Is The Preferred Habitat Of Moss On Essay Example

in height as age could impact the amount of moss growth.

To ensure fairness in the investigation, I will use the same quadrat size throughout. This way, I can survey an adequate area of the trunk without using a size so small that the moss coverage may be inaccurately represented. I will also try to create similar surroundings for each tree, taking into account factors like exposure to winds that may impact the amount of moss coverage. Additionally, I will attempt to maintain similar amounts of light availability among the areas I survey by recording the canopy cover. Finally, I will take recordings of percentage moss coverage from a total of 15 Yew Trees and 15 Oak Trees.

To increase the reliability of my overall results, I believe that a larger dataset, such as this, will reduce the impact of any potential anomalies. Despite this, there are several factors that I will not be measuring that could still affect my results. Factors such as canopy cover's influence on light availability, moisture levels and rainfall, bark texture and characteristics, forest type, seasonality, soil depth, and pH are just a few examples. While I cannot control these factors, I will still analyze their potential influence on my results.

To maintain consistency, I will select trees in the same vicinity and surrounding areas. In doing so, I will account for unvarying factors such as soil types, moisture levels, and light availability. Moreover, I will choose trees with comparable attributes. To achieve this, I will adhere to a set circumference of 1.5 meters while selecting trees. This approach will also guarantee similarity in terms of age and height among

the trees in my sample.

The quantities of moss growth may be influenced by various factors such as the number of branches and amount of canopy cover, which can affect light availability. To analyze the collected data, I will create a bar graph and scatter graph with the same axes to demonstrate the relationship between the species of trees (Yew or Oak) and the percentage of moss coverage from each of the 30 sites. Additionally, I will draw a bar chart to compare the average percentage moss coverage from both tree species, considering all readings. My results will be compared with the null hypothesis using the Mann-Whitney U test.

In my investigation, I will collect replicated measurements of one variable to ensure accuracy. To achieve this, at least six replicates will be collected and compared against a second set of data. The null hypothesis H0 states that there are no differences between observed and expected data. For my investigation, the H0 is that there is no difference in moss coverage on the north side of an Oak tree versus the north side of a Yew tree. Conversely, the alternative hypothesis Ha posits that there will be a difference in moss coverage on the north side of an Oak tree versus the north side of a Yew tree.

Moss is often found on the north side because it has a lack of external waxy cuticle and simple one cell thick leaves. Because of this, it is less likely to have water retention issues and die when not exposed to direct sunlight. The absence of direct sunlight also helps prevent moss from drying out quickly due to its

lack of a waxy cuticle. This investigation will analyze various biotic variables that can affect moss growth. For example, Yew trees are coniferous and retain their foliage year-round, making them ideal for hedging. However, green plants require light for photosynthesis which may not be optimal in conditions with insufficient light availability.

Reduced rainwater and moisture levels in the forest, caused by dense foliage, will discourage the growth of moss. During the investigation, it is essential to conserve the natural environment and ecosystems of the forest, leaving habitats undisturbed. When collecting data, careful consideration must be given to walking carefully to avoid damaging any living plants or their surrounding areas. Additionally, proper placement of equipment and avoiding littering is crucial. Safety and ethical points should be taken into account to uphold natural ecosystems.

To maintain the natural environment, I will return any items I move to their original position. When collecting data, I will operate in teams and remain visible to others to avoid straying. Additionally, I will wear suitable attire such as sturdy walking boots to prevent slipping on damp rocks. In case of any mishap, I will familiarize myself with the location of first aid kits.

The text describes a method of data collection and recording in the classroom and forest. A results table was created to record data collected in the forest, and equipment was gathered before boarding a minibus. Areas were located to collect data on moss coverage percentages for Yew and Oak trees to test a hypothesis. The Oak trees were sampled first, with 15 in total.

By identifying the distinct rough bark on the trunk, I was able to distinguish the Oak

trees. Searching for the trees one by one and looking out for their distinctive characteristics led me to locate the Yew trees. The green pine needles helped me identify them and I recorded data for the 15 Yew trees second. All of the Yew trees were found near a shaded dark area.

While searching for Oak trees, I focused on areas along footpaths with sufficient light and gaps in the canopy. To ensure consistency, I measured the trunk girth by using a string of approximately 1.5 meters. After that, I determined the north side through compass reading and referred to a book to confirm whether the green substance on the tree was moss or something else, such as lichen with similar characteristics.

Using a meter ruler, I positioned the quadrat against the north side of the trunk whereby the top right corner of the ruler touched the bottom left corner of the quadrat. I then determined the percentage of moss coverage by counting how many out of 100 squares were covered with moss. After obtaining a percentage, I recorded it in the corresponding column of the results table. This process was replicated for all samples, resulting in 30 moss coverage measurements, 15 each for Oak and Yew trees. To ensure accuracy and validity, I collected 15 results for each tree type and eliminated any irregularities before statistical analysis.

While in the forest, I took the opportunity to double-check my calculations for moss coverage to avoid inaccuracies. I also made a point of referencing the plant species pamphlet during data sampling to avoid confusion between moss and similar species like lichen. Additionally, when in the classroom, I checked my

Mann Whitney U test multiple times to ensure there were no errors. Similarly, in the field, I stabilized the compass for a minute or so before starting the sampling process to guarantee I was always working in a northern direction.

When examining evidence and making conclusions, the key trend and findings of the study indicate a significant difference in moss coverage between Oak trees and Yew trees. The results table clearly illustrates that there is a much higher percentage of moss coverage on Oak trees compared to Yew trees. In fact, many Yew trees have no moss coverage at all, with the highest percentage being only 20%, while the highest percentage of coverage on Oak trees is 100%. Therefore, not only does moss grow more on Oak trees, but the growth is also exponential compared to Yew trees. By referring to the bar chart (graph 3), it can be calculated that the average moss coverage on Yew trees is only 2%.

There is a significant difference between the groups of results, with Oak trees having a mean of 72.4% and 93% moss coverage. Graph 1 (a bar graph) and Graph 2 (a scatter graph) further illustrate this difference. Graph 1 shows that moss coverage percentages are predominantly high for Oak trees (70-100%) and low for Yew trees (0-4%). Similarly, Graph 2 indicates strong groupings with Oak tree readings concentrated towards the top end and Yew tree readings at the base.

To illustrate my point, I want to highlight the bar graph results for trees 9 and 15. Tree number 9 has an Oak tree with a total moss coverage of 100%, while the Yew tree only has

a moss coverage of 1%. Similarly, in tree number 15, the Oak tree has a moss coverage of 98% while the Yew tree has no moss at all. After conducting a Mann-Whitney U test calculation, I was able to reject my null hypothesis with confidence. The test result was 4, which is less than or equal to the critical value of U at the 5% level (64). Based on this result and in accordance with the critical values table, I can safely reject my null hypothesis with a confidence level of 95%.

Based on my findings, it can be confidently concluded that moss favors the north side of Oak trees over Yew trees, providing support for my hypothesis that there is a difference in moss coverage between these two tree types. The reason behind this preference may be attributed to several factors. Deciduous trees have branches which channel water towards their trunks, creating an ideal environment for moss growth requiring dampness and moisture. In contrast, the branches of coniferous trees hinder moss growth by shedding snow and flaking off, resulting in minimal or no moss coverage observed on the Yew trees examined.

Sunlight is necessary for green plants to perform photosynthesis, synthesizing organic molecules that facilitate organizational processes through energy released during respiration. Mosses develop photosynthetic sporophyte cells, allowing them to partially generate their own nutrients. Light plays a significant role in germinating many moss species' spores. Yew trees are conifers with dense foliage, creating year-round shaded environments beneath them. This insufficient light may hinder moss growth on their trunks.

The atypical 20% growth of moss on a Yew tree may be due to either the

absence of branches in the canopy or the tree's unshed bark. In contrast, the deciduous Oak trees thrived in areas where leaf fall created numerous gaps in the canopy, allowing sufficient light levels for photosynthesis without drying out from direct sunlight exposure. Moss survival depends on moisture since their tissues are thin and small, lacking cuticles and requiring water for fertilisation. Male sex organs emit sperms when there is an abundance of moisture and some may swim to the archegonia. Neither moss nor related species such as lichens have roots; instead they absorb rainfall over their tiny leaves through osmosis and diffusion to obtain essential nutrients present in rainwater.

Mosses have a system of multicellular rhizoids serving as simple root like structures which anchor the plant, since they lack vascular tissue and require moist or wet habitats. The fuzzy rhizome facilitates water and nutrient absorption. On the other hand, Yew trees are coniferous with a dense canopy that restricts rainwater infiltration, thus limiting the moss's access to crucial nutrients essential for survival.

Due to the dry and firm soil, the damp and moist surroundings are restricted, resulting in a meager 2.93% moss coverage. Comparatively, the Oak trees were positioned in areas with numerous openings in their canopy. The Oak trees thrive in lighter and more exposed areas to the elements, despite significant canopy coverage.

Moist shade is the preferred habitat for moss, as it is cool, damp, and sheltered from direct sunlight, particularly on the north side. Under such conditions, moss readings can reach 100%. Moss growth is limited to moist locations since it lacks the typical vascular structures found in true leaves, stems, and roots. Oak

trees' deeply furrowed surface provides a convenient place for mosses and similar species to attach to both living and decaying trees. Conversely, Yew trees have flaky bark that easily peels and shreds.

This article explains that mosses and lichens utilize tree bark as a means of support, but obtain their nutrients from the air. Due to the uneven and less stable surface, moss tends to grow less on tree bark. The article also notes that deciduous trees such as the Oak tree are more conducive to moss growth than other types of trees. In addition, the forest that was visited had limestone substrate, which typically results in an alkaline environment. Yew trees, which prefer soils with a higher pH such as those containing limestone and chalk, may have more alkaline bark as a result.

Moss is most suited to grow in an acidic pH range of 4.0-5.0. If the initial physical conditions do not meet these requirements, the moss may not grow on the bark because changes in pH can affect the ionic charges and tertiary structure of enzymes, leading to denaturation. Therefore, conditions that are not optimal for growth may cause moss to die off.

The Yew tree is toxic, with its leaves, bark and seeds possessing poisonous properties. However, the leaves of the yew can be used for producing taxol, an effective drug that permanently inhibits cancer cell growth. Additionally, the Yew tree's bark, which is poisonous, could potentially serve as a natural deterrent against moss and other similar species that may try and grow on the tree.