Rocky Shore Zonation

Order Description

Production of a Scientific Paper
PART A. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION [TC and DJS]
A major element of working in research but also industry and many other professional
sectors is the ability to synthesise, analyse and interpret significant data sets in order to
address key unknowns. This largely practical-based component of the module will therefore
provide students with the numerical skills to manipulate, process and statistically analyse
existing data sets.
Assessment: Students will need to produce a scientific report (using the SPF style) on data
that they are provided with. The total word count is to be less than 2500 (excluding abstract,
figure titles and reference list)
Marks allocated: 35% of the module marks are allocated to this exercise.
Deadline: Week 11 10am: Tuesday 13th
Approach: A dataset will be provided and should be analysed and presented as a fully
referenced SPF. The SPF must contain all relevant sections (including an abstract and
appendices/supporting information where relevant – see detailed information below). Three
documents are handed out here. This, the first provides the basics on the assessment
requirements and what is expected to be incorporated in to the SPF (see below), the second
excel file provides the completed data set and the third PowerPoint slide is a lecture that
provides some background information on rocky shores, the factors that drive zonation and
outlines the methods used to collect the data generated in the excel spreadsheet. You
should at least read through all these documents before the session on Monday when I will
be available to briefly run through the material but mostly importantly to address any
questions you may have.
The Data set: Animals on a rocky shore appear to have a predictable vertical distribution
within the intertidal habitat. This pattern of distribution is often termed “zonation”. There are
many different reasons why the same or similar species appear to be distributed in this way
– some of the reasons put forward are due too with the environmental conditions and how
organisms are adapted to these conditions whilst other reasons put forward relate to
biological interaction such as competition, predation and prey / food availability. It is the
combination of both physiochemical environmental conditions combined with biological
interactions that drives the predictable distribution patters commonly observed on rocky
shores of the UK. The universal predictability of distribution with species appearing in bands,
has given rise to numerous “Zonation Schemes” (see PowerPoint slides). Within this
exercise data was collected by a class of previous students from the rocky shores
surrounding the Isle of Cumbrae, West Scotland (see excel file “BS257 Rocky Shore Data
Set”). Students must produce a scientific paper using this data to determine whether
zonation exists ie species have discrete distributions up the shore.
Methods used to collect data: See power Powerpoint presentation.
In brief: The study site was the famous rocky shore of Farland Point located on the
southeast of Isle of Cumbrae west Scotland. On that shore 11 vertical stations were located
through use of a theodolite with vertical height being standardised to chart datum (see
https://www.ukho.gov.uk/Easytide/easytide/Support/faq.aspx) . Each vertical station was 0.5m
above the next and therefore ranged from 0 m to 5.0 m above chart datum. At each station
height 10 quadrats (“replicates”) were placed randomly across the shore (but always as the
defined height). Each quadrat was 0.25m2
. The abundance of all macroalgae, lichens, and
barnacles were estimated as percentage cover where all other invertebrates were counted.
Data was entered in to a spreadsheet which can be found on the excel file. You must use
this data (all or sections of) to determine whether zonation of species exists at Farland point
and to describe the reasons why some species may be distributed they way they are.
Outline Requirement of the SPF
Title: should be clear and concise (< 15 words)
Abstract: A brief introduction to the problem / question being investigated. A brief outline of
the methods – a sentence or two maximum to include survey location and basic data
collection techniques. Then a substantial (~ 70 %) of the summary should be devoted to a
statement of what the main results were. Be specific. For example do not just say that
“There was a difference in distribution of a particular seaweed rather than the abundance of
Fucus serratus varied significantly with vertical height within the intertidal area, was
maximum at a height of 2m above CD and was absent from 3 to 5m (I have obviously made
this up!). Once you have given the key results you should finish with a sentence that states
the biological significance of the results and a conclusion. There should be no references in
an abstract. Word count 250.
Introduction: This section should put the work into a general context by drawing on the
background material (see PowerPoint lecture and your additional reading). You should start
broad and the introduction should flow to the final statement of aims of the study. Anything
more than one or two pages is excessive. You must, in the introduction, include the key
references – when you state a fact you should cite the reference. Make sure you use correct
referencing format (see UG handbook and other scientific papers). You should make sure,
as far as possible, that you cite scientific papers rather than web sites or text books. The
whole point of the introduction is to ensure that the reader understands the bigger picture,
the concepts, understands the subject matter and why you are investigating what you are
investigating.
Methods: the lengths of methods sections vary drastically in scientific papers as really
depends on the study being reported. However the basic lay out is generally the same for all.
You should have a section at the start that describes the Study site – here you need to do
some reading on the region (western Scotland, island (Isle of Cumbrae) and shore line
(Farland Point). It would be useful to show a map that demonstrates where in the world the
study was done (eg inset map) and the specific location of the study. If you use a map make
sure it looks professional and you just don’t copy and paste a basic map which is not well
presented. Remember this would be Figure 1 and should have a full legend (on the
underside of the figure). A second section could be entitled “Survey design and data
collection or something equivalent. Here you should state how data how the survey was
designed (eg replicate quadrats at heights above chart datum located through use of a
theodolite (see information above). You should mention how quadrats were located, how
many replicates there were up the shore, and the heights above chart datum that they were
located. You should then describe how data was collected eg % cover for sessile species
but actual counts for mobile species. Finally you should have a section on Data Analysis –
here you should describe how you dealt with the data eg tested for normality, used a certain
statistical technique etc.
Results: The most important thing to remember about the results section is that the text is
the most important component which should be supported by figures and statistics. Do not
lead with the figures eg Figure 2 shows that the abundance of Fucus species at different
vertical heights up the shores differed …… This is not correct. Something like… “The
abundance of Fucus species varied significantly (stats information here) at the different
heights up the shore (see Figure 2). Then you would go in to specific detail eg The
abundance of Fucus serratus was greatest at 2m above CD (put mean data value ± SE
here), was at in low abundance below this height and absent between 2.5 and 5m.
Remember that when you complete the statistics you will be using all of the replicates but
when you present figures you should present as means ± SE (eg as bar charts or X-Y plot if
you want to compare the abundance between two species if you think they are interacting eg
to demonstrate relationships between species distributions). You should aim to produce high
quality professional figures (between 3 and 5 usually) rather than basic coloured excel
figures etc. The figures should be produced in such a way as to clearly demonstrate the
patterns in the data. Make sure axes are labelled and correct units are given. Remember
that the results section needs to fully describe the trends in the data and not discuss the
reasons for these trends.
Discussion: It is usually to start with the research aim or another similar sentence. Then you
would discuss all of the results that you present. Often students make a common error here
….. you must not describe the results but you should discuss those results ie what is causing
the patterns in the data you observed. You should focus on discussing what the likely key
drivers are in producing the data you present – what are the biological reasons. You should
also compare your results with those published in the literature and do use the literature to
identify possible causes of the data trends you observed. All of your facts need to be fully
referenced. Contextualise your study and work through the discussion systematically
covering all of the results. You can include limitations but within a scientific paper it is often
written in such a way as to identify future opportunities. For example if we find that we
cannot conclude much about the distribution of species at this site it may be due to the fact
that it’s a unique site and for whatever reason the distribution doesn’t conform. The
weakness here is that we looked at one site at one year – so that is a limitation but you
would phrase to say that future research should consider a wider selection of sites to gain a
greater understanding of universal zonation etc. The discussion should be no more than a
couple of pages. Finish the discussion with a strong conclusion which states the most
important points and what they mean.
References: This is a place where students often lose marks for no real reasons. All
information should be fully referenced within your SPF eg (Smith 2015); or if two authors
(Smith and Jones 2015) or if more than two Smith et al. 2015) – you must not include any
further information eg initials or titles etc. In the actual reference list you should give all
authors (not et al etc) and the full details of the publication – see any reference list in a
scientific paper and also the UG hand book.
General format / common questions
? Word count 2500 (estimated breakdown of these given below; here and for this
assessment only the 2500 word count excludes the abstract, figure legends (or table
titles) and reference list. All other words are counted ie titles, references within the
text.
? Ariel / Calibri font size 11-12.
? Title (< 15 words)
? Abstract (<250 words – no references
? Introduction (approx. 750 words)
? Methods (< 500 words) – remember you can use figures including maps
? Results (approx. 500 words) and 3 – 5 figures
? Discussion (approx. 750)
? References: At least 10 made up mostly of scientific papers