Conclusions

Before concluding, there are several limitations on our results that are worthy of noting:

First, samples were only taken at one tide level (low tide only), and thus may not accurately represent the average differences in the environments at different locations (as the effect of the tide is more prevalent within the bay than in the open strait).

Second, the samples were not collected simultaneously (the latest having been collected up to a couple of hours after the first samples). This may account for differences in salinity and temperature (as both fluctuate as the day progresses and as tides progress).

After conducting this experiment, I have a number of conclusions to make.

It was interesting to see the differences in the aquatic environments of the inner bay and in the Juan de Fuca. It seems that, beyond temperature differences between the different areas, there is also a big difference in terms of actual micro-organism populations and their motility between the inner bay and beyond the mouth of the bay.

There are also many lessons I have learnt during this project.

Despite the many hours we spent planning our experiment, there were inevitable problems encountered during the experiment itself. For instance, we discovered that gram stains can only be conducted on cultured bacteria samples and that the use of a hemocytometer is difficult when examining samples with a wide range of different species (as some may look like clusters of another, etc.) and also when examining motile organisms, as it can make it difficult to count accurate values. This has given me a better appreciation for the intricacy of lab design.

It was also difficult (at times) to be able to work as a team. We all have our own ideas on how the lab should be laid out, which leads to both conflict and compromise. Although the difficulties of team work were not unknown to me prior to this experiment, it nonetheless further highlighted the importance of being able to discuss and make a compromise.

Having seeing different trends in the light absorbance properties of water at different locations in the Pedder Bay we tried to do some research to explain the different trends we observed in the sample. These researches weren’t productive enough because we couldn’t figure out exactly the reason of the trends except for the marina where we thought of some possibilities accounting for the higher absorbance of the light especially at the surface water. The water being so much absorbent, we thought may be due to its relatively high opacity which may mainly be caused by either the effect of the run off entering the bay by the Marina which lead the water not to be too settled and hence the mud rise up and trap most of the light or the pollutions by the boats paints or the human activities in the marina that in one way or another lead to pollution of the surface of water. similarly, since the mouth of the bay is a bit far from human habitat and any other man activities interactions, we see its water absorbs relatively the least light compared to the other places.

For the other places we basically we couldn’t explain the trend why they are the way they are instead we just explain their implication in terms of what kind of marine organism are those places suitable for.

THE DOCKS

Since in the docks as we saw generally the violet and blue light are more absorbed than others, this is a nice habitat for green sea weeds. This is because these kind of see weeds example green algae have green pigments, chlorophyll which absorbs red mostly and blue whereas reflecting the green light as seen. Red seeds are other forms of life that will be favoured in this place. In addition to chlorophyll, the red sea weeds have two other pigments namely phycocyanin blue pigment which absorbs red light and phycoerythrin the red pigment which absorbs blue. Therefore, these kinds of lives will favoured as seen that their light requirements for photosynthesis hence life will be fulfilled.

THE MARINA

The marina doesn’t show much difference compared to the docks. The Marina surface show a bit of different trend where by the blue light is relatively highly absorbed hence this may also make a good habitat for the green and red seed weeds for the same reasons I explained above..

THE MOUTH OF THE BAY

The mouth of the bay seems to be the most appropriate place for the marine weeds to live since the light have their peaks at both blue and red light hence supporting both blue and red sea weeds.

Microorganism populations

Micro-organism populations in the samples were studied under a microscope at x400 magnification. I compared populations of micro-organisms by eye (as it was often difficult to distinguish a group of organisms from a single organism, making an exact count difficult to determine, and the motility of the organisms made the use of the hemocytometer difficult).

Overall, I observed that population size and motility of organisms tended to increase as one progressed further into Pedder Bay (the smallest populations were observed near the prison; the largest were observed near the Marina). Furthermore, populations near the surface tended to be larger and more motile than those at a depth of 3m. The depth discrepancy may be explained by the fact that phototrophic micro-organisms find more light at the surface than at 3m depth. The locational discrepancy can be accounted for by the difference in temperature between area beyond the mouth of the bay and the Marina (average temperature being higher as one approaches the Marina). This may be due to surface runoff providing nutrients for the bay micro-organisms, or runoff of organisms themselves into the bay. Alternatively (or in addition), the higher temperature in the bay may be better at supporting life; however, higher temperatures may also imply lower dissolved oxygen content, which would theoretically hinder aerobic micro-organisms.

All in all, I see that the inner bay area (close to the Marina) seems to be more hospitable for micro-organisms and that micro-organism populations tend to flourish more in the shallower and more sheltered bay area than out beyond the mouth of the bay.

THE MOUTH OF THE BAY

We did the same collection in the mouth of the bay. We examined the data and observe the trends comparing them to the distilled water. From the graph drawn here are our observation.

SURFACE WATER

• We saw a new trend with relatively less absorption of light, whereby this time the very violet light was the least absorbed and the blue light being the most absorbed in this case about 1% of the light is absorbed. The light at the blue and green boundary is least absorbed at about 0.3% of the light and the trend rises to the red light whereby about 0.7% is being absorbed.

BOTTOM WATER

• This water show the most different trend from the rest of the others. This time the trend show the increase of absorption with the increase in the wavelength violet being the least absorbed and red light being the most absorbed.
  

Light absorbance in the Marina

THE PEDDER BAY MARINA:
We did the same thing in the Marina as we did in the PC docks, we analsed the sample the data taken from the surface and the data taken from the 3 metres deep. Comparing the data to the distilled water.

BOTTOM WATER

• From the bottom sample, we see most of the light passing unabsorbed, though there is relatively increase in the amount absorbed compared to the distilled water as we can observe from the graph that about, 3% of violet light is being absorbed which is about 2% more than the amount distilled water absorbs.
• The trend shows that there is generally decrease in the rate of absorption as the wavelength increases.

SURFACE WATER

• This graph shows different trend from previous the other graphs. Contrary the others, relatively less violet light is being absorbed and we see the peak on the light blue light whereby it is about 2.7% which is about 2.69% rise from the level of the distilled water.
• Generally there is relatively more absorbance of light in the Marina's water surface compared to the bottom water.
  

Salinity and temperature testings across the bay.

Apparatus: YSI salinity and temperature portable meter.
Locations: strategicly selectod across the bay.

Raw data collected:
At the Marina: 3m depth- 30.8 ppt, 9.8 C, surfase- 30.2ppt, 11.0 C
At the PC Docks: 3m depth-30.8 ppt, 9.4 C; surface- 30.3ppt, 11.1 C
At the Green Buoy: 3m depth- 30.8ppt, 9.1 C; surface- 30.6ppt, 10.9 C
At the Prison: 3m depth- 30.9ppt, 9.2 C; surface- 30.6ppt, 10.6 C

At the time the time the data was collected the tide was at its lowest ( 0.4m)

If to examine the main tendency of the salinity curves, both at the 3m and the surface, it increased as we were moving out of the bay. The surface salinity had more fluctuation, than the bottom, which is not suprising, since 3m water is more stabile. The temperature mainly had teh opposite performance, it decreased as we moved out of the bay on both levels measured. That may be explained by the increased area of the water that had to be heated. The surface water was generally less salty and warmer because it recieves most of the runoff and precipitation, and is first to be heated by the sun, whereas the saltier and colder water stays closer to the bottom because of density.
The salinity and temperature measurments might be useful for understanding the habitat of marine organisms and the patterns of their migrations. However, for making this kind of relations a bigger area in a much longer time period has to be examined.

THE LIGHT OF ABSORPTION:
We took samples from the bottom and the surface in three different sites of the Pedder bay that is the marina, PC docks and the mouth of the bay. From the samples we took, we studied their absorption of light parteins according to the wavelength of the light (colour). Though there is not much of difference quantitatively, but still the sample showed remarkable parteins that differed mainly due to depth variations. These parteins will be explained with reference to the partein in the distilled waater which we used for calibrating our spectro viz.

THE DOCKS:
From the docks we collected our samples from the surface and the bottom, and after the spectroviz analyisis, the following graphs were produced.


NB: the graph of distilled water is just for reference

• from the graphs we can observe the following
  

• For the case of distilled water, the there is very little absorption of light generally, but still we see violet light is mainly absorbed thats about 0.29%of all the light. At the boundary between green and yellow light, no lifgt is absorbed at all. then we see red light being relatively more absorbed.
• From the sample in the bottom water in the docks, we see the same case whereby most of the light pass the sample unabsorbed. The violet light is stillthe most absorbed, with an increase to about 4.6% of light absorbed. the trend generally conform to the distilled water's but with relatively increase in the absorption of light.
• From the surface water sample we see something a bit more remarkable. There is a general trend whereby the rate of absorption of light decreases with the increase in the wavelength of the light. There is a significant rise in the rate of absorption of the violet light to about 1.3% compared to the distilled water.