Flamingo Tongues

Question: 

How much damage do flamingo tongues cause to gorgonians?

Hypothesis:

Flamingo tongues do not cause drastic amounts of damage to the gorgonian population. 

Methods:

I went out snorkeling on the coral reef in search of flamingo tongues with my dive partner Evan and the rest of the group, the flamingo tongues were found on gorgonians on which they feed on.  The measurement of the damage done to the gorgonians by the flamingo tongues was measured in centimeters and was recorded on an underwater slate, as well as the amount of flamingo tongues found on each gorgonian, and the species of gorgonian they were found on.  For every gorgonian that had flamingo tongues present, I randomly selected a gorgonian in the same general area of the same species and recorded the amount of damage present, in order to compare gorgonians health with flamingo tongues present and gorgonians health without flamingo tongues present. 

Results:

The gorgonians with 0-5 centimeters of damage was 4 for the gorgonians with flamingo tongues and 7 For the gorgonians without flamingo tongues present.  Gorgonians with 6-10 centimeters of damage was 6 for the ones with the tongues present and 4 for with out the tongues present.  Gorgonians with 11-15 centimeters of damage was 4 for the gorgonians with tongues present and 1 without the presence of flamingo tongues. Gorgonians with 16-20 centimeters of damage was 1 for the gorgonians with tongues present and 2 for the gorgonians where the tongues were not present. And one fan that had no tongues present had damage between 21-25 centimeters of damage. 

Conclusion:

The conclusion drawn from the experiment is that flamingo tongues do not generally cause large amounts of damage to the gorgonians, but if they were in a large enough group they could do a significant amount of damage. 

The hypothesis was accepted with one exception.  Flamingo tongues do not cause drastic amounts of damage to gorgonians unless they are in a large group.  The more flamingo tongues there are on a gorgonian, the larger the amount of damage dealt. 

Discussion: 

There were several limitations, it was somewhat difficult to find lots of flamingo tongues, also the limitation of time, and resources that were available.   If I were to continue my research on flamingo tongues and had unlimited time and resources, I would set up aquariums with gorgonians and flamingo tongues and further observe their feeding habits and damage dealt to gorgonians in a more controlled environment, and further observe to see if there are certain species of gorgonians they prefer to feed on more so than others.

-Isaak 

Research project by Emily, Sruja, Jackson and Charlie

CLEANING STATIONS: GOBY NATIONS 

Question: 

What species of fish is most common at the Tobacco Caye neon goby cleaning stations?

Hypothesis: 

We hypothesize that the spotlight parrotfish will be the most frequent visitor at the neon goby cleaning stations. 

Explanation: 

To continue and expand our marine learning at the Tobacco Caye Research station, we tested which fish species was the most frequent visitor at neon goby cleaning stations. Based on our observations and earlier learnings about marine biology, we predicted that the stoplight parrotfish would be the most popular visitor at neon goby cleaning stations. To test our hypothesis, we observed four neon goby cleaning stations. We inventoried and identified each fish that was cleaned. However, our hypothesis was incorrect and therefore rejected. We discovered that the striped parrotfish, a close relative to the stoplight parrotfish, was in fact cleaned the most often. Even though we had to face the difficulties of limited supplies and time, we all had fun and learned a lot from this unique opportunity. 

Oh Christmas Tree... Worm Oh Christmas Tree... Worm

Michael, Veronica, Chad 

Overview 

The reef on Tobacco Caye is covered by beautiful coral and exotic fish. One group of animals that is often overlooked by the untrained eye is worms. The Christmas Tree Worm can be found all the reef. Our group decided to study them because they are so weird and beautiful looking. 

Question 

Our group noticed that all the Christmas Tree Worms we saw on the reef were settled on a just a few different types of coral. We decided to investigate the question "what type of coral Christmas Tree Worms prefer?". 

Hypothesis

Christmas Tree Worms prefer Brain Corals over Star and Starlet Corals(all hard corals). And the null hypothesis: they have no preference.

Materials and Procedures

1.) Pick a location with a variety of hard corals and in fairly shallow water.

2.) Lay down a ten meter transect belt was parallel to the shore.

3.) Two people look for worms and record what type of corals the worms are on that and are with in one meter of the transect. The third person made sure that the transect belt doesn't sway and they assist in counting as needed. 

4.) We repeated this process six times and covered 120 meters squared. 

Conclusion 

We reject the null that they have no preference. The data clearly shows that the Christmas Tree Worms prefer Brain Coral. 80% of the 20 worms we found were on Brain Corals. A possible reason that they "prefer" Brain Coral is that they don't have a choice... The Christmas Tree Worm larvae probably actually land on each of the hard corals fairly evenly without preference. The polyps on Star and Starlet Corals are close together and probably leave little safe space for a baby worm. The polyps on Brain Coral are much more spread out and leave more space for the Christmas Trees to settle down without being eaten. To prove this theory we would have to dust each type of coral with Christmas Tree Worm larvae in segregated tanks. 

Cleaning Stations Project - Belize 2013

Project by: Jake, Jamie, and Bryan

Overview

For our marine biology group study here in Belize, us three decided to gain some insight on cleaning stations within the reef setting. Cleaning stations are areas located throughout the reef that house small species responsible for cleaning other fish. Microscopic parasites exist on all fish, and these small cleaner species are responsible for removing these parasites from their clientele. In this particular study, we investigated the actions of two specific cleaner species; the Neon Goby and the Blue-Headed Wrasse. 

The Question

In looking at these two species, we wanted to analyze each species' cleaning preferences, if you will. Due to their smaller size, we figured that Neon Gobies would stick to cleaning only smaller fish, while the larger-sized Blue-Headed Wrasse would clean the larger fish. Therefore, our hypothesis went something like this: Neon Gobies will clean smaller fish than Blue-Headed Wrasse will clean.

Methods

In order to effectively answer our question, we went out and selected three different cleaning stations that housed both the Neon Gobies and the Blue-Headed Wrasse, so that we could do a comparative study. Whenever a fish came in to be cleaned, we documented it's general size, and also which species was seen cleaning it. We monitored each station, once in the morning and once in the evening, for ten minutes. 

Results

In regards to our hypothesis, we both accepted and rejected it. On an acceptance note, we noticed that in general, larger fish were in fact cleaned by the Blue-Headed Wrasse. However, on a rejection note, we noticed that there were, in fact, a few exceptions to this general trend. For example, a couple of species of larger fish, such as the graysby grouper, were cleaned exclusively by Neon Gobies. However, as far as a general trend is concerned, Blue-Headed Wrasse, for the most part, did in fact clean larger fish, while Neon Gobies cleaned mostly smaller fish.

Further Observations

After completing our study, one observation in particular stuck out to myself and the rest of the group. We noticed that size didn't have as much correlation to which species did the cleaning as the species' position in the water column did. Put simply, fish that live on or near the bottom (graysby grouper, snappers, etc) were cleaned by Neon Gobies, whereas fish that hover in the water column (grunts, triggerfish,etc) were cleaned by Blue-Headed Wrasse. This, we believe, is due to the fact that Blue-Headed Wrasse hover around the cleaning station, whereas Neon Gobies tend to hug the coral head and only move when a client needs cleaning. 

Expanding the Study

If we were given more resources and another chance to repeat the study, there are a few things that we would change. For one, we would definitely like to analyze more than three cleaning stations. We believe that this would give us more data, thus allowing us to potentially solidify our hypothesis. Also, it would be unique to look into a differentiation between juvenile and adult cleaner species, and whether or not this affects their cleaning habits.

Summary

On a closing note, our study gave us the further insight to marine cleaning stations that we desired, and also provided us with the ability to lead and conduct out first marine study. It has been an amazing week here in Belize, and these studies do not even come close to scraping the surface of what this amazingly breathtaking place has to offer.

In the above picture, you can see both Neon Gobies (the tiny fish with neon blue stripes) as well as a Blue-Headed Wrasse in the juvenile stage (the yellow fish at the top of the frame with a white belly). This picture shows a basic cleaning station as a whole.

Picky Parrotfish By: Evan, Brynn, and Cody

Question

Do different species of parrotfish have a preference of habitat between the coral reef and sea grass? We are particularly interested in the preferences of Yellowtail Parrotfish, Stoplight Parrotfish, and Red Band Parrotfish.

Hypothesis

We hypothesize that the Stoplight Parrotfish will prefer the coral reef habitat, the Red Band Parrotfish will prefer the coral reef habitat as well, and the Yellowtail Parrotfish will prefer the sea grass habitat.

Method

As a group, we did a 15 minute timed swim in each habitat. During the timed swims we divided up tasks between each individual to ensure more accurate results. Between the three of us, we had two people with underwater slates tallying each species of parrotfish as we came across them. The third member of our party was an observer that helped spot the parrotfish due to a lack of slates. We compared results after to determine the right amount of parrotfish that we spotted. 

Results

After our two 15 minute snorkels we had some outstanding results. In the coral reef habitat we came across an interesting array of parrotfish. We saw 23 Stoplight Parrotfish, 10 Red Band Parrotfish, and absolutely zero Yellowtail Parrotfish. In the sea grass habitat we were shocked by the results. We were swimming in the grass for 5 minutes without seeing a single parrotfish. All of a sudden we ran into a school of over 100 parrotfish. It was a mix of Stoplight Parrotfish and Yellowtail Parrotfish, although the Yellowtail Parrotfish was the most abundant. We ran into another mixed school of parrotfish in lesser size. In total we accounted 125 Yellowtail Parrotfish and 18 Stoplight Parrotfish.

Conclusion

We both accept and reject our hypothesis. We accept our hypothesis in the fact that the Red Band Parrotfish was found in the coral reef habitat, and the Yellowtail Parrotfish was found in the sea grass habitat. We reject our hypothesis in the fact that the Stoplight Parrotfish was found in both habitats, not just the coral reef habitat. We found that in general, Stoplight Parrotfish don't have a preferable habitat. They cross over between the two. Yellowtail Parrotfish prefer the sea grass habitat to the coral reef. Red Band Parrotfish prefer the coral reef to the sea grass.

Discussion 

We had a couple limitations in or experiment. The first being our time limit. We had just 15 minutes to collect our data. The second being the fact that fish move around a lot. There was the possibility that we could have recounted the fish as well. The third was that ocean swells during our experiment prevented us from conducting our survey out in the deeper waters of the reef. To improve our experiment we could change a few things. We could change our survey times to one hour to get the best possible results and we would do 10 surveys. With these changes the experiment would have more accurate data to represent the trends, but the trends would still be the same. 

Projects Day 2

Another great day on Tobacco Key!  Today the students carried out their research projects during snorkels in the morning and afternoon. All groups had success with their protocols and will be analyzing the data and creating poster presentations tomorrow. The students really have done a great job with these projects, and are developing excellent science skills.  

This evening students enjoyed a little bit of relaxation and refreshments.  Coke does taste better out of a glass bottle.  Also, the fishing wasn't too shabby.

We also celebrated Evan's 17th birthday today with some yummy chocolate cake thanks to our great cooks! Happy Birthday Evan!

Project Day 1

Today the students began developing their research projects. They reviewed the scientific method and learned some field sampling techniques used in the marine studies.  Then we set them free to come up with a question to test based on their own observations and curiosities. While we often complete labs at school, this type of project development was new for most students.  With a small amount of assistance each of the groups have come up with a question, hypothesis, and methods to test it.

This afternoon we went for a snorkel just off the island for students to make some preliminary observations and tweak their data collection methods.  The slow pace of the snorkel helped students see new creatures and hone in on some interesting behaviors of the reef inhabitants.  Many of the students also got to see a nurse shark, which was exciting!

We're having another movie night tonight to save up our brain energy for tomorrow when we will be carrying out the projects. Stay tuned for some interesting results!