Our Pond's Health

1. General purpose:

Our pond, which is located in middle of our campus, is an important part of the overall health of our local ecosystem and the river watershed. The General Purpose of the Campus Pond Water Quality Assessment is to understand its current water quality.  By comparing the Diversity Index and data collected this year to those from previous year, both chemical and biological data, we can inspect the trend of our water’s health and  find evidences for changes in the pond, therefore, we can conclude answers and have solution for negative transformations of our pond and the outflow of it, the swamp.

- Check if the pond is clean and clear by

+ chemical test

+ observation

+ biotic ( animal lives in the system )  

- Hypothesis: If the abiotic and biotic factors change in a negative fashion, then the changing landscape surrounding the pond has caused the changes.

2. Material used:

• Camera (from iPhone and iPad)
• Net
• Bucket and Tray
• Sampling Tubes
• Spoons
• Magnifying Lens
• Pipette
• Physical Test:

• Temperature ( “ name ” )
• Turbidity

• Chemical Test:

• pH
• Phosphate
• Nitrogen
• Dissolved oxygen

3. Method ( picture )

First, we did observation of the sites for a few minutes and did our chemical test right away before stirring the site. We followed the procedure of chemical test from the LaMotte water test

which is included on the pictures we had.

We poured some pond water into the bucket. Next, we used the net and tried to dig and stir the dirt at the bottom of the pond. Then, we reused the net to get the water, which was already mixed with dirt. Then, took the dirt we had into the bucket of water. Leave it until everything in the bucket settle down, then observe closely to animals inside there. Use pipette to take small animals such as fishfly, caddisfly to sampling tube for more details. Then record number of individuals of each animals had found. repeat the procedure again in the next classes.

4. Clips + Photos

We tested the water at Site 1, which was an inflow. The water that was coming into our area was from the parking lot and much of the drainage throughout campus. The area was surrounded by trees and there was grass growing in the water. It was muddy and there were many rocks, varying in size and were of a sandy color. The water itself was very clear and we could see many organisms living there. Each day, the temperature of the air varied but the water stayed at a consistent temperature. It was only windy and cold on Saturday and the other days were relatively warm.

5. Chemical data:

1. Saturday
1. Temperature:
1. Air: 9.5 C
2. Water: 12 C
2. pH: 7
3. Phosphates: 1
4. Nitrates: 0, 0
5. Organisms found: none
2. Monday
1. Temperature:
1. Air: 17 C
2. Water: 12C
2. Nitrates: 0,0
3. Turbidity: 10
4. Dissolved Oxygen: 0
5. Organisms found:
1. Frog (x3)
2. Hellgrammite (x1)
3. Fishfly (x1)
4. Mayfly Nymph (x1)
3. Tuesday
1. Temperature
2. Nitrates: 0,0
3. Turbidity: close to 0
4. Dissolved Oxygen: 0
5. Organisms:
1. Dragonfly nymph (x2)
2. Caddisfly (x1)
3. Mosquito Larva (x1)
4. Aquatic Worm (x1)

               Map of the pond from google maps with Adam’s hand writing :D

	Diversity Index	Total number of species
2007	19.309	168
2008	15.4	122
2010	11.76	193
2012	7.26	134
2013	10.184	279

Table 1: The campus pond’s Diversity Index and Total Number of Species from 2007 to 2013.

Calculation about the Pollution Tolerance Index: Our Water Quality Score is 52.2 which is higher than 40 which prove that the diversity of animals in our pond is high and the pond is a good environment for different animals to live in, especially to those which sensitive to polluted water.

	2007	2008	2010	2012	2013
Aquatic worms	6	5	12	3	14
Leeches	0	0	0	0	17
Midge Larvae	10	10	5	4	7
Snails	0	0	0	0	10

Table 2: Number of some tolerant species from 2007 to 2013

6. While looking at the data we collected, we had to scrutinize and discuss our results and compare our data the years before to find trends, figure out any errors we made and possible variables that affected the trends. The diversity index of this year, 2013, was 10.184. To figure this out, we calculated the total number of individuals, divided the number of each organism we found by the total number, square that number and then add up all of our results to find the diversity index. Looking at past numbers, we can see that our year was not in accordance to the declining trend in the diversity index from 2007 to 2012. The results of our data collection may have been affected by the fact that we had 6 sites whereas there had been fewer in the past.

The area around the pond has also changed with the addition of two turf fields. This addition may cause a spike the levels of nitrates and phosphates which may cause the diversity in the pond to drop. This can mean that indicator species populations, like mayflies, stoneflies, caddisflies, etc., could drop as a result, allowing the more pollution tolerant species to thrive.

7.  Although there have been findings that would suggest a decline in the diversity of the pond, this years results paint a picture that the pond is in good health. The chemical tests all came back within the healthy levels that are expected in any water system, the pH was 7, the Nitrates were 0,0 and the Phosphates were under 3 every time. The water seemed clean and there was an abundance of life in the pond, ranging from lilypads to Hellgrammites. Seeing that there were a large amount of indicator species in the water, this further helps the belief that the water is healthy.

I believe that the pond is healthy, not only because of its chemical wellbeing but because it has a lot of life. Our class saw a large amount of indicator species, and even though frogs are not the greatest indicator, the fact that they are there means that they have tadpoles in the pond which are pretty good indicators of water health. I do believe that we made some mistakes in our testing of the dissolved oxygen in the water as it always came up negative but seeing as there was life inside of the area that we were testing.