Species Richness Comparison of Valley Floor and Ridgetop Hardwood Overstory

Trees and Species Diversity of Terrestrial Macro-Invertebrates: Indicator of

Health of an Isolated Urban Temperate South Eastern Deciduous Forest

Hackett, D., Romanelli, S., Reed, A., Pace, J., Robinson, M.

Biology 3070L
Dr. Thomas WIlson
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
February 2015

Abstract
An ecosystem is thought to be healthy when high species richness and
evenness create equilibrium among the community of populations living
there. By creating many unique niches that interact, a healthy ecosystem
ensures the constant flow of energy and nutrients between living and
nonliving components within the ecosystem. Ecosystems worldwide are
threatened due to habitat degradation and fragmentation, pollution, and a
decline in biological diversity. These negative impacts are all the result of
increasing human urbanization and development. One particular region
where over-exploitation has led to the decline of ecosystem health is the
Southeastern United States. To investigate the health of a temperate eastern
deciduous forest ecosystem, we will determine species richness of overstory
hardwoods for two different habitat patches lying along a topographic
gradient within the larger landscape. In addition, we will investigate
diversity of macroinvertebrate species found within the patches. The first
sample plot, best described as ridgetop, is located at the peak of Stringers
Ridge, directly above and parallel to a main biking path. The valley floor
sample plot is located on a steep incline found just below the biking trail. The
elevation gradient that exists between the two habitat patches should
influence the relative species richness and diversity. Our hypothesis states
that species richness of overstory hardwoods in the ridgetop habitat is likely
lower than that of the valley floor habitat due to the erosion of mineral
nutrients, organic matter, and seeds that are washed from the ridge top to
the valley floor. Also, we hypothesize that the species diversity of
macroinvertebrates collected on the ridgetop will be lower than those found
on the valley floor. Using random sampling techniques and appropriate data
analyses, we concluded that the ridge top habitat exhibited higher species
richness of overstory hardwoods than did the valley floor. Upon examination
of the data, we rejected our original hypothesis. Invertebrate diversity was
not very high in either habitat patch, with only 5 and 4 different species,
respectively. Future field studies regarding species richness and diversity
could benefit the assessment of Stringers Ridge overall health and vitality.

Introduction

Located in Hamilton County, Tennessee, our data collection site was an

isolated urban forest known as Stringer's Ridge Preservation Easement,

situated on the outskirts of the Tennessee River Gorge, a particularly

mountainous region. This site lies within the limits of Chattanooga, a city

with a growth rate of 1.46%, higher than any other city in the state (Fleener
2012). Park area includes about 92 acres with 10 miles of footpath set aside

for mountain biking and hiking. In 2007, a proposal to turn Stringers Ridge

into a condominium plex prompted local residents to reject the idea and call

for the preservation of all 37 threatened acres. $2.4 million dollars later, in

addition to a generous donation from the private landowner, the Trust for

Public Land obtained ownership and 55 more acres were successfully added

to the easement. Given to the city of Chattanooga, Stringers Ridge is held by

the Tennessee River Gorge Trust as an interim conservation easement set up

to protect and conserve the inherent value and health of this urban forest.

This is particularly important in a region that is experiencing rapid

development, leading to urban sprawl.

As of 2000, it was determined that 3.1% of the land in the United states was

classified as urban, a number expected to rise in the following decades

(Nowak et al. 2007). The Northeastern and Southeastern regions of the

United States, exhibiting growth rates over 1.4%, exemplifies expansions of

municipalities into surrounding rural areas and the introduction of rural

populations into more urbanized society (Nowak et al 2007). As growth

ensues throughout these areas, there is a dire need for preserved urban

forestry along with best management practices to maintain the health of

these areas.

Conservation of forest habitats may hold numerous benefits to a population

in an urban city. According to

Harnik et al,
physiological stress decreased and

outdoor exercise increased proportionately to relative amounts of nearby

trees and forests. Protection of forest habitat in cities has many positive

repercussions; improved air quality, offsetting of greenhouse gases, and

absorption of stormwater runoff (

Nowak et al., 2006, Sanders, 1984). From

an economic standpoint, decreasing the amount of urban forestry would be

counterintuitive to development. In Nowak et als study, trees in and

around New York city saved it $11.2 and $10.6 million dollars in

heating/cooling costs and external air pollution controls, respectively. These

economic savings are directly tied to healthy ecosystem functionality, and

they clearly display the benefits associated with conserving such urban

forests.

According to Elton and Krebs, one of the most frequently stated objectives of

ecological investigations is to understand the distribution and abundance of

organisms. This measure is also the main criteria used to classify endangered

and threatened species. To determine the overall health and function of an

ecosystem, one could identify, classify, and analyze all organisms present

within an ecosystem. However, because the scale and scope of Stringers

Ridge is far too large, and the terrain is too arduous, to asses every organism

present, ecological field studies must use an appropriate sampling technique

to select a subset of sample units for survey. Selection of these units must be

done in such a way that the samples taken accurately represent all other

units not chosen within the study area, while remaining random and

unbiased.

The species rivet theory states that every species in an ecosystem provides

a fundamental part of the whole (Erlich and Erlich 1981). In (

Maestre, F. et al

2012) study, 55% multifunctionality variance (i.e. nutrient pools and carbon

storage) were noted with relations to higher species richness, in a model fit

that also indicated that reduction in the richness created a lower variance.

Because our study site exhibited large variations in topography, soil

composition, and microclimate, we questioned if these differences would

create significant changes in richness and diversity along the physical

gradient. The changing nature of community structure across the landscape

(zonation) reflects the shifting distribution of populations in response to

changing environmental conditions. These conditions are modified by the

direct and indirect interactions among the component species, in addition to

their abiotic surroundings (Smith and Smith 2012).

The study (Hess, A. et al 1999) which analyzed herbaceous vegetation on

different gradients in a Tennessee park, stated that a ridgetop habitat had a

significantly lower species richness (over 50%) than that of lower lying plots.

This observation led us to question whether it is a trend that valley floors

contain higher species richness and greater species diversity than a similar

ridgetop habitat. We hypothesized that this was in fact a trend, due to a

consistent downhill flow of necessary nutrients, water, organic matter, and

seeds.
We believe that mineral deposits such as phosphorus, calcium, and

nitrogen are likely to wash down into the valley floor from the ridge top,

supplying the valley floor inhabitants with fresh nutrients. It is suggested in a

study (Monk. 1967) that southern hardwood trees tend to grow in deposits

or outcroppings of phosphorous and limestone, adding further evidence to

our reasoning.

After the formation of our hypothesis, we established two plots measuring 40

meters x 40 meters, each. The first sample plot, referred to as ridge top

habitat, laid above and parallel to one of the main biking trails on a
stratigraphic ridge. The second sample plot, referred to as valley floor

habitat, laid directly below the bike trail across from the ridge top. The

notable difference, however, was the variation in slope aspect between the

two sample plots. Although the ridge top increased in elevation from bottom

to top, the magnitude of elevation increase was negligible compared to the

steep valley floor sample plot. It should also be duly noted that large amounts

of debris and human trash were found within this valley area, potentially

affecting levels of richness within the species we sought to analyze.

With regards to vegetation sampling, spatial distribution is very important.

It provides particular insights into how the biotic community was developed

within our sample areas. Also, studies into spatial spatial distribution can

lead to further conclusions of community dynamics within the area of study

(Greg-Smeith 1983). Using analytical tools such as the Ripley K function

(Ripley 1976) distribution patterns for the vegetation in an area can be

analyzed, and spatial points could be rationalized (Haase 1995). Community

structure varies in time (temporal) as well as space. Succession, or the

change in community structure over time, could also be a major factor

influencing community dynamics within our study area.

Material and Methods

Study site description:

The study site was a 92 acre, isolated urban forest, in the center of the

municipality of Chattanooga, Tennessee. The forest is an oak dominated

stand in the mountainous Tennessee River Gorge. The site has numerous

trails (16.1 km) and varies in topographic gradients. The sampling plots were

located approximately 3.22 kilometers away from the Spear Head entrance,

on the most northern point of the Gig City trail. The latitude and longitude

of the site is 35.069N 85.3211W and the elevation of the site at center is

275 meters.

Figure 1:
Shows the map of the study site known Stringers Ridge Preservation Easement.
 Figure 2.
Location of Plot 1, or the Ridgetop plot

Figure 3.
Location of Plot 2, or the Valley Floor plot
Sample Plot Creation

In ecological research, a study site the size of Stringers Ridge cannot be fully

analyzed, but instead an appropriate amount of samples can be taken and

analyzed, so long as those samples are representative of the site as a whole. A

commonly used measure of a representative sample is 25% of the total land

area. Because we decided to make our plots 40 meters x 40 meters, the total
2
land area per plot was 1600 meters. Two plots of this size resulted in 3200
2
metersof total land area. Next we multiplied 3200 by .25 (25%) to get 800
2
meters, which is the total land area of the samples. Because each sample
2
point consists of a 10 metercircle, we divided 800 by 10 to determine the

total number of sample points needed in order to fully represent the total

study area.

After establishing the locations for each plot, we used tape measures and a

compass to make 90 degree right turns after walking 40 meters from the first

corner. Before moving to the next side of the plot, we laid semi-permanent

yarn along the line to help us as a visual aid. After 4 corners, we had

successfully laid each 40m x 40m quadrant. Next, we found the 20 meter
mark of each side, and connected the 20m segments with yarn, effectively

splitting the sample plot into four quadrants, each 20 meters by 20 meters.
2
The (x,y) coordinates for each of the 40 (10m) plot points were obtained

through an electronic random number generator program that randomly

selected a number between 0 and 20. This was to prevent bias, which is

always of concern when determining the validity of data collection and

sample size. Non-random sampling is the largest source of user bias because

the human brain tends to select samples based off of unconscious

predispositions (Dartmouth 1). A model of each plot was created as an (x, y)

graph with each (x, y) value corresponding to a certain number of meters in a

certain direction.

For each of the 40 plot points, a Kevlar string (1.8m) was attached to a
2
single point, stretched and rotated in a circular pattern to get 10m, and from

this, every hardwood tree and invertebrate species in that perimeter was

identified and logged. We excluded hardwood trees that were not of a

significant size (maturation) and who would not contribute dominantly to an

overstory aspect of the area; a trunk diameter size smaller than that of

standard thumb was the baseline for exclusion. Noting as well, smaller

understory shrub trees would not be included in the data sets, but could
correlate with differentiating levels of species abundance.

Random Number Generated Plot Points:

Plot Points: Ridge Top Plot Points: Valley Floor

Quadrant 1: (1,10)(5,17) Quadrant 1: (17,17)(15,8)
(11,19)(16,11) (3,16)(17,6)(19,3)
(5,3)(4,5)(3,12) (16,3)(19,12)
(3,10) (8,19)(16,7) (16,12)(8,15)(9,8)

Quadrant 2: (20,3)(18,8)(10,14) Quadrant 2: (5,1)(10,9)(3,8)

(10,4)(13,11)(4,15) (5,2)(13,4)(4,3)
(16,12)(5,6)(19,15) (14,18)(11,3) (9,14)
(10,2)

Quadrant 3: (19,5)(6,1)(16,8) Quadrant 3: (3,11)(18,5)(2,17)(

(2,3)(18,17)(2,9) 4,1)(9,2)(6,16)
(12,19)(17,13) (6,15)(5,4)(11,7)
(12,6)(16,17) (5,12)

Quadrant 4: (8,11)(3,2)(15,1) Quadrant 4: (3,10)(2,11)

(10,2)(14,20) (15,17)(7,9)
(7,11)(12,14) (12,13)(7,2)(8,14)(
(10,14)(17,8) (2,18) 15,8)(2,4)

Vegetation and Invert Sampling

All hardwood trees greater than a thumbs width in diameter standing within
2
the 10mcircle were examined for a height estimate and DBH. Next, each

individual hardwood was identified by means of a dichotomous key.

Invertebrate samples were collected by rearranging ground litter, digging

shallow holes and dissecting rotted logs in no particular fashion. Once again,
2
only specimens observed within the 10mcircle of the (x, y) coordinate were

considered for this experiment. All ground-dwelling samples were collected

in ziplock bags while flying insects were closely noted and documented.

Finally, all samples both collected and observed were later identified with a

dichotomous key. All data was recorded and incorporated into graph form

and input into excel spreadsheets.

Data Analysis

To assess the relationship between the relative number of new species per

unit area, a species area curve was constructed. Plotted on an (x, y) graph,

the vertical axis represents the cumulative number of new species, while the
2
horizontal axis depicts sample area (10m). As for the mean number of

species per sample area, a performance curve was created to indicate the

significance of our findings for each individual plot point with respect to the

entire quadrant. Our results, for both curves, rise and then cascade at a fairly

constant rate. This demonstrates an inverse relationship between sample

area and the number of new species found. In general, as sample area

increases, the number of new species as well as mean number of species per
 unit area will plateau or become less significant.

Table
1
. Indicates all aspects of study time. An objective based log was used

to show weather and date and time spent

Performance Based Log

January/February 2015 February 2015 March 2015 March/April 2015

Day 1: Jan.20, 2015
Chose two sample plots,
one as a ridge top (RT)
and the other as a valley
floor (VF).
Measured out the ridge
top as 40 meters x 40
meters.
TOD: 2:00-4:00 P.M.
Weather: Overcast. 45 F
Day 4: Feb. 10, 2015 Day 7: Mar. 3, 2015
Met in lab for Mid-Term, did Finished up sampling RT (Q3
not work in field site. & Q4).
Began sampling VF, minimal
amounts (Q1).
TOD: 2:00-4:00 P.M.
Weather: Humid, damp
ground, sunny, and chilly (45
F)
Day 10: Mar. 24, 2015
Continued RT IDs (Q2
Heavy VF sampling,
(Q2,Q3,Q4).
Recorded RT DBHs into
final data
TOD: 2:00-4:00 P.M.
Weather: Approx. 60 F,
partly cloudy w/ mild
winds

Day 2: Jan. 27, 2015
Measured out the valley
floor as 40 x 40 meters.
Put out yarn to provide
rough exterior of plots.
TOD: 2:00-4:15 P.M.
Weather: Sunny/Low
winds 42 F and Humid, Approx. 28-28 F
Day 5: Feb. 17, 2015
Finalized plot quadrants
Generated the remainder of
random points for VF.
Sampled a few RT points.
TOD: 2:00-4:00 P.M.
Weather: Cold, Partly Cloudy,
Day 8: Mar. 10, 2015
Spring Break, did not work in
field site.
Weather: Hot (80 F),
Day 11: Mar. 31, 2015
Finished up RT IDs, (Q3
& Q4)
Started IDs for VF (Q1)
Collected Inverts for RT
(All quadrants)
Took VF DBHs
TOD: 2:00-4:00 P.M.
Sunny

Day 3: Feb. 3, 2015 Day 6: Feb. 24, 2015 Day 9: Mar. 17, 2015 Day 12:
Generated X,Y coordinates Continued Sampling of RT Began RT identifications (Q1) Collected Inverts on VF
for Ridge-top plot. Quadrant 2 & 3. Continued sampling VF (Q1) (All quadrants)
Deci Decided to break each plot Obtained GPS coordinates for Took RT DBH values. Recorded VF DBHs into
into q RT and VF corners for Google final data
quadrants, and yarned them out Earth Images. TOD: 2:00-4:00 P.M. Cleaned up RT & VF
them out. Weather: Pleasant, partly (Flags, yarn, tree tags)
Sampled 2 points in RT TOD: 2:00-4:00 P.M. cloudy, and warmer (53 TOD: 2:00-4:00
TOD: 1:50-4:15 P.M. Weather: Cold (30 F), F) Weather: Approx 75 F,
Cool/Cloudy 37 F Overcast, Windy sunny, mild winds.
Results

Ridge Top Overstory Hardwoods:

The total amount of hardwood overstory tree species

found on the ridgetop was 14, with an overall individual

count of 64. The sample plot was oak dominated,

composing 39% of the total amount of individuals

Quercus velutina
analyzed. The Eastern Black Oak ( ) was

the most abundant of all species, containing 23% of all

individuals in the data set. The species area curve for the
2
ridge top plot indicated that at 10mthere was 1 different
2 rd
species and at 330m (33plot point) our maximum

number of 14 species were found, and a leveling-off of

new species was occurring. The 95% confidence interval associated with this
-17
community was 0.562 (+/-) 2.11 x 10 .

Valley Floor Overstory Hardwoods:

The total amount of hardwood overstory tree species found on the valley floor

was 11, with an overall individual count of 21. The sample plot was oak
dominated, composing 39% of the total amount of individuals analyzed. The

Quercus prinus
Chestnut Oak ( ) was the most

abundant of all species, containing 23% of all

individuals in the data set. The species area curve

2 th
for the valley floor plot indicated that at 40m(4

plot point)there was only 1 species found and at

2 th
350m (35plot point) our maximum number of 11

species were found, and a leveling-off of new

species was occurring. The 95% confidence

interval associated with this community was 0.278

-5.
(+/-) 5.69 x 10
Ridge Top Invertebrates:

For the ridge top, 5 separate species of invertebrates were captured, with an

overall count of 26 individuals. The most abundant of the species were the ants

Hymenoptera),
( consisting of 69% of the total number of individuals (18

specimens). The
simpson diversity index was indicated with a value of

D 0.4862.
=
s
Valley Floor Invertebrates:

The valley floor species richness was 4, with an overall individual count of 42.

Again, most abundant were the ants (36 specimens)

, making up 85.7% total

amount of the individuals captured. The simpson diversity index was indicated

with a value of D=0.739

s

Percent Similarity (PS):

Percent Similarity of Ridgetop and Valley Floor Invertebrate Communities

Ridgetop Valley Floor

Species 1- Bee= 1/26

Species 2- Ant= 18/26

Species 3- Millipede= 2/26

Species 4- Worm

Species 5- Pill Bug- 2/26

27.29%
 Literature Cited

1.Dodd,C.( .Chapter24:SamplingMethods.Amphibianecologyand
2010)

conservation:Ahandbookoftechniques.pages447448.England:Oxford

UniversityPress.

.Dwyer,J.,GChilds,andD.Nowak.(2000).Forestryinurbanand
2

urbanizingareasoftheUnitedStates:Connectingpeoplewithecosystemsin

the21stcentury.pages629637.

3.Elton,C.(1927).AnimalEcology.SidgwickandJackson,London.

4.EhrlichP,.R.andEhrlichA,.H.(1981).Extinction.Thecausesand

consequencesofthedisappearanceofspecies.RandomHouse,NewYork.

5.Haase,P.(1995),SpatialpatternanalysisinecologybasedonRipley's

Kfunction:Introductionandmethodsofedgecorrection.JournalofVegetation

Science,Vol.6.pages575582.

6.Harnik,P.,Welle,B.,Keenan,L.S.(2009).MeasuringtheEconomicValue

ofaCityParkSystem.TheTrustforPublicLand.

7.Hess,A.etal.(1999).HerbaceousSpeciesRichnessalongaTopographical

GradientinSteeleCreekPark.JamesH.ScheuerSummerInternshipin

EnvironmentalStudies,SwarthmoreCollege.
8.GreigSmith,P.(1983).QuantitativePlantEcology.BlackwellScientific

Publications,Oxford.

9.Hobbs,E.(1988).Speciesrichnessofurbanforestpatchesandimplications

forurbanlandscapediversity.LandscapeEcology.Vol.1.no.3.pages

141152.SPBAcademicPublishing,TheHague.

10.Krebs,C.J.(1972).Ecology.HarperandRow,NewYork.

11.Maestre,FernandoT.etal.(2012).PlantSpeciesRichnessand

EcosystemMultifunctionalityinGlobalDrylands.Science.pages214218.

NewYork,NY.

12.Monk,Carl.(1967).Treespeciesdiversityintheeasterndeciduousforest

withparticularreferencetonorthcentralforest.

Vol.
The American Naturalist.

101.No.918.pages173187.TheUniversityofChicagoPressforThe

AmericanSocietyofNaturalists.

13.Nowak,D.J.,D.E.Crane,etal.(2006).Airpollutionremovalbyurban

treesandshrubsintheUnitedStates.UrbanForestryandUrbanGreening.

Vol.4.pages115123.

14.Ripley,B.D.(1976).Thesecondorderanalysisofstationaryprocesses.

JournalofAppliedProbability.Vol.13.pages255266.

15.Sanders,R.A.(1984).Urbanvegetationimpactsonthehydrologyof

Dayton,Ohio.UrbanEcology.Vol.9.pages361376.
16.Smith,T.,&Smith,R.(2012).
Elementsofecology
(8thed.).San

Francisco:PearsonBenjaminCummings