Business Case For Diversity Essay Example

the tide. Over the course of a year, the upper zone is submerged in water for less than 1% of the time, while the bottom zone is submerged for approximately 20% of the time. This limited exposure to water presents a challenge for organisms to obtain nutrients through photosynthesis, leading to slower growth rates. Furthermore, water filters specific wavelengths of light, reducing its intensity and negatively impacting rates of photosynthesis. Moreover, spending less time in water also results in decreased dispersion of spores, leading to lower productivity. Organisms on the upper shore also experience significant temperature fluctuations.

Submergence in H2O provides protection against temperature changes because H2O has a high specific heat capacity. Species on the upper shore will experience the largest temperature fluctuations, while those on the lower shore will be less affected. High temperatures will increase the risk of dehydration and elevate salt levels in pools. Another important factor determining the organisms that can live on a shore is wave action. Exposed shores experience a lot of wave activity, while sheltered shores have little wave action. Seaweeds find it very challenging to survive in the dry, brighter, wave-exposed environment.

Normally, sheltered shores face off from the open sea and the prevailing wind, resulting in smaller waves compared to exposed shores that face out into the open sea and the prevailing wind. Sheltered shores are typically found on north to north easterly facing shores. North-facing sheltered shores receive less sunlight than open ones, making them less prone to dehydration. Additionally, these areas are generally more suitable habitats for inter-tidal beings. On the other hand, exposed shores normally face into the open sea and the prevailing wind,

leading to larger waves than sheltered shores.

Exposed shores are typically found on south to south western facing shores. These exposed shores receive more sunlight than sheltered ones and are therefore more prone to dehydration. In general, they are inhospitable environments for most intertidal organisms. With that said, I will now describe the characteristics of the upper shore zone and the exposed and sheltered shores. Afterward, I will explain how Pelvetia canaliculata has adapted to such a habitat and constantly changing environment.

Taxonomic group:

English equivalent or translation

Phylum:

Chromophycota /Brown seaweeds e.g.

Kelps and wracks belong to the class Phaeophyceae, which are also known as Brown seaweeds. Examples of brown seaweeds include kelps and wracks. Wracks specifically belong to the order Fucales, which are a type of Fucoids. The family that wracks belong to is Fucaceae. Pelvetia is the genus of wracks, and the species is canaliculata. Pelvetia canaliculata is typically dark olive green in color, but it turns black and brittle as the fronds dry out. It has a lifespan of approximately 4 years and can grow up to 150 millimeters in length. The fronds of Pelvetia canaliculata are curled longitudinally, forming channels that are dichotomously branched. These branches end in swollen and powdery reproductive structures. One notable characteristic of Pelvetia canaliculata is that it does not have air vesicles or mid-ribs.

Pelvetia canaliculata

Pelvetia canaliculata attaches to hard substrata with a fastener system that provides stability in water motion. It can tolerate a range of sheltered to open conditions. Dehydration limits its distribution higher on the shore, while competition and grazing pressure from other species limit its colonization at lower levels.

During neap tides, plants can

lose up to 65% of their water and turn dry and black. But during spring tides, they absorb water and regain their normal olive-green color and softer texture. The upper shore plants are estimated to be exposed for about 90% of the year. In water, seaweed obtains the carbon necessary for photosynthesis from dissolved carbon dioxide or hydrogen carbonate (HCO3-). However, when exposed to air, photosynthesis can only happen if CO2 from the air is consumed.

Seaweeds can perform photosynthesis at comparable rates whether they are submerged or in the air, as long as they do not become dry. Nevertheless, their capacity for photosynthesis diminishes when they begin to dry out. Pelvetia canaliculata is a species commonly discovered on high shores and frequently faces the risk of prolonged drying. While it is capable of photosynthesizing when exposed to air, it may experience nutritional stress because it only obtains nutrients when submerged.

Research scientists discovered that a specimen, which had been dried out for 6 years, was able to resume full rates of photosynthesis within less than a 24-hour period of being in saltwater again. Interestingly, the P.Canaliculata species actually needs to be exposed to the air periodically. If it remains underwater for more than 6 out of 12 hours, it begins to deteriorate significantly. This is a remarkable example of a seaweed species that relies on periods outside of water.

Increasing wave exposure and water flow rate can cause Pelvetia canaliculata to be torn off the substrate or mobilize the substrate with attached plants. It is unlikely for any Pelvetia canaliculata to survive in areas with extremely high wave exposure. In faster moving water, the risk of frond

rupture will increase due to increased drag. Therefore, Pelvetia canaliculata adjusts its form to decrease drag based on its location.

Pelvetia fronds on wave-exposed shores are shorter and thinner due to frequent breakage at the tip. Pelvetia canaliculata possesses several adaptations that allow it to thrive in the upper shore habitat, unlike other algae found further down. These adaptations include rolled fronds to reduce water loss through evaporation, channels within the frond to trap water, a fatty layer covering the cells that prevents water from evaporating and slows down dehydration, a flexible cell wall that contracts when drying, the ability to survive with low nutrient levels, and the capacity for rapid metabolic recovery when submerged during respiration and photosynthesis. As a result, Pelvetia is a highly resilient alga well-suited for its niche at the top of the shore.

"I will compare and analyze the lengths of Pelvetia canaliculata fronds on a wave-sheltered rocky shore and a wave-exposed rocky shore.

Experimental Hypothesis:

There will be a significant difference in frond length between the wave-exposed and wave-sheltered shores, specifically in the upper shore zone. I predict that fronds on the wave-sheltered shore will be longer due to reduced wave exposure.

Null Hypothesis:

There will be no significant difference in frond length between the two types of shores in the upper zone. Any differences observed will be due to chance factors.

Variables:

The table below provides information about variables that could impact investigation reliability and how they will be controlled.

An exposed shore has larger fetch, resulting in greater wave action and harming the fronds of Pelvetia canaliculata. I will

conduct my research in areas designated as wave-sheltered and wave-exposed according to the Ballantine's biologically defined exposure scale. For the wave-sheltered shore, I will collect data at the Angle Point site (SM 875 033), which is a rocky shore protected from waves inside the Milford Haven estuary. Angle Point is located 12km northwest of Pembroke and faces northeast, sheltered from southwesterly winds with a small fetch. The Ballantine's biologically defined exposure scale categorizes this site as Grade7- very sheltered.

For the wave-exposed shore, my information is about West Angle Bay, SM 852 032. It is a rocky shore on the Atlantic coast of Pembrokeshire, located 14km northwest of Pembroke. The shore faces south and has a significant fetch towards South America. According to the Ballantine's biologically defined exposure scale, this site is classified as Grade3- exposed. The length of Pelvetia canaliculata, which depends on various factors, could affect its growth rate and overall length.

The study involves various variables, including tallness on shore, wave action, and abiotic and biotic factors. These variables have different effects, which I will explain. To measure the samples, I will use a 30 centimeter ruler and record the measurements in millimeters for both shores.
Regarding tallness on shore, my research indicates that Pelvetia canaliculata only occupies the upper zone of the shore. However, abiotic factors impact different zones within the upper shore differently. For instance, wave action affects the lower part of the upper shore zone differently from the higher part. Additionally, there is a 19% greater water coverage in the lower section compared to the higher area.

Thus, there will be an increase in nutrition consumption resulting in varied growth rates. I will

measure both samples on both shores horizontally across the upper shore zone using the horizontal continuous belt transect technique. To ensure consistency, I will use a transverse staff to work at the same height. The strong force generated by powerful wave action will decrease the fronds' growth rate. The fronds will adapt by becoming shorter, thereby reducing the retarding force. While I cannot control any abiotic factors, I will measure them to observe their potential impact on the samples from the two different sites.

However, I will take both my samples on the same periods of the twenty-four hours, on the same season and on the same shore country Humidity. Wind spray increases the humidness, this will be higher on the wave-exposed because of the greater and higher moving ridge action Light strength. Needed for photosynthesis. Although the Pelvetia canaliculata requires to be immersed in saltwater for this to happen, the procedure still takes topographic point easy in air. Wind velocity. Wind increases the rate of transpiration as it moves the bed of H2O out side the pore, which contributes towards the dehydration of the fronds. Rock gradient. The steeper the stone the harder the moving ridge will hit it doing greater harm for the fronds. Besides a flatter shore will expose a greater country of substrate for colonising and will non run out every bit fast as a steeper incline.

Aspect It refers to the orientation of the stone. South-facing shores receive more light and heat, but they dry out faster. North-facing shores are cooler and darker, with less risk of drying out. Consequently, on a north-facing slope, communities of Pelvetia canaliculata will be larger

and higher up the shore.

Substrate or stone type The hardness and size of stones affect an organism's ability to attach to them. Soft stones are not suitable for attachment.

If rocks are too small, they will move around in the waves and prevent any organisms from attaching to them. It is important for the type of rocks on both sites to be the same. To measure the length of the frond on the Pelvetia canaliculata, I discovered that the average height of the fronds is 15 centimeters. Therefore, I selected a 30 cm ruler.

I believe that this size is suitable for measuring a small sample of organisms, as it will contain an adequate number of Pelvetia Bunches. The quadrat will be utilized to conduct a continuous horizontal belt transect. This is to ensure that all data collected on both sites are gathered at the same height, thus ensuring a fair trial. To record the data.

It is important to protect my information in case of rain and prevent the loss of values.

Ethical Consideration

In order to consider the beings living on the shore, we will measure the seaweed in its natural state without cutting or harming any life specimens. We will also be cautious not to step on delicate sea life like snails and barnacles. If animals such as snails need to be removed from the seaweed for measurement purposes, we will release them near where they were captured and ensure their chances of survival. It is also crucial to adhere to local regulations regarding habitat protection and endangered species, obtaining consent from licensing authorities and landowners.

Preliminary Investigation

As a group, we conducted initial work to study different shore

zones and the species found in each zone. We examined their adaptations for surviving extreme conditions such as dehydration. Before proceeding with the full investigation, we performed a pilot study on 10 random Pelvetia Bunches to determine the optimal method for measuring their length and which section of the frond should be used.

From my initial investigation, I discovered that I will be measuring the longest section of the longest frond on each pelvetia clump. Additionally, I will also position the end of the ruler on the ground where the Pelvetia's holdfast is located. Lastly, I will ensure that the ruler remains vertical at all times to ensure an unbiased test.

Method

Firstly, check the time of day when the low tide occurs and its height above chart data point. You will need the assistance of a friend who has the same height as you during this part of the method.

During low tide, position yourself on the lowest part of the lower shore where the tide is at its lowest. Place the cross staff on the land so that one side is facing you and the other side is facing towards the upper shore, where Pelvetia canaliculata grows (information gathering area). Lower your body so that your eyes are level with the gap in the cross staff. Look at the reflection of the small tube filled with colored liquid, which contains a bubble and two lines in the middle of the tube. Use one hand to support the cross staff and adjust the position of the bubble by moving the flexible plastic part up and down

until it remains stationary between the two marked lines on the tube. Instruct your friend to move around until you can see their boot through the gap in the cross staff.

Make sure she/he doesn't walk backwards because the shore is very slippery due to the mucus on the algae, and the small pebbles and stones make it easy to fall. When you can see the boot, ask your friend to stop and not move from that point. Now stand up and walk towards your friend with your cross staff. Place the cross staff on their boot position after they move their boot.

This is the new location where you should gather information. Repeat the process described above until you reach the upper part of the upper shore where Pelvetia canaliculata grows (data collection area). Every time you move up with the cross staff to a new location, you gain 0.6 m in height. Continue recording and adding the height increase every time you switch to a new location.

At the terminal, add the total height increase in metres to the low tide's tallness. The result will be the tallness of the information collecting area. When you reach the upper shore where Pelvetia canaliculata is present, place the 1/4m quadrat on the first location where they are observed. To prevent bias, measure the length of the longest frond of each clump within the entire quadrat to the nearest millimeter. Start from the right-hand side and then move across to avoid measuring the same clump multiple times. The fronds of Pelvetia canaliculata grow in bunches, with each clump being attached to a rock by a single fastener.

The fronds are

arranged in a sea way, so when measuring, position yourself opposite the Pelvetia's fronds. After putting on your gloves, gently collect a group of Pelvetia canaliculata upright, ensuring that all the fronds in this group originate from the same attachment point. Also, as a control, ensure that the group is attached to a substrate and not in a rock pool. Keep your face at a distance as there will be small flying creatures and always try to minimize disturbance to other organisms living there as much as possible. Now slide the hand holding the Pelvetia group up, so that all the fronds are laid against each other.

Now finding the longest frond is simple: with the free manus, grasp the tip of the longest frond and let the remaining fronds descend towards you or away from the sea, avoiding any further measurements of this cluster. While still holding onto the longest frond, align a 30 centimeter ruler with the frond using the free manus. Ensure that the ruler is parallel to the frond, with the 0 millimeter edge flat on the rock for accurate measurement. Use a plastic ruler with a smooth base and avoid metal materials to prevent damage to delicate fronds or rusting; it is also easier to read measurements as it is transparent. Now, read and record the length of the frond to the nearest millimeter in the prepared recording table. Keep both the results and calculator inside a plastic bag in case of poor weather conditions.

Include the frond with the rest of the clump in your investigation, but do not include any loose pieces of dust or seaweed that are not attached

to a stone. This could lead to misleading results. Also, do not measure dead fronds as they will affect your data. These fronds are typically dried out and very brittle, with a black color instead of olive green. It is recommended to consult a teacher or expert for confirmation. Measure all the Pelvetia canaliculata on the sides of the stones and those that have their hold firmly within the quadrat, even if some of the fronds are outside. The quadrat frame is relatively thick and may cover some of the Pelvetia canaliculata fronds. Avoid including rock pools in your investigation as they provide artificial environments.

After measuring all the Pelvetia Bunches in the first quadrat, discard it and move on to a new one. This is a systematic method of conducting a continuous horizontal belt transect. When discarding the quadrat, use your hand to secure the right or left side of the frame, depending on where more Pelvetia is found. Toss the quadrat in a way that the left side becomes the right side. Each time you record 5 new measurements, calculate the running mean to determine if the sample size is large enough. Once you have obtained at least three consecutive running mean values that differ by 2 decimal points, calculate the ±2.5% value of the repeated value and then double the sample size.

If the running mean stays within the desired range until the last required sample, then stop. However, if it exceeds the specified range, calculate a new range.

Abiotic factors approach

Wind velocity is measured using a wind gauge: Ensure it is facing the direction of the wind. Wait for 20 seconds until the

reading becomes stable.

Measure the average speed in m/sec. Measure humidity using a whirling hygrometer: spin the hygrometer for 20 seconds. Record the temperature of both the wet and dry thermometer. Utilize the chart to calculate the humidity percentage.

Temperature is recorded using a thermometer and a gyration hygrometer.

Statistical Testing

The z-test will be used to determine if there is a significant difference between the sample mean and the population mean for the wave-sheltered and wave-exposed datasets. The z-test is chosen because the sample size is greater than 30. Z= ( S1 ) 2 + ( S2 ) 2

Analysis and Conclusion

The results tables and graph comparing the average length of Pelvetia canaliculata between the wave-sheltered and wave-exposed shores provide evidence supporting the hypothesis. Looking at the average graph, it is clear that the sheltered shore has a mean that is more than 2.9 times higher than the open shore.

The risk of fracturing fronds is greater in wave-exposed shores with faster water movement and disruptive H2O, as the dragging force increases. Pelvetia canaliculata adjusts its shape to lessen drag based on its location. Fronds on wave-exposed shores are shorter and narrower due to frequent breakage at the tips. The large error bars for both shores suggest significant variation in the results, reducing the data's reliability.

The standard divergence between the two sets of information is significant, with 24.48mm for the sheltered shore and 14.99mm for the exposed shore. Despite this variability and less reliability in my data, comparing the two sets of information should still be safe. The frequency histograms show that the data collected at

the wave-sheltered site is more diverse than the open site, with 13 classes compared to only 9 for the exposed shore. The frequency histogram for the sheltered shore displays a bell curve shape, indicating a normal distribution with the peak at the 80.00-89.99mm class. Conversely, the wave-exposed histogram shows a positive skew, as most of the data lies on the right side with a common length of Pelvetia in the 20.00-29.99mm categories. This skew may have occurred because I had difficulty measuring the very small fronds of Pelvetia growing on the wave-exposed shore and did not include them in the results.

Besides, an increase in the flow rate of H2O causes plants to be torn off the substrate or the substrate with the plants attached may be mobilized and then rinsed away. Pelvetia canaliculata is permanently attached to the substrate, so once it is removed, it cannot reattach. I believe that these factors combined contribute to the spread observed in the histogram. The peaks of both histograms are significantly distant from each other.

The length of Pelvetia canaliculata differs significantly between the two sites, as demonstrated by a trial with a 99% level of significance. However, there appears to be a convergence in the length of these organisms within the 40.00-99.99 millimeter class. This convergence can potentially be attributed to similar abiotic factors present at both sites. Notably, the exposed shore received more sunlight compared to the sheltered shore, which was shaded by a drop. This increased sunlight availability likely allowed the Pelvetia canaliculata on the exposed shore to engage in more photosynthesis.

These factors could have allowed some fronds to have a faster growth rate than others,

resulting in them becoming longer. Alternatively, it could be that on the exposed shore, the wave action is stronger, causing spray to splash higher up the beach compared to a sheltered shore with fewer waves. This would provide more nutrients for the fronds to grow longer during periods of exposure. Although a bell curve pattern is observed on the wave-sheltered site, three anomalies have been identified. Firstly, the frequency of the histogram in the 90.00-99.99mm category would be expected to be lower than that of the 100.00-109.99mm category but higher than the frequency of the 80.00-89.99mm category. One explanation for this anomaly could be interference from the surrounding environment. If interference occurred when the plant was not submerged, the entire plant would be covered by sediment, preventing photosynthesis from occurring efficiently in the first place.

If the surrounding nevertheless occurred during immersion, some of the fronds may become covered and still be able to carry out photosynthesis. This will decrease the growth rate and length of the fronds. Another factor is that within the same quadrat, I measured Pelvetia canaliculata that grew on both sides of a stone. It is expected that the fronds of Pelvetia facing the direct action of the moving waves on the side of the stone will be shorter than the fronds on the other side facing land.

The reason for the difference in length of Pelvetia fronds on different sides of the stone is that the initial force of the moving wave is absorbed by the fronds on the sea-facing side. This causes the fronds to frequently break off at the tips, resulting in shorter length. However, on the sheltered side

of the stone, the wave force is weakened by the seaward-facing side, so the length of the fronds is not as affected. To control for this in future measurements, I will only measure the length of Pelvetia fronds on one side of the stone (sea/landward facing) to ensure fair results. Another possible explanation for the anomalies shown on the histogram could be that swollen reproductive fruiting bodies on some Pelvetia canaliculata added a few millimeters to their length.

The text suggests that the growth rate and length of fronds in a specific size class (110.00-119.99 millimeters) may be influenced by intraspecies competition. The longer fronds in this class may create shade and block sunlight from reaching the fronds in the lower size classes, leading to slower growth and shorter fronds. This could result in competition for light, where fronds in the smaller size classes are outcompeted by those in the larger size class. There are two measurements recorded in the size class of 160.00-169.99 millimeters, which could indicate an exception to the expected growth range of Pelvetia, which is typically no more than 150mm in length. This anomaly could potentially be due to overgrowth or mutation, or it could suggest errors in the measurement process.

Despite the equipment not working, I observed that the wave-exposed shore received more sunlight compared to the sheltered shore. This is because the wave-exposed shore faces south. Although the difference in light strength between the chlorophyll on the different shores is small, it can impact the growth rate. Sunlight also plays a crucial role in promoting the growth of rhizoids, which anchor the young plant to the rock and facilitate good spore

colonization. This is evident from the data collected from the wave-exposed shore, which shows similarities with the data from the wave-sheltered shore.

The level of humidity on both sites is quite similar, although the wave-sheltered shore is slightly more humid. This difference in humidity was expected on the wave-exposed shore due to the higher wave action, causing spray to reach higher and contribute to the air humidity. In contrast, the sheltered shore has fewer and weaker waves, resulting in lower air humidity. The most convincing explanation for the increased humidity on the wave-sheltered shore is that it rained the night before and on the day the measurements were taken. The measurements of wind velocity were as predicted, with the wave-exposed shore experiencing faster winds compared to the sheltered shore. While wind velocity does not significantly affect transpiration rate in this case, as the humidity is high on both shores, it does have a major impact on other variables such as wave action.

Wind speed impacts the force and energy of the oncoming wave, leading to frequent breakage of the fronds' tips and reducing their length on the wave-exposed shore. The significant disparity in rock gradients between the two sites greatly influences the difference in frond length. The exposed shore experiences greater wave action due to prevailing winds and a large fetch, intensifying the force exerted on the fronds as compared to the sheltered area. Pelvetia canaliculata growing on steeper rock gradients encounters stronger wave impacts, resulting in more frequent and easier breakage of the fronds' tips compared to those growing on less steep rocks. Additionally, Pelvetia canaliculata is adapted to survive low nutrient levels as it can

only obtain nutrients when submerged, which may be for as little as 10% of its time. The steepness of the exposed shore also leads to faster drainage of water, resulting in lower nutrient levels compared to the sheltered shore.

The species' growing rate will be reduced by this. Additionally, Pelvetia, which grows on wave-exposed shores, is at risk from changes in salinity due to fresh water like rain flowing down the steep cliff face.