Statistics for a wetland soils project I'm working on

[ashmgee 193]

Hello.

 

I am familiar with some of the names around here although I am new to this site myself.

 

I am just looking for any stats knowledge or ideas on a project I am working on right now. I set up the project to run simple t-tests on the data set, but now have some confounding variables that have occurred as a result of changes that were made to the project after it was started that were out of my control.

 

I am just gauging the potential that someone on this site has more stats knowledge than I do in a scientific based project and if they have enough time to give some advise on how to proceed or if there are any things that I am not taking into consideration.

 

I will leave it at that for now, and don't worry, you aren't doing my homework. I wish it was that easy!

[IU Hoosier41 14,491]

Let's see it


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[ashmgee 193]

Ok this involves two sites. The first is our project site, and it was originally tied into a brackish slough that had a tidal influence. It was diked and as a result is no longer tidally influenced and no longer salt water influenced. Because of its low position it still floods enough to be considered a wetland by classification, but is flooded when rain water inputs (there are plenty here) are in play.

 

The second site is a reference site that is still tied to the same brackish slough and has not had altered hydrology. Our original design was to compare our project site against a site that was more similar to its current state, but instead we have been asked to compare it to the state it would have been in if the dike was not installed 80 years ago.

 

The two sites were sampled on a grid layout with transects, and plots on the transects at every 100 ft. We tested for three things at the plots, and just looking at the data it is clear that they are different.

 

Wetlands accumulate organic matter because of anaerobic environments, and we proposed that because the project site had altered hydrology, and didn't flood as frequently over the last 80 years, it would have accumulated less organic carbon. The other tests we ran were in an attempt to further back that hypothesis up if it was indeed proven.

 

The problem is that although these soils are of the same parent material, and are classified very similarly with the exception of the saline characteristics in the reference tidal wetland, and would be extremely similar if not for the dike, I feel that the stats are weak. I feel that it is possible that the differences couldn't be proven to be based on simply the frequency and duration of flooding.

 

I could go on, but that should be a start, and to pad my post count...

[ashmgee 193]

No takers?! I don't blame ya...

[IU Hoosier41 14,491]

I just now read it, it'd honestly be hard for me to say much without knowing more. That being said. I'm not sure you explaining it more would help me. I know stats and love analysis, but this appears to be our of my comfort zone


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[CR3AMnCR1MS0N 1,867]

I nominate this for the prayer thread!!! :D


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners