Net Primary Productivity of Fescue Plants Lab Report

Luke Johnson
Mrs. Norris
AP Environmental Science
11 October, 2014
Collaborators:
Hannah Whitt, James Hamil, Megan Redfern
Introduction:
The purpose of this lab is to calculate the net primary productivity of fescue plants. The Net
Primary Productivity, or NPP, is the difference between the gross primary production and respiration
shown by the formula: NPP = Gross Primary Product (GPP) Respiration. This is the total energy
accumulated by an ecological unit of interest from a living organism. This could, in turn, affect a
population or ecosystem. The biomass is divided by the area of land and then divided by the total
number of days for grass to grow resulting in the NPP. We will be able to use this lab for identifying the
NPP of an environment and have a better understanding of its effects.
Hypothesis:
If the fescue plants are cut and then dried for seven days, then the net primary productivity of
the plants will be lower than the actual NPP of fescue, approximately 58 g/cm^2/year, due to the
difficulties of the growing conditions resulting in a lower biomass creating lower NPP.

Parts of the Experiment:
Control Group: NPP of average grass/fescue plant
Experimental Group: Each Groups individual experiment
Independent Variable: Sun (Light), water, soil quality
Dependent Variable: NPP and growth rate
Controlled Variables: Energy absorbed, 2cm grass length
Materials:
Fescue Plants (Grass Seeds)
Soil
Metric Ruler
Scissors
Weigh Boats
Digital Scales
Paper Towels
Methods:
1. Lab Day 1
a. Cut all of your grass plants to the same height: Use a ruler to precisely cut all of the
blades to a height of 2 cm. Carefully remove and discard all the clippings from your plot.
Allow grass to continue to grow for 10 days.
2. Lab Day 2
a. Cut all of grass plants to the same height as before: use a ruler to precisely cut all of the
blades to a height of 2 cm. Carefully remove all the grass clippings and place them in a
weigh boat. Allow the clippings to dry for 2 days.
b. Measure the area of grass used in your experiment and record in your data table.


3. Lab Day 3
a. Weigh the grass clippings from lab day 2 and record in your data table. Calculate the net
primary productivity using the following formula
i. NPP = Biomass/Area/Day
b. Obtain the NPP data from the other groups in your class. Then/ calculate a class average
for NPP for Fescue.
c. The known NPP of fescue plants is found to be 58 g/cm2/year. Compare this average to
your average from the lab. Represent the difference using percent error.







Photos:


Data:
Group Biomass (g) Area of Plot (cm2) # of Days of
Growth
NPP
1 .1 176.25 6 9.46 X 10^-5
2 .1 102 6 1.042 X 10^-4
3 .1 195.5 6 8.52 X 10^-5
4 .1 163.875 6 1.017 X 10^-4
5 .1 147 6 1.13 X 10^-4
6 .1 147 6 1.13 X 10^-4
7 .1 270 6 6.17 X 10^-5
8 .1 240 6 6.94 X 10^-5
Average NPP for
Fescue
1.003625 X 10^-4

Data Analysis:
All groups compiled data on to the cart above in order to gather all information. After the initial
growing of the grass, all groups trimmed the grass in order for all growths to be as even as possible.
Once the grass grew again, it was cut to 2 cm again and placed on a paper towel to dry. After they were
dried, a petri dish was weighed and then weighed again with the grass clippings to get an exact biomass
of the grass clippings. The NPP was then calculated by taking the biomass/area/number of days. All
groups calculated and compiled their data to form the class data with the average NPP being 1.003625 X
10^-4. Errors that may have contributed to the difference in each groups data would be a result of
watering differences, amount of seed used, or the amount of light the plants were exposed to.
Conclusion:
With the percent error being 99.9998%, this was not a good model for testing the NPP. The
possible causes of such a high percent error may include inaccuracies as a result of loose clippings being
lost and excluded from the calculations, or having a scale that could not calculate past the first decimal
place for grams. However, if all clippings were to be collected and a scale that could present a more
accurate mass the resulting percent error may have been a better representation of the known average
NPP of fescue plants. An experiment in order to test NPP could be tested on a soccer field where one
would be outside, exposed to sunlight and different weather conditions, while the other inside, with
both having the same amount of water and same soil. The grass on both fields could then be cut, dried,
and the NPP could be determined. This would provide a better test due to the fact that there would be
more mass to be weighed and a greater area to be tested. By understanding the NPP of an ecosystem
would allow for people to find out the specific measurements of a resource in order to keep an
ecosystem healthy. With a low NPP, one could conclude that the environment is not receiving the
proper amount of resources needed, leading to species that could not live within that environment. The
NPP of the fescue plant was significantly lower than the average of 58 g/cm^2/year meaning that my
hypothesis was correct. Possible errors in the experiment may include an uneven distribution of water,
light, and some grass clippings being left out of the total mass. Another experiment must be done in
order to determine the NPP of an area due to the inaccuracies of this one.














Work Cited
Norris, Kara. Net Primary Productivity of Fescue Plants. Wake Forest. Norris, Kara, n.d. PDF.