FERMI QUADRAT PRAIRIE STUDY 2006

Back to Period 1 List



Top Data Table Graphs Comparative Analysis


GPS LOCATION: N:_41ºn_50'28.8''  W:_88ºw_16'24.5''

STUDENT RESEARCHER: _Greg_B.

 

Aerial View of Fermi Prairie Quadrats: Plot 17

Fermi Lab Map


 

DATA:

Table of our Fermi Quadrat

Plant Name Dominance Importance Value
Big Blue Stem 63 111
Prairie Dock 7 35
Wild Bergamot 10 130
Tall Sweet Clover 15 87
Crab Grass 5 125

Table of All Quadrats of Plot 17

RAW DATA                      
Native Plants Total Plants Found Total Percentage Found # of Quadrats Found In Density Frequency Dominance Relative Density Relative Frequency Relative Dominance Importance Value
Big Bluestem 200 423 11 16.67 0.92 35.25 40.57 27.5 48.62 116.69  
Compass Plant 12 30 1 1 0.08 2.5 2.43 2.5 3.45 8.38  
Indian Grass 126 222 8 10.5 0.67 18.5 25.56 20 25.52 71.08  
Switch Grass 34 38 2 2.83 0.17 3.17 6.9 5 4.37 16.27  
Prairie Dock 7 44 3 0.58 0.25 3.67 1.42 7.5 5.06 13.98  
Rosinweed 6 5 3 0.5 0.25 0.42 1.22 7.5 0.57 9.29  
Yellow Coneflower 5 4 2 0.42 0.17 0.33 1.01 5 0.46 6.47  
Wild Bergamot 91 80 4 7.58 0.33 6.67 18.46 10 9.2 37.65  
New England Aster 1 15 1 0.08 0.08 1.25 0.2 2.5 1.72 4.43  
Tall Boneset 8 7 3 0.67 0.25 0.58 1.62 7.5 0.81 9.93  
Foxglove Beard Tongue 1 1 1 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.2 2.5 0.12 2.82  
Indian Hemp 2 1 1 0.17 0.08 0.08 0.41 2.5 0.12 3.02  
                     
Non-Native (Weed) Plants Total Plants Found Total Percentage Found # of Quadrats Found In Density Frequency Dominance Relative Density Relative Frequency Relative Dominance Importance Value
Daisy Fleabane 1 1 1 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.02 3.03 0.16 3.21  
Wild Carrot 86 18 3 7.17 0.25 1.5 2.02 9.09 2.85 13.96  
Sweet Clovers (tall) 168 140 5 14 0.42 11.67 3.95 15.15 22.15 41.26  
Yarrow 18 27 4 1.5 0.33 2.25 0.42 12.12 4.27 16.82  
Tall goldenrod 25 16 4 2.08 0.33 1.33 0.59 12.12 2.53 15.24  
Clovers (ground) 2 10 1 0.17 0.08 0.83 0.05 3.03 1.58 4.66  
Hairy Vetch 3 17 2 0.25 0.17 1.42 0.07 6.06 2.69 8.82  
Drummonds Aster 6 4 1 0.5 0.08 0.33 0.14 3.03 0.63 3.8  
Unlisted-Oval leaf 111 154 4 9.25 0.33 12.83 2.61 12.12 24.37 39.1  
Unlisted-Grasslike 3831 245 8 319.25 0.67 20.42 90.12 24.24 38.77 153.13  
                     
SORTED DATA BELOW                      
                     
Native Plants by Dominance Dominance   Native Plants by I.V Importance Value              
Big Bluestem 35.25   Big Bluestem 116.69              
Indian Grass 18.5   Indian Grass 71.08              
Wild Bergamot 6.67   Wild Bergamot 37.65              
Prairie Dock 3.67   Switch Grass 16.27              
Switch Grass 3.17   Prairie Dock 13.98              
Compass Plant 2.5   Tall Boneset 9.93              
New England Aster 1.25   Rosinweed 9.29              
Tall Boneset 0.58   Compass Plant 8.38              
Rosinweed 0.42   Yellow Coneflower 6.47              
Yellow Coneflower 0.33   New England Aster 4.43              
Foxglove Beard Tongue 0.08   Indian Hemp 3.02              
Indian Hemp 0.08   Foxglove Beard Tongue 2.82              
                     
                     
Non-Native (Weed) Plants by Dominance Dominance   Non-Native (Weed) Plants by I.V. Importance Value              
Unlisted-Grasslike 20.42   Unlisted-Grasslike 153.13              
Unlisted-Oval leaf 12.83   Sweet Clovers (tall) 41.26              
Sweet Clovers (tall) 11.67   Unlisted-Oval leaf 39.1              
Yarrow 2.25   Yarrow 16.82              
Wild Carrot 1.5   Tall goldenrod 15.24              
Hairy Vetch 1.42   Wild Carrot 13.96              
Tall goldenrod 1.33   Hairy Vetch 8.82              
Clovers (ground) 0.83   Clovers (ground) 4.66              
Drummonds Aster 0.33   Drummonds Aster 3.8              
Daisy Fleabane 0.08   Daisy Fleabane 3.21              
                     
                     
                     
                     
ALL SPECIES Dominance Importance Value ALL SPECIES Dominance   ALL SPECIES Importance Value      
Big Bluestem 35.25 116.69   Big Bluestem 35.25   Unlisted-Grasslike 153.13      
Compass Plant 2.5 8.38   Unlisted-Grasslike 20.42   Big Bluestem 116.69      
Indian Grass 18.5 71.08   Indian Grass 18.5   Indian Grass 71.08      
Switch Grass 3.17 16.27   Unlisted-Oval leaf 12.83   Sweet Clovers (tall) 41.26      
Prairie Dock 3.67 13.98   Sweet Clovers (tall) 11.67   Unlisted-Oval leaf 39.1      
Rosinweed 0.42 9.29   Wild Bergamot 6.67   Wild Bergamot 37.65      
Yellow Coneflower 0.33 6.47   Prairie Dock 3.67   Yarrow 16.82      
Wild Bergamot 6.67 37.65   Switch Grass 3.17   Switch Grass 16.27      
New England Aster 1.25 4.43   Compass Plant 2.5   Tall goldenrod 15.24      
Tall Boneset 0.58 9.93   Yarrow 2.25   Prairie Dock 13.98      
Foxglove Beard Tongue 0.08 2.82   Wild Carrot 1.5   Wild Carrot 13.96      
Indian Hemp 0.08 3.02   Hairy Vetch 1.42   Tall Boneset 9.93      
Daisy Fleabane 0.08 3.21   Tall goldenrod 1.33   Rosinweed 9.29      
Wild Carrot 1.5 13.96   New England Aster 1.25   Hairy Vetch 8.82      
Sweet Clovers (tall) 11.67 41.26   Clovers (ground) 0.83   Compass Plant 8.38      
Yarrow 2.25 16.82   Tall Boneset 0.58   Yellow Coneflower 6.47      
Tall goldenrod 1.33 15.24   Rosinweed 0.42   Clovers (ground) 4.66      
Clovers (ground) 0.83 4.66   Yellow Coneflower 0.33   New England Aster 4.43      
Hairy Vetch 1.42 8.82   Drummonds Aster 0.33   Drummonds Aster 3.8      
Drummonds Aster 0.33 3.8   Foxglove Beard Tongue 0.08   Daisy Fleabane 3.21      
Unlisted-Oval leaf 12.83 39.1   Indian Hemp 0.08   Indian Hemp 3.02      
Unlisted-Grasslike 20.42 153.13   Daisy Fleabane 0.08   Foxglove Beard Tongue 2.82      

 

GRAPHS OF DOMINANCE AND IMPORTANCE VALUE:

Graphs of Dominance and Importance Value for All Quadrats 2006

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS:

Part 1. Background Information

 

 

            I am going to tell you about three things dominance, importance value, and diversity. I am also going to tell you what we did in the field and the comparison to all of 2006, 2005, 2004, and the beginning of this project 1992. I am also going to tell you my prediction for the future, and what I learned from this experience.   We use dominance, importance value, and diversity in talking about prairies. We use dominance to find the total percent of the plant that is in the area. We use this because there can be a high percent of prairie plant which is good for the prairie or if there is a high percent of weeds then it is not so good. To find the importance value you would add the relative dominance, relative frequency, and relative density. The importance value is how important the plant is to the environment like weeds are not that important and prairie plants are really important. It also tells us how dominant, frequent, and how dense a plant is. The diversity is the verity of plants in the area. To find this you would count up the number of the plants or weed in your quadrat, which is an area in your prairie.

 

 

Part 2. Comparison

 

 

            In our quadrat we found big blue stem, prairie dock, wild bergamot, tall sweet clovers and crab grass. We found that big blue stem had the greatest dominance (63) and crab grass was the least dominant (5). Then it was tall sweet clover (15), wild bergamot (10) and prairie dock (7). Wild bergamot had the greatest importance value (130), followed by crab grass (125), big blue stem (111), tall sweet clovers (87) and last prairie dock (35). When you compare all the other years, big blue stem was the most dominant in 04’, 05’, and 06’. Unlisted grass like was the most dominant for the weeds. It also had the most importance value in those years. But in 1992 the top five were Indian grass as first, big bluestem second, wild bergamot as third, prairie cord grass was forth, and finally the compass plant was fifth. There was many diverse plants but a lot of the same were in the top ten or close to it some were big bluestem, Indian grass, switch grass, compass plant, stiff goldenrod, and wild bergamot.

 

 

Part 3. Prediction

 

 

            My prediction is that ether the prairie will be a lot more diverse meaning it will have a lot of different plants or big blue stem will keep being the most dominant over the next 10 to 15 years. I think this because their roots are so long so it can’t die from the frequent fires. Also in 1992 when we started doing Fermi Indian grass was the most dominant and had the most importance value. Big bluestem was the second and in 2004, 2005 and 2006 big bluestem was the most dominant and had the most importance value. The weeds though will die out every time because they have little roots that the fires can reach, that’s why it’s good to have the fires.

 

 

Part 4. Reflection

 

 

            I have learned a lot about prairies in the past couple of weeks like how important they are to our ecosystem and the reclamation of the prairie really helps because animal’s food shelter. It gives us great information about our earth and it physical features. It also gives us food. Also how some of the names like Indian grass came from the first settlers. They got the name for Indian grass because the top of the grass looks like an Indian headdress. Big bluestem got the name chicken’s feet because the grass really looks like chickens feet. The cord grass kept rubbing against the horses hips so they had to get a boy and give him a sword and he had to cut down the grass in front of them. I also learned how the prairies were destroyed. They were destroyed by the settlers making it into farm land. This unit was a really fun and an enjoyable experience.

COPYRIGHT:

© Copyright 2006, L&T Natural Images and Madison Jr. High, all rights reserved. Contact information: email at lccwik@comcast.net or tcoutts@naperville203.org

ACKNOWLEDGMENT:
This project was created by the 7th grade students of team 7 UPS from Madison Jr. High, Naperville Consolidated Unit School District #203 in Naperville, Illinois with the help of their teacher Mrs. Trudi Coutts along with Technology Lab Director Mrs. Margaret Gilmore. Support for the project came from Principal Ms. Erin Anderson and the other dedicated and cooperative faculty and staff of Madison Jr. High.

 

REFERENCES:
Fermilab Education Department particularly the SIMply Prairie Project. Authors: Bill Fraccaro, Johnson School, Wheaton, IL; Larry Cwik and Pat Franzen, Madison Junior High School, Naperville, IL; and Bernie Jokiel, Gary D, Jewel Middle School, North Aurora, IL.
Created for the NTEP II Fermilab LInC program sponsored by Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Education Office and Friends of Fermilab, and funded by United States Department of Energy, Illinois State Board of Education, North Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium which is operated by North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL), and the National Science Foundation.
 

Thank You for Coming