The Bioblitz at the New York Botanical Gardens was definitely a much more immersive experience than expected. Consisting of an intensive, hands-on regimen, the program was a release from the typical lecture-centered field trips I had been on before.
Upon entering the premises, I had noticed several groups of students dressed in Bioblitz shirts debating the identities of plant, animal and lichen species. Intrigued by their meticulous analyses, my post-work fatigue was soon replaced by an overwhelming sense of intrigue. That intrigue turned to excitement when the phrase “water gear” exited my group leader’s mouth, and I soon found myself in a lake capturing and identifying fish using nets.
The netting technique was somewhat complicated. In groups of three, we dragged the net along the bottom of the lake from the center to the periphery, with one person on each side of the net heaving it and the third maneuvering it to the edge of the water. It was imperative that we kept the fish alive and out of harms way; an oxygen-supplying bucket was used to ensure its wellbeing while captive.
After several hours’ worth of work identifying aquatic specimens (such as the Bluegill Sunfish) in various bodies of water, we discussed the relationship between the size and temperature of these organisms’ habitats and their physical traits. We had come to the conclusion that certain species of fish found near the shoreline were much more energetic and large in size in conversely to the size of the bodies of water in which we found them— the smaller, younger fish were more prone to be found near the coastline of larger bodies of water due to the larger abundance of predators and competitors within the depths.
Ultimately, the Bioblitz was a very fun experience. I am very glad to have had a firsthand glance at what we call “frontier science” and the discovery of the unknown. I would definitely do this again if given the opportunity.
By: Maria Camila Osorio on September 11, 2014 at 2:42 pm
I love the sentence where you write “my post-work fatigue was soon replaced by an overwhelming sense of intrigue” because it’s somewhat similar to what I went through that day. In a way, I’m envious of the fact that you got to go into the water and catch the fish yourself, even but even if I had been in the group, I couldn’t have done it due to my height limitations. 🙁 I have a question for you, you describe the netting method to be somewhat complicated, do you think that perhaps using individual nets (instead of those that covered most of the lake) with baits, of course, and simply sampling different locations would have been a better method? Or what specifically was complicated about it?
The conclusion you guys made about the fish size and its relationship with the temperature of the organisms’ habitat as well as their physical traits was, indeed, interesting. What was some evidence you used to support this idea?
By: Shinnosuke Takahashi on September 18, 2014 at 5:01 pm
Hey Maria,
Thanks for your comment! About the question concerning the large net vs. a smaller, individualized one, I believe that the larger one would be better. Not only would the smaller nets cover much less area, but also the baits would add another factor to the netting process that may alter our results. For example, the bait may attract specific species more than others, which would lead to a skew in our data.
Our conclusion was derived from both trends in our data and our group leader’s knowledge of the growth habits of adolescent fish. However, the latter was definitely more influential… He kind of just told us that that’s how it was and we all figured it made sense.