Bio 100 Carley Henry Pond Water Paper
Bio 100 Carley Henry Pond Water Paper
Bio 100 Carley Henry Pond Water Paper
Carley Henry
A . Gamble
BIO 100
December 8, 2018
Abstract
As a research project, students were given jars to fill with pond water. The bottom of the
jar had to have 1 to 2 inches of muck and two dead leaves. My pond of choice was Millpond
Park in Mt.Pleasant. For about five weeks each individual recorded their own qualitative data,
quantitative data, and microscopic observations. Before the pond water project was complete we
swabbed a sample from our water and put it onto nutrient and potato agar petri dishes. After that,
we observed the microbial growth.
What is a pond?
A pond is a body of water that is shallow enough to support rooted plants (All about
ponds...). A pond is a small body of standing water, usually smaller than a lake. A pond is home
to smaller aquatic beings and can grow plants all across due to it being shallow. A pond is home
to many water organisms that can be seen with the naked eye or with a microscope. Chemical
properties of a pond relate to the hardness of the water, nitrate levels, alkalinity, and pH.
Physical features of a pond are water color, water smell, physical appearances, and suspended
solids. Organismal features of a pond are what living creatures that are found in a pond or in a
sample of a pond.
Results
Data Summary
Qualitative Data of Pond Water
Water Water Suspended Physical Tem pH Tota Total Ni Ni
Color Smell Solids Appearance perat l Hardn trit tra
ure Alk ess es te
(Cels alini (P s
ius) ty P (P
M P
) M
)
Microscopic Observations
Discussion
The chart represents all of the quantitative data collected over the five weeks. Located at
the bottom of the chart is Week 1 through Week 5. There are four lines at the bottom
representing little or no change and low numbers. Two of the lines are at zero due to the fact that
there were no nitrites or nitrates in the pond sample. The yellow line, Alkalinity, starts at a higher
number, but decreased over the five weeks. The green line, Hardness, starts at 1000 and
drastically decreased over the five weeks. The second table is the microscopic observations, in
which there was no luck in the first few weeks, towards the end there was a copepod and a water
mite. One mistake I made was not taking pictures of my microscopic observations every week.
In this experiment the water color did not fluctuate as much as I thought it would. When smelling
the pond sample, most of the time it smelled like normal water, at times it had a slight stench.
While recording suspended solids, most of the time it was clear, sometimes opaque. To test this
you test if you can see your fingers through the jar. If you could clearly see them, it would be
called clear. If they were more blurry, it would be called opaque. If you could not see your
fingers, it would be considered turbid. For the physical appearance, the only thing I noticed was
a yellow-ish film at the surface of the sample. For microscopic observations, in week 1 I
unfortunately could not get anything due to the organisms being so quick. This repeated in week
2. In week 3, I found what is to be known as a Copepod, a Copepod is of great ecological
importance due to the fact that it provides food for many species of fish (Copepod, 2018). In
week 4, I was unfortunate again but in week 5 I found a water mite. A Water Mites feed on
insect larvae and small crustaceans (Water mites, 2018).
Conclusion
While observing the qualitative and quantitative data, the pond water sample had minor
changes but nothing too drastic, besides the hardness. The microscopic observations were pretty
disappointing due to the fact that I could never catch anything. This assignment was useful due
to the fact that it is weekly observations and it is interesting.
References