Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Erik Mechtel
Independent Research
201718
Assessment of Assumption Use in Macroinvertebrate Studies: Error Analysis
1. Overview of Research
This study aims at pursuing errors in ecological modeling. Less broadly, the field of pollution
modeling and mapping using biological indicators such as macroinvertebrates contains several
assumptions which have gone untested, or loosely tested in association with other studies. Doing
analysis on the assumptions using scientific data may yield oversights that negatively affect the
pointsource accuracy of data on pollutants. This would cause some studies to lose accuracy and the
use of the conclusions as derived from these studies might suffer deviation from the current ecological
state.
2. Background
Macroinvertebrate analysis for the use of pollution sensing has taken many forms, from
laboratory experiments to field data to citizen science efforts, to gather data on macroinvertebrate
populations in streams in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Even high school biology classes have
helped gather data for official organizations such as the USGS and the Chesapeake Monitoring
Cooperative. Under these organizations, a common system for collecting and analyzing data has
emerged. However, this is only the setting for further research.
The most obvious, and most difficult, direction that thus appears is the analysis of assumptions
used in said data collection. However, since they are assumptions, there is no substantial data from
which to begin to derive accurate, new conclusions, or more precisely, conclusions that do not commit
the same potential errors in the analysis already conducted. Therefore, much of the dataif not all of
itmust be free from potentially fallacious analysis.
3. Problem Statement
The problem, therefore, is identifying possible assumptions and testing the assumptions’
validity in the application of pollution modeling and mapping through macroinvertebrate data.
Therefore, results could perform two roles: (1) validating the data and analysis done thus far in
pollution modeling or (2) finding that data thus far contains slight inaccuracies on a pointsource
pollution scale. Both are important reasons for doing this type of error analysis.
4. Methodology
a. Question and Hypothesis
Are the quantity and taxonomic diversity of macroinvertebrates in a given stream location
determined solely on a pointsource pollution scale, i.e.: operating only meters beyond the
source? Or, are there, when analyzing nonpoint pollution sources, other factors that may not
have been considered when testing for uncontrolled variables.
There will be a clear, if slight, increase between settings where point pollution is not the only
influence on the size of macroinvertebrate communities and when it is the only source.
Noticeable taxonomic differences will also ensue.
b. Basis for Hypothesis
Pollution, be that largeparticle type or chemical pollution, can often be transported by
fastmoving water, and given macroinvertebrates live in often fastmoving water to filter feed, there is
a nonzero chance that they would absorb pollution from beyond point pollution sources. Further,
given the natures of studies thus far, there could be problems when generalizing from data that was
original influenced by point pollution sources.
c. Research Design
There are two possible ways of pursuing this topic: (1) original data or (2) correlating data. The
first is the most expedient for defining the results of this study: it would show that pollution flowing
downstream clearly does or does not influence macroinvertebrate communities. The latter is less direct,
and may be susceptible to more error: it would require compiling data from other studies and finding a
possible correlation within scenarios including point and nonpoint pollution sources. It would be
prudent, therefore, to begin work on the former with consideration to falling back on the latter.
5. Operational Definitions
Point pollution: Pollution that has been shown or is assumed to have a fall off just beyond its
source.
Physiogeographic: Of or relating to the physical, geographical, or combined physical and
geographic characteristics of a location.
Benthic: Existing or living at the bottom of a body of water.
Water column: The theoretical term referring to the middle to upper section of a body of water
containing life.
Biological Indicator (species): Organisms which respond to their environment and can therefore
be used to assess its health.
6. Final Product Overview
Given the scientific applications for this study, it would seem reasonable that a journal paper
would follow from any data collected (given that would be the optimal means of studying
macroinvertebrate error analysis). And also given the scientific basis of the research, that paper and
following information would be presented to fellow scientists, through the article or (at a high level) at
conferences on the subject.
7. Working Product Overview:
As a necessary facet for a scientific journal, original data must be collected, in the form of an
experiment. Therefore:
Resources:
Lab setting OR Stream setting
House, Howard County Conservancy respectively
This will require administration and outreach to current professional organizations to
obtain permission to conduct tests.
The stream would be the most accurate, the lab would be easier, of only for the
administrative necessities.
Chemical indicators
A nonharmful chemical indicator needs to be located, which meets all health and
ethical requirements.
And one that is readily available.
Observation tools
Careful notations of existent and added macroinvertebrate species would need to be
conducted.
Then, the effects need to ascertained over a short period of time.
Finally, conditions which are both statistically chaotic and which are controlled need to
be tested for each variable.
Calendar: (January/February Calendar through hopeful administrative approval)
Sun. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat.