[Insert descriptive title here ]
[Kaelynn Duffy]
Abstract
[insert abstract sentences here]
Introduction
[Insert sentences that introduces the broad topic]
[Insert paragraph(s) that describe the background material including references to sources
– this begins broader and narrows down.
Do not forget to include the 2 required citations in correct format]
[Insert hypothesis]
-Hypothesis:
[Insert appropriate predictions]
- Prediction 1:
- Prediction 2:
Methods
[Insert a brief description of the methodology for this study]
-Highlights of how data was collected, brief:
Via KSU Arboretum Region 1 vs Region 2
3-5, no overlapping 100m^2 plots
Hardwoods and pines were measured, but must be ~3m (10ft) high, single trunk,
and at least 25 cm circumference at chest hight.
[Insert a description of the statistical analyses]
- Analyses:
- Specific data:
- Program/Website Used, the version, and citation for the website: RStudio, version 4.3.2
RStudio Team (2020). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA
URL http://www.rstudio.com/.
[be sure to cite the protocol and reference it for details since we followed the methods
outlined in the protocol]
(sentence referring back to the protocol for details with a correct citation)
Results
[Insert figure]
Figure 1. Circumference (in cm) of the 10 largest hardwoods in region 1 and region 2. Dark
bar represents the median, gray boxes the percentile from 25 to 75 and the whiskers
represent extreme values.
[Insert required tables]
Mean Standard Deviation
Region 1 84.5
Region 2 162.4
Table 1. Mean and Standard Deviation for the circumference of the top 10 largest hardwoods
for region 1 and region 2.
T-Statistics Degrees of Freedom P-Value
R1 vs R2 -5.591 9.7806 0.0005276
Table 2. T-Test comparing the mean circumference of the 10 largest hardwoods from region 1
and region 2. The table shows T-Statistics, Degrees of Freedom, and P-Value.
Prop Region 1 Prop Region 2 Fisher’s Exact P-Value
Table 3. The proportion of hardwoods to pines for region 1 (Prop Region 1) and region 2
(Prop Region 2) and the p-value from a Fisher’s exact test on the relative frequency of
hardwood and pines across the two regions.
Hardwoods Pines
Region 1
Region 2
Table 4: Contingency table showing example data for a number of mature hardwoods
and pines ≥ 80cm in region 1 and region 2 of the forest.
[Insert sentences that describe the results]
Discussion
[Insert interpretations of each analysis].
[Integrate the discussion questions from the protocol into the discussion]
[Insert what it all means for your hypothesis. Did you have support or not? Explain using
the biology behind the predictions]
[Choose 1 of the following to include in your discussion. Your choice should be based on the
one that best describes a potential biological issue with your study.
1. Comparing trees to determine differences in age of the two regions requires a larger
sample size. In the future, increasing our sample across the entire arboretum and the
remainder of campus would yield more accurate results.
2. Measurements did not consider the abiotic factors that contribute to tree secondary
growth. Factors such as water, nutrients, and soil type, could have resulted in the
measurements recorded here, independent of how recently the regions were disturbed.
3. Since quadrats were not established, data was collected on overlapping plots. This
resulted in measuring the same trees multiple times, skewing the data and preventing an
accurate estimate of forest age.
4. Students were not properly trained in how to identify and measure the different trees.
This resulted in inaccurate measurements and identification of hardwoods as pine trees
and pine trees as hardwoods. Taken together, this yielded questionable results.
5. The regions differed in slope. Since region 2 had a steeper slope the trees were harder to
access, skewing which trees were measured. Ensuring that the arboretum is on flat
ground would help yield an accurate measurement of tree sizes and therefore, a more
accurate measurement of the forest age.
]
[Insert a plausible future study based on the findings of your present study.]
[Insert a conclusion paragraph]
Literature Cited
[Insert an accurate citation for each piece of literature cited.]
KSU Biology. 2021. Ecology: Variation within Ecological Communities. Kennesaw State
University, GA
Fisher’s Exact Test:****
Duke Forest at Duke University. 2021.“Environment: Forest Succession”
http://dukeforest.duke.edu/forest-environment/forest-succession/. 3/30/2021.
Response to Peer Reviewer
[start this on a new page and respond line by line to every comment your peer makes]
None (make up something)****
