During my field data collection activities, I had sampled 15 replicates. In location #1, which is 0-5 meters from the water’s edge, I had sampled 5 replicates. In location #2, 5-10 meters from the water, I had sampled 5 replicates. In location #3, 10-15 meters from the water’s edge, I had sampled 5 replicates. I had decided to go back to location #1 and continue randomly sampling until I reached 5 replicates. This way, I would have 5 replicates in each location. While I have had no issues implementing my sampling design, I did collect less replicates than I had initially expected. If I hadn’t declared that each sample had to be at least 5 feet from one another, I would have had a lot more replicates. I had implemented this rule to determine that each sample was independent from one another and that their root systems were not attached. Northern Rice Root’s (Fritillaria camschatcensis) don’t have large root systems, therefore; 5 feet is a considerable distance between each plant to ensure autonomy. Also, I am glad that I had placed flagging tape on all the Northern Rice Root plants I could see in my study area because they have severely deteriorated due to the cooler fall weather.
By looking over my initial data, I had noticed that the heavier bulbs were further away from the water. This ancillary pattern does not align with my prediction that when Northern Rice Root’s are closer in proximity to a water source, the larger their main bulb will be. I anticipate that this might be due to the constant access that the plants in location #1 have to moisture, causing them to not have to store as much water as plants in drier areas would have to, similar to species of cactus (Cactaceae). Therefore, since there is a noticeable difference in weight and circumference between the 3 different study locations, my hypothesis seems so be correct so far: proximity to a water source influences Northern Rice Root main bulb size.
Sounds like everything is going well.