Shoestring2014 5-decomp

18
Litter Decomposition Experiments Involving Young Technicians Rick Biche and Team 2 (2012-2014) A. Crosby Kennett Middle School

description

Litter Decomposition Experiments Involving Young Technicians, Rick Biche and Team 2 (2012-2014), A. Crosby Kennett Middle School. Hubbard Brook Annual Cooperator's Meeting, W. Thornton, NH, July 10, 2014.

Transcript of Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Page 1: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Litter Decomposition Experiments Involving Young Technicians

Rick Biche and Team 2 (2012-2014)

A. Crosby Kennett Middle School

Page 2: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Context Nutrient and carbon cycles

Students will…• develop a model to describe the

cycling of matter and the flow of energy among the living and non-living parts of an ecosystem

C. VanDyne

Page 3: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Mass Loss of Litter in the MELNHE Stands

• Nutrient Addition (N, P, N+P)

• Stand Age

– Litter mix

– Incubation stand

• Litter Arthropods (via mesh size)

Page 4: Shoestring2014 5-decomp
Page 5: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Young Stand Mix

American Beech 1.0±.02g

White Birch 0.75±.02g

Pin Cherry 0.5±.02g

Red Maple 0.5±.02g

Mature Stand Mix

American Beech 1.25±.02g

Sugar Maple 1±.02g

Yellow Birch 1±.02g

Litter mixes based on data collected in 2009 and 2005 (C7) by Matt Vadabancouer, Marty Acker, Craig See, Corrie Blodgett, and the 2010 Field Crew

Page 6: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Building Litter Bags

Page 7: Shoestring2014 5-decomp
Page 8: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Assignment

• Simplified data set

• Question– What was the effect of mesh size on the loss of

mass from litter?

– Did fertilization alter decomposition?

– How decomposition different between young and old stands?

• Use the data to support an answer to the question.

Page 9: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

R. StewardGrade 8

Page 10: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

R. StewardGrade 8

Page 11: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

M. JonesGrade 7

Page 12: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

M. JonesGrade 7

Page 13: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Student hypotheses

• Young stand litter has more nutrients

• There are dead bugs in the large mesh bags

• Mature stands have a better environment for decomposition

• Young stands have less good soil

• The fertilizer is taken by the plants before it gets to the litter

Page 14: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

P > Con p=0.03

Page 15: Shoestring2014 5-decomp
Page 16: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

P > Con p=0.03

P > Con p=0.04

Page 17: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

Multiple R-squared: 0.8061, Adjusted R-squared: 0.6364p = 0.022

Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) PlotAvgPO4 1 0.0019015 0.00190153 6.8244 0.031017 * Treatment 3 0.0002064 0.00006881 0.2470 0.861309 Stand 3 0.0071567 0.00238557 8.5616 0.007044 **Residuals 8 0.0022291 0.00027864

Resin strip data from Fisk, M. C., Ratliff, T. J., Goswami, S., & Yanai, R. D. (2014). Synergistic soil response to nitrogen plus phosphorus fertilization in hardwood forests. Biogeochemistry, 118(1-3), 195-204.

Page 18: Shoestring2014 5-decomp

• Shoestring crews 2012-2013 – Field help and inspiration

• Geoff Wilson and Jackie Wilson – Support and opportunity

• Craig See, Adam Wild, Matt Vadabancoer - Reviews• Ruth Yanai, Melany Fisk, Christy Goodale – support

and guidance• Sean Littlefield – field assistance• Kevin Richard - trust• Team 2 (155 student technicians)

Acknowledgements