangrove had the highest pH of 7.79 and the Casuarina had the lowest of 7.4. This shows us that the soil closest to the river has higher pH levels than the soils further from the river. The Mangrove was the closest and therefore had the highest pH and the Casuarina the lowest pH because it was the furthest from the river. The high abundance of minerals and salts in the river water and close by mangrove soil probably contribute to this increased pH. The percentages of water content of different soils varied by about 8% which is pretty high. The Mangrove soil had the highest percentage of water at 25.4% and the Sporobolus had the lowest percentage of water at 17.8%. The Casuarina had the second lowest percentage of 17.9%. As expected, the soils that are closest to the river would obviously have the highest water content, as the river water travels through the soil, and the soil furthest away would have the lowest water content. The results show otherwise, however. The Sporobulus has the lowest water content and it is closer to the river that the Casuarina. This could be due to experimental human error and other errors such as proximity of sampling points and depths of sample. However, from an experimental perspective, the results from Sporobulus and Casuarina are identical within experimental error due the inherent nature of associated uncertainty of the experimental method followed. The percentages of organic matter ranged widely. The Casuarina soil had the highest percentage of organic matter of 14.3% while the Mangrove soil had the lowest percentage of organic matter of 2.4%. This is a substantial range of 12%. This suggests that the organic matter is washed away by the river water. As the mangroves are near the river, lots of their organic matter is washed away, while most of the organic matter of the Casuarina stays in the soil because there isnt any river water reaching it. Conclusion By testing the biotic and abiotic factors of the mangrove ecosystem, one was able to determine the relationship between them and the distribution and abundance of the plants and animals. The abiotic factors do affect the lives of the biotic factors, as was seen during the field study and in the lab experiments done in class.

Bibliography 1. <http://web1.illawarra-e.schools.nsw.edu.au/New_ieec/11__12_files/Work%20sample%20Biology-%20Local%20Ecosystem.pdf>
25.03.2014

Illawarra

Environmental Education Centre. Last updated: 2013. Shell Cove, NSW 2529. Date viewed:

2. <http://www.bsu.edu/eft/belize/p/libm/animals.html> 2003 Teachers College / Ball

State University. Last updated: Muncie, IN 47306. Date viewed: 26.03.2014 2003. Ball State University

3. <http://indigiscapes.redland.qld.gov.au/Plants/Mangroves/Pages/Adaption.aspx>
Red Land City Council. Last updated: 2010. Capalaba QLD 4157. Date viewed: 26.03.2014

4. <http://www.fao.org/forestry/mangrove/3648/en/> Food and Agriculture Organisation

of the United Nations. Last updated: 2005. Rome, Italy. Date viewed: 25.03.2014