Comparing Vegetation Cover in Trampled and Untrampled Meadowhead Field Areas.

AIM – To compare the vegetation cover in two areas of Meadowhead field: trampled grass and untrampled grass. Also, we conducted 5 experiments to compare the physical factors they were:

Sampling

Water content of soil

Organic content of soil

pH

Soil drainage

METHOD – I will get a quadrat and place it on the ground in different positions. I will then count the number of squares that have vegetation and work out the total percentage cover by dividing the number of squares by 10 and multiplying the answer by 6.

25. I will then take 2 samples 1 of trampled and 1 of untrampled soils and I will do the above experiments on each sample. I will drop the quadrats 10 times on trampled and 10 times on untrampled areas this will make the results more accurate because if I drop it once the place I drop it at may have a problem or be measured wrong. I will drop the quadrat randomly by throwing it this will make it a fair test rather than dropping the quadrats deliberately in an area with lots of vegetation.

For measuring the water content of the soil I will heat the full 100g of each sample in the oven. The original weight subtract the weight after heating will be the water content of the soil.

For measuring the organic content I will burn 15g of each trampled and untrampled soil separately and then weigh it again after burning. The original weight subtract the remaining weight will equal the organic content.

To measure the pH of untrampled and trampled soil I will take a small sample (the same weight for each) and add universal indicator to it then compare the colour to those on the pH chart.

To test the soil drainage I will pass 30ml of water through 20g of each trampled and untrampled soil and after 3mins I will measure the amount of water that has been passed through each sample. The sample with the largest amount of water passed through means the sample has better water drainage.

There is also another factor that may influence the vegetation cover of a certain area. If the area being measured is not in direct sunlight then there will not be any vegetation as sunlight is needed by plants for photosynthesis. This will not be taken into account in this experiment or measured.

For all the tests and experiments I will use the same quantity of soil from each sample trampled and untrampled to make the tests as accurate and fair as possible. Also, I will do each experiment twice to make sure my results are more accurate. I will wear goggles at all times when I use a Bunsen burner and when I handle chemicals to protect my eyes.

PREDICTIONS- I think that the untrampled soil will have more vegetation cover. I think this because the untrampled soil will be better at draining water. The particles in the untrampled soil are more loosely packed compared to those in trampled soil that are very tightly packed together. So if there is a lot of rain, untrampled soil will be able to drain the excess water more efficiently. Where as trampled soil will become waterlogged because the air particles in the soil fill up with water. The particles in the trampled soil will be more tightly

Stephen Hunter 10I

PREDICTION- packed together because pressure that has made them trampled has squashed the particles together. If the drainage is poor as it is in trampled soil then nutrients cannot get to the plants. This is another reason why I think that untrampled soil will have more vegetation.

RESULTS-

PERCENTAGE COVER

QUADRAT NUMBER

NO OF SQUARES WITH OVER 70% COVER

TRAMPLED

UNTRAMPLED

1

5

16

2

4

16

3

10

16

4

7

16

5

5

16

6

2

16

7

2

16

8

7

16

9

3

15

10

12

15

TOTAL

57

158

The average percentage cover for trampled is 57 / 10 x 6.25 = 35.625%

= 36% (to nearest whole %)

The average percentage cover for untrampled is 158 / 10 x 6.25= 98.75%

=99% (to nearest whole %)

Notice the percentage cover for untrampled is nearly 3 times percentage cover for trampled.

WATER CONTENT

TRAMPLED

UNTRAMPLED

BEFORE HEATING

100g

100g

AFTER HEATING

58.89g

38.28g

WATER CONTENT

41.11g

61.72g

Water content = weight before heating – weight after heating

Water content of trampled = 100g – 58.89g = 41.11g

Water content of untrampled = 100g – 38.28g = 61.72g

Stephen Hunter 10I

ORGANIC CONTENT

TRAMPLED

UNTRAMPLED

BEFORE BURNING

15g

15g

AFTER BURNING

14.2g

0.1g

ORGANIC CONTENT

0.8g

14.9g

�

Organic content = weight before burning – weight after burning incorrect figures problem with experiment

Organic content of trampled = 15g – 14.2g = 0.8g

PH LEVEL

TRAMPLED

UNTRAMPLED

PH LEVEL

7

8

SOIL DRAINAGE

20g TRAMPLED

20g UNTRAMPLED

AMOUNT OF WATER PASSED THROUGH AFTER 3 MINS OUT OF 30ml

27ml

25ml

�

possibly incorrect results??

CONCLUSION- These results show that the untrampled soil is much more suited for growing vegetation and that you are more likely to find vegetation in untrampled areas rather than trampled areas. The results also show that untrampled soil has a higher water content that is better for vegetation. Also the pH levels of untrampled were neutral and trampled were slightly acidic. This further shows why untrampled soil is better for vegetation. My results agree with the predictions I made. I predicted that the untrampled soil would have more percentage cover and it has, untrampled has nearly 3 times as much vegetation cover as trampled. I also predicted that the untrampled would be better at draining water this was not proven with the experiments but I think there was a problem with that particular experiment.

Stephen Hunter 10I

EVALUATION- I think that the experiment wasn’t very successful. There were some results that possibly were incorrect or inaccurate which slightly didn’t help the end result. If I had had slightly more time to do the tests and experiments on the soil they may have been more accurate. I feel that I could have done with doing each experiment twice which I intended to do but there wasn’t enough time. I think that because I rushed the experiments some of them were inaccurate however some were fine and proved the point. I think the method was fine I don’t feel that any alterations of it were needed. These results are in general not very accurate, two out of the five are definitely not right the others I think are ok but again could be wrong. The organic content test was definitely wrong this could be because of inaccurate timing due to doing two experiments at once. The results for the water drainage test I think were incorrect I’m not sure what the problem was maybe the water wasn’t passed through at the same time.

If there was more time I think it would have been good to take two or three samples of each trampled and untrampled areas and do the tests on all samples this may have erased some of the mistakes in the final results.

Overall I don’t think the experiments and the whole investigation was very successful although some of the results were useful and correct. I think the problem areas have been identified and given another opportunity the experiments would be done better.