Blog Post 6: Data Collection

Hypothesis: The levels of nutrients will vary with each lake thus affecting plant growth. I predict one lake will have the highest concentrations of both nutrients as well as chlorophyll. Therefore, this lake will be the best for plant growth amongst the three compared lakes.

Sample sites:

Lake Three: 5m in depth, non-aerated

Lake Devonian: 5m in depth, aerated

Lake Muir: 7m in depth, non-aerated

Replicates:

Lake Three samples will be 0m, 1m, 2m, 3m, 4m, 5m

Lake Devonian samples will be 0m, 1m, 2m, 3m, 4m, 5m

Lake Muir samples will be 0m, 1m, 2m, 3m, 4m, 5m, 6m, 7m

Thus, I will have a total of 20 samples

Data gathered:

Temperature
Depth

Secchi disk depth (for measuring photic zone)

DOC (dissolved oxygen content) %

Phosphorus concentrations (μg/L)

Nitrogen concentrations (μg/L)

Chlorophyll concentration (μg/L).

So far, I have only had minimal problems. Two of my lakes were shallower than expected, so I simply used the data from the last sample to contain any sediment. This ended up being 5m, so I simply dropped 6m and 7m because sediment would vastly change the DOC and nutrient concentrations. I am quite pleased with the data I have gathered, and I can already see my hypothesis will end up being correct. The lake with aeration certainly has a higher chlorophyll content.