FERMI QUADRAT PRAIRIE STUDY 2006

Back to Period 2 List of Student


Top Data Table Graphs Comparative Analysis


GPS LOCATION: N:41°50`27.9"   W:88°16'24.6"

STUDENT RESEARCHER: Gino L

Fermi Lab Arial View








 

DATA:

Table of our Fermi Quadrat

Plant name total # Plants found Total percentage Domiance Importanc Value
Uknown Grass 1288 30 30 5211.4
Big Bluestem 27 14 14 144.6
indian grass 7 16 16 67.4
New england aster 9 4 4 55.3
Rosinweed 2 2 2 55.4
Mountain mint 9 4 4 55.s

Table of 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            
Big Bluestem 35.25 116.69   Big Bluestem 35.25            
Compass Plant 2.5 8.38   Unlisted-Grasslike 20.42            
Indian Grass 18.5 71.08   Indian Grass 18.5            
Switch Grass 3.17 16.27   Unlisted-Oval leaf 12.83            
Prairie Dock 3.67 13.98   Sweet Clovers (tall) 11.67            
Rosinweed 0.42 9.29   Wild Bergamot 6.67            
Yellow Coneflower 0.33 6.47   Prairie Dock 3.67            
Wild Bergamot 6.67 37.65   Switch Grass 3.17            
New England Aster 1.25 4.43   Compass Plant 2.5            
Tall Boneset 0.58 9.93   Yarrow 2.25            
Foxglove Beard Tongue 0.08 2.82   Wild Carrot 1.5            
Indian Hemp 0.08 3.02   Hairy Vetch 1.42            
Daisy Fleabane 0.08 3.21   Tall goldenrod 1.33            
Wild Carrot 1.5 13.96   New England Aster 1.25            
Sweet Clovers (tall) 11.67 41.26   Clovers (ground) 0.83            
Yarrow 2.25 16.82   Tall Boneset 0.58            
Tall goldenrod 1.33 15.24   Rosinweed 0.42            
Clovers (ground) 0.83 4.66   Yellow Coneflower 0.33            
Hairy Vetch 1.42 8.82   Drummonds Aster 0.33            
Drummonds Aster 0.33 3.8   Foxglove Beard Tongue 0.08            
Unlisted-Oval leaf 12.83 39.1   Indian Hemp 0.08            
Unlisted-Grasslike 20.42 153.13   Daisy Fleabane 0.08            

 

 

 

 

GRAPHS OF DOMINANCE AND IMPORTANCE VALUE:

     

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

There are three main topics that are used to compare the quadrats. (a one by one by one by one meter square) but in order to do this you need to find out the

dominance, which is how dominate the plant is to the prairie, importance value which is how important the plant is to the prairie, and diversity, which is used when comparing two plants.

             When we went out to the Fermi lab, we had to identify what was in our quadrats. Then find out the what the dominance of the plants were in the quadrat, then we had to

come to a conclusion. In 2006 the average dominance for big bluestem grass was 24.49 per square. This means that there were 24.49 big bluestems in one fist. (100 fists in one quadrat) then we had to fmd out the importance value of big bluestem plant. It came out to be 119.07 which is how important it was to the quadrat!

Part 2

There are some reasons that we could compare the two types of comparative analysis, with the importance value and dominance. In 2004 the data for big bluestem

was 12.009. In 2005 the data was 64.9. The data in 2006 was 119.6. Some ofthese

reasons, it could have been the precipitation. It could have been rainy in one area but not the other.

For example, in the prairie it is more open so it could get more amount of rain than in the forest which is covered by trees and very little rain can break through. Same for the

amount of sun light. More in the prairie less in the forest. So as one can see, those are the reasons we could compare the analysis

Part 3

Next, from all of our study, we need to find out what will happen in about 10 years. Well

if you take the data from 1992, it has changed quite a bit. Lets talk about some of these

changes. In 1992 it               a lot,(72.7 to 119.07) that is a lot, some of the reasons it got

like this were maybe because of the rain or the amount of sunlight it got. All and all, this

                                                              I .                                                   A

is what I think will happen in the future.

Part 4

As one can see, it's time to tell you what I learned all of this fun trip. Well first of all, I learned what dominance, importance value, and frequency means. All and all this was a very nice trip, to learn about the prairie, it was really fun for me, and how it had to change

over time.
 

 

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.