Final Post: Proctor Pond Assessment Project

photo by: A.J. Fox

General Purpose:

The Proctor Pond is a campus landmark, marking the center of campus. It is an important part of the overall health of the campus ecosystem and even the Merrimack River watershed. For our Proctor Pond Assessment our objective was to learn sampling and data collection methods that we were able to apply during our fieldwork to assess the ecological "health" of the Proctor campus pond by evaluating the biotic and abiotic elements of the pond. The goal of this assessment is to compare the quality of water from this year with the assessments taken over the past decade so we can determine the direction the Proctor Pond water quality is trending towards as well as analyze any possible patterns over the years.I think that the Proctor’s water quality has started to level off at a stable and healthy level because the diversity index, or the amount of organisms present in the pond, has leveled off over the last couple years and has found a healthy balance even with the possibility of pollution flowing in from surrounding drains of recent construction sites.

Materials Used:

photo by: A.J. Fox

All sites used:

• One pole net either wooden or metal
• Up to two spoons, one with holes one without holes
• Eye droppers either small tip or large tip
• A compact magnifying glass
• One large tub to obtain samples
• One smaller tub with dividers to place organisms in
• Smart Phone to take pictures of organisms found and to take notes.
• Identification chart organisms

Method for Data Collection:

1- Leave Shirley Hall through the doors facing the library with your phone and walk around the building towards the parking lot where there is a white door near the biology room. This door leads to a supply closet, where all of the equipment that is necessary to move forward with this project is located. Grab a large net and the bucket that it labeled with the number of your location. Inside the bucket there should be a three-section container which has two spoons, two small magnifying glasses, and a species chart.

2- Now walk down the steps facing the pond and walk to your designated location. There were six locations in total. Look at the map to see specific locations.

3- This is where the testing will occur. Prior to testing, be sure to observe the area for a few minutes. This observation of weather is imperative to the changes in your findings on a day to day basis. Record this information in your notes. In addition to your notes, be sure to take pictures of your area.

4- Next, begin filling up the large bucket with water until about halfway full then place it on a stable surface. Next, grab the net and put it into the water right above the ground. Now move the net back and forth in a sweeping motion to get the floor of the pond stirring. Do this for about twenty seconds then scoop the net out of the water and dump its contents into the net. Put the net aside and start clearly the bucket of debris (leaves, sticks, etc.) while being very careful to not miss a small organism. Fill the three-section container with water from the pond. Now search for life in the bucket and once found, gently collect the organism with the spoon or dropper and place into the three-section container. Make sure to identify the organism using the chart and record the number of times that organism is present in the test. Take plenty of pictures!

5- Alan will come around to each group the the temperature probe, dissolved oxygen, pH, phosphate, turbidity, and nitrate tests. He will help you follow the directions of each specific test and complete the test each day. Be sure to record the findings. After the completion of these tests, start cleaning up your materials, put them back where you found them, and head back to the classroom.

photos by:A.J. Fox

For abiotic data collection Alan would arrive on his famous red tricycle at our site and give us the abiotic tests, turbidity and ph (tested each fieldwork day), along with nitrate/nitrite and phosphate ( which were not tested each fieldwork day). While we used the the tests kits, Alan used his fancy 2 in 1 thermometer/dissolved oxygen sensor. When finished we recorded all the abiotic data we tested for the pond along with the date, weather, and time of day.The tests are pictured below:

photos by: Betsy Abrahamson

General Narrative on Site/Observation/Events:

On the first day, Monday, October 16, at about 8:15 a.m. Cooper and I bundled up for the frigid temperature outside to do our field work.  we were assigned one of six spots on our Proctor Pond. Our site was site number 5, at the drainage in the corner of the pond near the math department entrance. We shivered through each step but made it out alive in the end.

photo by: A.J. Fox

Following the procedure I mentioned above Cooper scooped up the contents at our site and we searched for any signs of life. On our first day we came up with some interesting organisms. Pictured below are our findings :

photos by: A.J. Fox

Our site was not a particularly active site for organisms. I believe it might have to do with the drainage being right on top of where we are scooping but we only came up with three organisms after multiple scoop tests. We were fortunate enough to catch one tadpole, and two mayfly nymphs. Alan made it to our site with a few minutes to spare. Our results for the water tests were:

Dissolved Oxygen: .2

Water Temperature: 60.8 degrees fahrenheit

Turbidity: 0

Nitrate/Nitrite: 0

ph: 6

phosphate: not tested

The most surprising result we received was the dissolved oxygen which was extremely low. Alan explained the dissolved oxygen was so low because it was early in the morning and the sun was not completely out because it was cloudy. As a result there was not a lot of photosynthesis going on with the plants and this made the dissolved oxygen so low. It is also worth noting that as pictured above, the cold weather has brought on a lot of death among the pond plants. Lilly pads can be seen dying off and turning brown. Overall the first day was a success and we gathered tons of great data.

On the second day, We field tested at the same spot using the same methods. The day was October 17th at approximately 9:50a.m. The weather was much warmer than the first day and the sun was out and about. Right off the bat we had more luck with catching organisms. This time I got to scoop up in the pond. After I poured my scoop into the white bucket me and Coope got to work sifting through the plant matter and mud. Pictured below are a few of our findings:

photos by: A.J. Fox

Our result were:

Water Temperature: 54.6 degrees fahrenheit

Dissolved Oxygen: 1.2

Turbidity: 0

ph: 6

phosphate: 1/2

The dissolved oxygen is once again another important abiotic factor as it shows that because it was more sunny and later in the day, the dissolved oxygen was much higher. This could  be why we caught more organisms when doing our field work compared to our first day when it was freezing outside and in the early morning.

On the third and final day, it was a wonderful sunny day on October 18th and about 10:40a.m. The weather was much more similar to that of the second day that the first day. It was also the latest we ever did our field work. Picture below is what we found:

photos by: A.J. Fox

Our results were:

Water Temperature: 54.8 degrees fahrenheit

Dissolved Oxygen: 3

Turbidity: 0

Just like day two, the Dissolved oxygen was shockingly higher than before. Once again this is due to the fact that it is much more sunny, and later in the day which allows for proper photosynthesis resulting in more dissolved oxygen in the water. This is why we caught more organisms along with a larger variety because organisms were more active with more available dissolved oxygen.

Data Tables:

Weather:

2017:

10/13: sunny, partially cloudy

10/16: overcast, high winds, cold

10/17: sunny, high winds, cold

2016:

10/24: windy, partly cloudy, 52 degree air temp

10/25: cloudy, snowing, windy, 41 degree air temp

10/27: cloudy, windy, 35 degree air temp

2015:

10/20: sunny, rain in morning, 54 degree air temp

10/22: cloudy, rain in morning, 51 degree air temp

10/23: sunny, cold wind, 47.5 degree air temp

10/26: sunny, chilly, 51 degree air temp

2014:

10/18: downpour, cloudy, 57 degree air temp

10/20: clear sky, cold, windy, air temp unrecorded

10/21: clear sky, cold, windy, air temp unrecorded

10/27: overcast, cold, air temp unrecorded

2013:

Date unknown: weather conditions unknown, 58 degree air temp

2012:

10/9, 10/11, 10/12: weather unknown, air temp 47

10/18: rain, air temp 47

2010:

Date unknown: weather and air temp unknown - declared “consistent”

2008:

Date unknown: weather and air temp unknown - “cold snap” mentioned for final testing day

2007:

Date unknown: weather and air temp unknown - declared “consistent”

Dissolved Oxygen averages

2007= (1+2+2+3+4+3)/6= tot.15 average 2.5mg/l

2008= (2+1+1+2+2+2)/6= tot.10 average 1.6mg/l

2010= (2+1+1+2+2)= tot.8 average 1.6mgl/l

2012=(2+1+1+2)/3= tot.6 average 2 mg/l

2013=0

2014= (6.2+7.9)/2= tot.14.1 average 7.05mg/l

2015= (7.1+7.1+5+ 4.1+8.2+6.3+7.4+7.9+7.4+ 5.7+5.5+8.0+5.6)/13= tot.85.3mg/l average 6.56

2016= (9+8.9+6.9)/3= tot.24.8 average 8.26

PH averages:

(2007) PH = 6.7

(2008) PH = 7.0

(2009) PH = n/a

(2010) PH = 6.8

(2011) PH = n/a

(2012) PH = 6.6

(2013) PH = 7.2

(2014) PH = 6.0

(2015) PH = 6.3

(2016) PH = 6.7

(2017) PH = 6.7

screenshot from class spreadsheet

Turbidity Averages

2007	0.166 JTU
2008	0.166 JTU
2009	N/A
2010	0.166 JTU
2011	N/A
2012	0 JTU
2013	15.83 JTU
2014	4.85 JTU
2015	6.5 JTU
2016	20 JTU
2017	12 JTU

Screenshot from class spreadsheet

Nitrate Chart

2007	0.2 PPM
2008	0.0 PPM
2009	NA
2010	0.0 PPM
2011	NA
2012	0.0 PPM
2013	0.0 PPM
2014	0.5 PPM
2015	0.0 PPM
2016	0.0 PPM
2017	0.0 PPM

Screenshot from class spreadsheet

Water Temperature Averages

2007	52.1°F
2008	52.08°F
2009	NA
2010	53.1°F
2011	NA
2012	54.3°F
2013	53.1°F
2014	54.5°F
2015	51.6°F
2016	47°F
2017	57°F

Screenshot from class spreadsheet

Screenshot from class spreadsheet

screenshot from Kiara’s blog

 photo: screenshot from google maps

Input = Drainage → Water collecting from the hockey rink → Flows underground and into the pond.

• Underground River : Drain near library and turf

Output = Site 6

photo: screenshot from google maps

Photo: screenshot from class document

Analysis:

There is a lot of variety among data over the course of the last ten years. Some of the data we have taken including water temperature, turbidity, ph, and  the single most important piece of data, the diversity index.

Diversity Index:

As Jaimee Dee states in her blog, the definition of diversity index is,"a quantitative measure that reflects how many different types (such as species) there are in a dataset, and simultaneously takes into account how evenly the basic entities (such as individuals) are distributed among those types."

We used Simpson’s Diversity Index to calculate the biodiversity of the pond.The equation is:

screenshot from Kiara’s blog

Looking at the Diversity index over the course of the last ten years in can be seen leveling off the last 4 years which is possibly a good sign the pond is maintaining a healthy ecosystem with no drastic changes. The diversity index was 7.14 in 2014, 6.4 in 2015, 6.3 in 2016, and 7.0 in 2017. Before 2014 the diversity index was all over the place with no obvious trends. For example, in 2007 the diversity index was a whopping 19.6 and only two years later it was a 0.74. Possible factors contributing to the rapid decline in the diversity index could include a harsh beginning to winter with an enormous cold front, wiping out the majority of plant matter that contributes to dissolved oxygen production from photosynthesis and minimal exposed sunlight from clouds.

Water Temperature:

Over the course of the last 10 years water temperature has been fairly inconsistent and all over the place. The most notable water temperature was this year, 2017 with an average water temperature of 57 degrees F after a steep decline from 2014-2016. This is significant because it can be a result of a warming climate that is affecting the length that organisms can survive in the Proctor pond. This may be why the diversity index has remained stable and not declining. This can also be a result of the time of day we have conducted our tests. I am sure year to year the tests vary among groups so depending on time of day, especially later in the day, organisms will be more active, especially on a sunny day when more dissolved oxygen is present  as a result of photosynthesis ,which leads me to my next topic, dissolved oxygen.

.

Dissolved Oxygen:

Alan mentioned that, “ Dissolved oxygen is better preserved in cold water” and with that in mind I looked at our data table. This could not have been more true as in the year 2016, we had the coldest recorded water temperature average at 47 degrees F. and the highest dissolved oxygen average at 8.26. This was because 2016 was a cold year and it rained a lot which resulted in the ability for the water to hold oxygen better. The rain churned the water which also helped with dissolved oxygen production. That being said, why was the diversity index not higher in 2016? It’s possible that the pH which dropped drastically in 2014 after being near a perfect 7.2  which resulted in one of the highest diversity index’s recorded but unfortunately we don’t have the dissolved oxygen data for that year which hurts the ability to know if that contributed as a factor to the high diversity index and if pH was the biggest factor for that year and on.

Ph:

Ph is a special factor that is closely related to overall pond health because the majority of organisms can only survive in a narrow range of pH. Looking at the data for pH it is clear that  our pond had began to stabilize but not grow since 2014. This is because in the year 2013 there was a pH of 7.2 (the highest pH average recorded) and a diversity index of 12.2 which overall means it was a great year for the pond because of how high the diversity index was. But the following year in 2014 the pH went down to 6.0 (the lowest average recorded). This rapid change could have resulted in a loss of some organisms because the diversity index dropped down to 7.14. Since then the ph has remained roughly the same between 6.3 and 6.7, and as a result the diversity index has also remained stable, not moving up or down in a drastic form. We can definitely see that pH has a direct impact on the biodiversity of the pond and in my opinion is the biggest factor in what determines our biodiversity. The years 2007, 2008, 2013 were all years that had a pH closest to 7.0 and resulted in the highest diversity index scores each year.  Proctor pond and it appears the issue has been to low of a pH. Thankfully it appears the pH is beginning to slowly creep back up and this is a good sign for proper health in the Proctor Pond.

Conclusion:

I believe that the biodiversity of the Proctor pond is stable and improving at the moment even through harsh, early winters like the year 2016.  I believe this is the current scenario for our pond because of the data trends I found in our pH, dissolved oxygen, and diversity index result. I think the trend in pH and diversity index slowly rising since 2014 will continue, I believe depends on the stability of pH levels in the pond moving forward. In each year the diversity index always directly relates to pH levels. The closer the pH has been to 7, the better the diversity index has been. Due to no dissolved oxygen data or pH data for the year 2009 not being recorded, it is hard to determine what caused a sudden steep decline in the diversity index. If it was known the pH sudden dropped or shot up that would be a possible explanation for the absurd drop in diversity index but it is not something that can be confirmed. As for the years 2014 to present, the pH has been steadily increasing after a great pH  in 2013 (7.2) and a steep drop in pH in  2014 (6.0). As expected the diversity index too a hit, dropping from 12.2 to 7.4 but since then the diversity index has remained stable but not increasing or decreasing barely at all even though pH has started to steadily climb back up. It is possible there could be water temperature disrupting the increase in biodiversity because it had a rapid decrease in water temperature from 51.6 degrees F in 2015 to 47 degrees F (lowest ever recorded water temperature) to 57 degrees F this year. The years that had the highest diversity index had water temperatures hovering near 52 degrees F so it’s possible that although pH is in a good place right now, the pond is not thriving with biodiversity because of inconsistent water temperatures, being  too cold one year then being too hot the very next year which I’m sure can shock certain organisms. In conclusion, this is why I believe the Proctor Pond is stable because of the increasing pH to 7.o but it is not thriving because of the crazy water temperature changes from year to year. In addition, years with later winters and water temperatures hovering around 52 degrees F seem to be the most ideal scenario for a high and healthy diversity index. Of course the higher the diversity index, the more biodiversity present in the pond, and the more biodiversity present in the pond means a healthier, living breathing ecosystem.  

As I personally reflect on our Proctor Pond project, I think Cooper and I found this experience to be very interesting because we did not know very much about our pond. We found that the pond truly has good biodiversity because of all of the species that we caught and saw but that activity among the pond ecosystem varies throughout the day and weather patterns. I think that our class had room for improvement, especially in how we organized our data and the system we used to share it with everyone. It made it more difficult to properly organize all of it into our final project. In terms of Cooper and I and how we conducted our fieldwork I think we could have scooped in a broader area instead of one small specific spot at our site. It was possible the reason why we did not find a lot of species compare to other sites if it wasn’t the drain at our site being the issue. Also, when searching for organisms in the white sample bucket we could have been more diligent and observant of any organisms we might be scooping out by accident when removing plant matter from our sample we collected. Overall, I really enjoyed doing this field work because I like doing work outside of the classroom and having hands on learning experiences.I feel like most students would never get the opportunity to do something like this and I am very fortunate to participate in this pond study that has been on going for about 10 years. It makes me happy to be a part of something that can not only benefit the future health of our Proctor Pond, but give insight into our constantly changing environment.