Data collecting of biota and abiota present in Tamar Estuarine

Published:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Data collecting of biota and abiota present in Tamar Estuarine

Introduction

Estuaries in Australia, as elsewhere in the world, provide the major foci for human activity (Saenger, 1995) .One of a estuary in Australia is Tamar Estuary which is located at Tasmania which is form from several river such as the North Esk River, South Esk River, Meander River, and Macquarie River. South and North Esk River are from the city Launceston The catchment area is approximately 10,000 km2 and it is connected to Bass Strait. When 1805, Launceston urban land use was restricted primarily to Launceston, which settled becoming Australia’s third-oldest city such as agriculture, forestry operation and some mining activity. Two tin and wolfram or tungsten mines operated at these sites with in excess of 20 000 tonnes of tin and 15 000 tonnes of tungsten trioxide recovered from these mines over their lifetimes C. F. Burrett and E. L. Martin (1989), Sulfides of iron, cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc also contained from mining Creek and Aberfoyle. (R. H. Norris, P. S. Lake, R. Swain 1989). An environmental study in the early 1980s found that the Tamar Estuary was contaminated with zinc, copper, lead, and cadmium from the entry of Storys Creek into the South Esk River to the Tamar Estuary. (R. H. Norris, R. Swain, P. S. Lake and Aust. J 1981)

Few oceanography instruments were used for measuring the benthic habitat, water quality, nutrient samples and zooplanktons in Tamar Estuarine. Underwater video and benthic grab were used for benthic habitat, Hydrolab CTD and secchi disc for water quality, Nutrient Sampling for Niskin bottle drop and sample collection, Net was for Vertical haul zooplankton sampling.

Materials and Method

In Tamar Estuary, reviresco departed from beauty point to Point Effingham (41.08. S;146.4E) with the depth 4m.The weather at 9.14am was cloudy. Another site selected was at Clarence Point (41.07 S; 146.48 E) with the depth 6m. The weather at 10.30am was cloudy. (Figure1).Both site are taken on 10th of April 2015. 2 samplings were collected per site for benthic disk, water quality, nutrient sampling and vertical haul zooplankton sampling.

Tamar Line Map

Figure 1: Tamar Estuarine Map

  1. Benthic disk

2 methods were taken using the underwater video and benthic grab. The underwater video, lowered it until reach on the seafloor and recorded the habitat types on the screen by using the table 2. For benthic grab, lowered it into the water and avoiding the grab set off until it reached the seafloor. Pulled it up, looked, identified and recorded the organism and sedimentary presented in the grab.

SEAMAP_Classification_2006

Table 2: Habitat classification table for estuarine and marine environments.

  1. Water quality

For “CTD drop” (hydrolab DS5 water quality meter, data collected for the depth, temperature, salinity, PH, dissolved oxygen and chlorophyll a when it was drop over the water every 5m and it was connected to the laptop. Measured the depth used of the rope when secchi disk no longer see the white and black quadrants in the water.

  1. Nutrient Sampling

Settled off the Niskin bottle to collect water when reached 5m in the water and the water was collect without sampling sample.

Total Suspended Solid (TSS)

Filled about 75 % capacity of 500ml bottle water from the Niskin bottle, and the bottle was frozen on returned to lab. The continue procedure with the dissolved nutrient referred to practical 10, nutrient analysis.

Dissolve Nutrient

Labelled a 30 ml “red capped” specimen tube with the site, date and depth. Removed a plastic syringe from its packet and attached a minisart sterile filter to the end. Do not touch the sterile filter with bare hand. Removed the plunger from the syringe, shaked and discarded. Repeated the process. Filled the syringe and replaced the plunger into the syringe to avoid dispensing any water. Removed the cap from a 30ml “red capped” sample tube and dispensed a few ml into the sample tube. Shaked, discarded and repeated the process. Now dispense all remaining water from the syringe into the sample tube.

  1. Vertical haul zooplankton sampling

By using the net covered with a bottle filled the water into the bottle. Recorded the metre that available on the net as starting point and lowered it down into water .Took the net up and meter on the net was recorded when the boat drove awhile. The water in the bottle was poured into another bottle and pour about 200 ml of alcohol inside it. The consequence procedure referred to practical manual 9.

RESULT

Classification

Site 1

Site 2

Geomorphic type

Consolidated substrate

Consolidated substrate

Bio-geomorphic type

vegetated

vegetated

Substratum/ecotype

Silt, algae bed, aquatic macrophytes

Silt, Aquatic macrophytes

Modifiers

Eco- unit

Eco-unit

Structure

patchy

Continuous but still patchy

Relief

Flat, silty sand

Hills, silty sand

Substratum texture

Solid and cobble

cobble

Biota

Sea grass, red algae, sponge,

Red algae, green algae, sponge, brown algae, fish,sea grass

Rock type

dolerite

dolerite

Figure 1: table of benthic habitat from underwater camera between Tamar Estuarine site 1 and site 2.

Site 1

Site 2

Sediment/rock

Hard, dolerite

Dolerite, More sediment

Biota

Ostracad, brown algae, decapod, gastropod, red algae, sea grass, coral ,sponge , shrimp, crab

Red algae, gastropod, bivalve, bryzoa, polychaete worm

Figure 2: table of benthic habitat collected from benthic grab between Tamar Estuarine site 1 and site 2.

Figure 1 and table 2 shows the site 1 and 2 have a rock type of dolerite and most have macrophytes and algae, a lot of biota in both sites. The measurement of secchi depth in site 1 is 6.9m and site 2 is 6m.

Site 1

depth(m)

Temperature (.c)

PH

Turbility

Level Dissolve Oxygen

Chorophyll a

salinty (ppt)

0

16.31

9.02

0.51

0

0.51

33.5

5

16.31

9.03

0.59

0

0.59

33.7

10

16.31

9.03

0.58

0

0.58

33.78

15

16.31

9.03

0.53

0

0.53

33.94

20

16.33

9.03

0.48

0

0.48

34.09

Site 2

0

16.31

9.04

0.6

0

0.46

33.8

5

16.3

9.04

0.7

0

0.5

33.89

10

16.3

9.04

0.5

0

0.47

33.94

15

16.31

9.04

0.4

0

0.5

33.91

20

16.3

9.04

0.7

0

0.45

34.12

25

16.29

9.04

0.5

0

0.49

34.1

Figure 3: Table of water quality collected from hydrolab in Tamar Estuarine between site 1 and site 2

Figure 4: Graph of depth (m) against Salinity (ppt) between Taman Estuarine site 1 and site 2

The figure 3 shows the almost the same of temperature, PH, chorophyll a and salinity in both sites when down the depth until 25. Figure 4 shows the positive correlation between depth and salinity between both sites, but site 2 salinity have decreased a little in the depth of 15m and 25m. The range of salinity is between 33.5ppt and 34ppt.

Sample

Volume Filtered (m3)

Measuring cylinder (ml)

Biomass (ml)

Biomass (ml m-3)

Site 1

44.6

100

6.0

0.13

Site 2

102.1

100

2.3

0.022

Figure 5: table estimation of zooplankton biomass is each sample.

Figure 6: zooplankton Abundance between site 1 and 2.

The distance travel in site 1 is 89.25m and 204.10m in site 2. Volume filtered which is 17.52 and 40.07ml respectively. Both of the sites use the same 0.25m radius net. Calculation for abundance m-3= [(count x measuring cylinder ml/sub-sample ml)]/volume filtered m-3 by using figure 6. Figure 5 and 6 show the zooplankton in site 1 are more abundance than site 2 and table x shows the dominants of zooplankton are copepods in both sites but site 2 is less abundance than site1.

Figure7: Standard ammonium curve at absorbance of 640 nm.

The concentration of ammonium had done based on this figure 7 in site 2 bottom is 0.00 and the bottom is -0.03. The total suspended solid (TSS) in site 1 is 40.2410mg/L and site 2 is 44.4944mg/L.

Discussion

Both of site show the PH is about 9 which is basic in figure 4 maybe due to the a lot of dolerite which have basic properties will react with water to form alkaline solution as Graddon, (1997) said reflecting likely effects of geology on water chemistry and sedimentology. Macrofaunal species richness due to the variable of sea grass ( Homziak et al., 1982 ) in table 2. Some species might respond to the increases surface area available in dense macrophyte habitats because of space requirements or protection from predators( Orth et al., 1984) or because they will use that as food which is associated with plant surface Kitting et al., 1984. (Edgar and Shaw1995).

The high salinity of water in figure 4 at both site have met the suggestion (Williams, 1980), freshwater species were not collected in Tasmanian estuaries in any numbers, even at sites with minimal input of saline water despite the presence of a diverse fauna in Tasmanian rivers. In Estuaries, copepods mostly are most abundance with other types of the zooplankton biomass and species diversity in estuaries (Kleppel et al., 1988). (Blondeau-Patissier et al., 2009andOubelkheir et al., 2006) have observed that Tasmania coastal waters have the smaller TSS range between 0.3 and 326.2mg/L which are accepted from our result with the 40.2410mg/L and is 44.4944mg/L in site 1 and site 2.From Water and Marine Resources Division (2002), was below the default trigger level, concentration of ammonium both site are 0 and -0.03 may due to the concentration of solution below than 0.075 mg/L so that can’t be detect by machine. Tamar estuarine still haven’t a significant pollution, but must be keep it a constant rate for our future.

Bibilography

Blondeau-Patissier et al., (2009), D. Blondeau-Patissier, V.E. Brando, K. Oubelkheir, A.G. Dekker, L.A. Clementson, P. Daniel, Bio-optical variability of the absorption and scattering properties of the Queensland inshore and reef waters, Australia,J. Geophys. Res., 114 (C5),

C.L. Kitting, B. Fry, M.D. Morgan (1984). Detection of inconspicuous epiphytic algae supporting food webs in seagrass meadows, Oecologia, 62 , pp. 145–149

C. F. Burrett, E. L. Martin (1989) , Geology and Mineral Resources of Tasmania. Special Publication 15 (Geological Society of Australia: Brisbane).

Edgar, G.J., Barrett, N.S., Last (1989), P.R., The distribution of macroinvertebrates and fishes in Tasmanian estuaries. J. Biogeogr., in press. [SD-008]

G.J. Edgar, C. Shaw (1995), The production and trophic ecology of shallow-water fish assemblages in southern Australia: III. General relationships between sediments, seagrasses, invertebrates and fishesJ. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 194 (1995), pp. 107–131

Graddon, D.J. (1997) Characteristics of Tasmanian estuaries and catchments: physical attributes, population, and land use. Master of May, D. & Stephens, A. (1996) Environmental Studies Thesis, University of Tasmania, Hobart.

J. Homziak, M.S. Fonseca, W.J. Kenworthy (1982) ,Macrobenthic community structure in a transplanted eelgrass (Zostera) meadow Mar. Ecol.: Prog. Ser., 9 ,pp. 211–221

Kleppel et al., (1988), G.S. Kleppel, D. Frazel, R.E. Pieper, D.V. Holliday,Natural diets of zooplankton off southern California,Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 49 (1988), pp. 231–241

Oubelkheir et al., (2006), K. Oubelkheir, L.A. Clementson, I.T. Webster, P.W. Ford, A.G. Dekker, L.C. Radke, P. Daniel,Using inherent optical properties to investigate biogeochemical dynamics in a tropical macrotidal coastal systemJ. Geophys. Res., 111 (C7)

P. Saenger (1995). The status of Australian estuaries and enclosed marine waters. L. Zann, P. Kailola (Eds.), State of The Marine Environment Report For Australia. Technical annex 1, The Marine Environment Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, Queensland (1995), pp. 53–60.

R. H. Norris, R. Swain, P. S. Lake, Aust. J (1981). Marine and Freshwater Reseach. 1981, 32, 165.

R.J. Orth, K.L. Heck, J. Van Montfrans (1984). Faunal communities in seagrass beds: a review of the influence of plant structure and prey characteristics on predator–prey relationships,Estuaries, 7A , pp. 339–350

Water and Marine Resources Division (2002), Section 40 Report in relation to the Draft Amendment No.3 to the D’Entrecasteaux Channel Marine Farming Development Plan February 2002, available at http://www.tarfish.org/documents/DEntrecasteaux%20Channel%20Marine%20Farming%20Amendment%203%20Panel%20Report.pdf accessed at 16 May 2015.

Writing Services

Essay Writing
Service

Find out how the very best essay writing service can help you accomplish more and achieve higher marks today.

Assignment Writing Service

From complicated assignments to tricky tasks, our experts can tackle virtually any question thrown at them.

Dissertation Writing Service

A dissertation (also known as a thesis or research project) is probably the most important piece of work for any student! From full dissertations to individual chapters, we’re on hand to support you.

Coursework Writing Service

Our expert qualified writers can help you get your coursework right first time, every time.

Dissertation Proposal Service

The first step to completing a dissertation is to create a proposal that talks about what you wish to do. Our experts can design suitable methodologies - perfect to help you get started with a dissertation.

Report Writing
Service

Reports for any audience. Perfectly structured, professionally written, and tailored to suit your exact requirements.

Essay Skeleton Answer Service

If you’re just looking for some help to get started on an essay, our outline service provides you with a perfect essay plan.

Marking & Proofreading Service

Not sure if your work is hitting the mark? Struggling to get feedback from your lecturer? Our premium marking service was created just for you - get the feedback you deserve now.

Exam Revision
Service

Exams can be one of the most stressful experiences you’ll ever have! Revision is key, and we’re here to help. With custom created revision notes and exam answers, you’ll never feel underprepared again.