sycamore tree health, dispersal, and soil composition in quarry bottom flood zones
DESCRIPTION
Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones. Zachary R. Young, Sarah Minor, Hunter Schouweiler. Introduction. Sycamore Trees ( Platanus occidentalis ) Frequently found in riparian and wetland areas. Moderately tolerant of flooding - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood ZonesZachary R. Young, Sarah Minor, Hunter Schouweiler
![Page 2: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Introduction Sycamore Trees (Platanus occidentalis)
Frequently found in riparian and wetland areas. Moderately tolerant of flooding Growth standards and average age Divided at the ground forming secondary trunks Flaking is tree exfoliating, giving way to growth Seed dispersal
Biotic and abiotic factors
![Page 3: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Hypothesis
1) Flooding will have a negative effect on sycamore tree health.
2) Sycamore trees in the flood zone will have the lowest average health score due to greater frequency of anoxic conditions.
3) Sycamore trees on medium or large rock piles will have higher health scores than those on quarry bottom or flood zone mud because those trees on rock piles will have higher nutrient availability due to soil accumulation in rock pile
![Page 4: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Methods Designated 3 areas (area 1, 2, & 3) in which to sample sycamore trees
Collected data on all sycamore trees taller than 2m
Measurements: Height of tree Location of the tree: in, near, or far from flood zone Type of soil: floodplain mud, quarry bottom; small, medium or large rock
pile, and base of rock pile Health score of tree
Each member of the group gave their health score independent of the other group members’ scores
Numbered each tree
![Page 5: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Locations
12
3
![Page 6: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Location Definitions In the flood zone – at one point completely surrounded by water
We determined whether an area had been flooded at one point by looking for biofilm or recognizing other characteristics of flooding, such as depressed and dried out mud areas.
Near flood zone- within 3 to 4m of the floodplain or an elevated area, such as a rock pile, where some but not all sides of the elevated area are touching an area that at one point had been flooded
Far from flood zone – more than 3 to 4m from floodplain edge and no sign of flooding characteristics in immediate area
![Page 7: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Health Index Health Index Criteria:
0 = cannot have any foliage, tree looks dried or withered, trunk may be deformed, no flaking bark
1 = low/minimal foliage, trunk may be deformed, no flaking bark
2 = about half of tree is covered in foliage, no misshapen trunk, little to no flaking bark
3 = about three-quarters of tree is covered in foliage, good quality leaves and healthy trunk, flaking bark
4 = near full foliage with good quality and healthy leaves and trunk, flaking bark
![Page 8: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Description and Observation of Sampling Areas
Area 1
Area 1 was enclosed by a Nature Park trail, a large hill, and the quarry pond.
The flood zone in this area was distinct – pronounced by a lip that formed the edge of the floodplain. Where there was not a lip, there was a distinct contrast in plant life that designated the edge of the flood zone. There were no other flood zone habitats past this initial floodplain
edge.
![Page 9: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Description and Observation of Sampling Areas
Area 2
This area was enclosed by the other side of the large hill, the continuation of the Nature Park trail, an area filled with cattails that extends from the far end of the quarry pond, and the quarry pond.
This area had a floodplain that was different from area 1. It had many channels and large transects that extended from the initial floodplain edge into the back of this area. These areas flooded less regularly.
![Page 10: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Description and Observation of Sampling Areas
Area 3
This area was unique from the other two areas
Ephemeral pond that is located in the southeast corner of the quarry bottom, right against the quarry wall
We defined the boundaries of this area as coming out from the pond and extending to a series of rock piles which made the back edge of the area and area of cattails that enclosed the remaining side of the sampling area that was not enclosed by the quarry wall.
The flood plain was again more dynamic than area 1, but less abstract than area 2. There were some areas were watered had once been pooled from flooding outside the initial flood plain.
![Page 11: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Results
![Page 12: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Least Squares Means For Health Scores
Area Mean SE Mean1 1.869 0.21862 1.9134 0.17043 1.8136 0.1712
RE/ floodFar 1.7629 0.1666In 1.3752 0.1958
Near 2.4579 0.1996Area*RE/ flood
1) Far 1.7966 0.18091) In 0.8835 0.46971) Near 2.927 0.42012) Far 2.0172 0.30092) In 1.8521 0.20582) Near 1.871 0.35743) Far 1.475 0.3553) In 1.3901 0.28573) Near 2.5756 0.2351
![Page 13: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Comparison of Health Scores
Area 1 Area 2 Area 30
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Far In
Near
Heal
th S
core
![Page 14: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Analysis of Variance for Health Score, Using Adjusted SS for Tests
Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F PHeight (m) 1 9.811 8.519 8.519 9.66 0.002
Area 2 0.2406 0.1492 0.0746 0.08 0.919RE/ Flood 2 12.8711 13.5892 6.7946 7.7 0.001
Area * RE/Flood 4 8.1887 8.1887 2.0472 2.32 0.062Error 98 86.4554 86.4554 0.8822Total 107 117.5669
![Page 15: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Pairwise ComparisonsRE/Flood = Far subtracted from:RE/Flood Difference of Means SE of Difference T-Value Adjusted P-ValueIn -0.3877 0.2581 -1.502 0.2945Near 0.695 0.2593 2.68 0.0233
RE/Flood = In subtracted from:RE/Flood Difference of Means SE of Difference T-Value Adjusted P-ValueNear 1.083 0.2802 3.864 0.0006
![Page 16: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Least Squares Means For Health Score
Area Mean SE Mean1 1.865 0.24982 2.087 0.3043 2.282 0.3031
SubBase of Large or Medium Rockpile 2.006 0.2476Flood Zone Mud 1.427 0.7888On Large Rockpile 2.374 0.402On Medium or Small Rockpile 2.537 0.4044Quarry Bottom 2.044 0.1914
![Page 17: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Analysis of Variance for Health Score, Using Adjusted SS for Tests
Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F PHeight 1 8.391 6.424 6.424 5.6 0.021Area 2 1.266 1.938 0.969 0.84 0.435Sub 4 2.663 2.663 0.666 0.58 0.678Error 64 73.456 73.456 1.148Total 71 85.776
Term Coef SE Coef T PConstant 1.3874 0.3849 3.6 0.001Height 0.1841 0.07782 2.37 0.021
![Page 18: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
DiscusionSummary of Results
“Near” trees performed the best in relation to health score.
“In” trees performed the worst as shown by flood zone mud health scores.
Sycamores on rock piles, regardless of location, had the highest health scores
The effect of flood treatment on health score was almost significant over all areas. This was probably due to the data from area 2, which had zones that were less clearly defined due to minor discrepancies of relative watershed height.
Height was significantly related to health score.
![Page 19: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
DiscussionVariation between In, Near, Far
Trees that were labeled “In” had the lowest health scores: Anoxic soil conditions Decreased photosynthesis due to stomata closure and decreased macronutrients
(N,P,K) Flooding causes growth reduction in roots more than shoots. This leads to trees being
less drought tolerant. Increased sedimentation leads to a change in the root and soil water potentials and
poor macroinvertebrate post-flood decomposition
Trees labeled “Near” had the highest health scores: Moderately flood tolerant Same negative effects for “In” and “Far” sycamores most likely generate positive effects
for “Near” trees Sycamores thrive in riparian zone habitats Sycamore trees that were on rock piles in the “In” location are on the same plain as
near or far trees, avoiding the poor flooding conditions
![Page 20: Sycamore Tree Health, Dispersal, and Soil Composition in Quarry Bottom Flood Zones](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062501/568163f8550346895dd58e76/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Works Cited
1. Jones, Robert H., Rebecca R. Sharitz, and Kenneth W. McLeod. "Effects of Flooding and Root Competition on Growth of Shaded Bottomland Hardwood Seedlings." American Midland Nationalist 121.1 (1989): 165-175. Print.
2. Gregory, Stanley V., Frederick J. Swanson, W. Arthur McKee, and Kenneth W. Cummins. "An Ecosystem Perspective on Riparian Zones." BioScience 41.8 (1991): 540-551. Print.
3. Kozlowski, T. T. "Plant Responses to Flooding of Soil." BioScience 34.3: 162-67. Web. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1309751