The Effect of Temperature Difference in Microhabitats on Ectotherms

Elizabeth Pettit

February 24, 2015

Biology 301 Laboratory

Biophysical Ecology Lab Report

 Pettit 2

Abstract

In this experiment, stimulated ectotherms in the form of Marshmallow Peeps with I-

button data loggers placed inside of them were used to collect temperature data from two

different microhabitats within the habitat of a large magnolia tree. Unlike endotherms,

ectotherms have a low rate of metabolism and must therefore regulate their body heat through

solar radiation, evaporation, convection, and conduction in order to increase their individual

fitness. The two microhabitats used were a tree branch about seven feet off of the ground and a

puddle within the roots of the tree. Five simulated ectotherms were placed in each microhabitat

for twenty minutes while the I-button data loggers recorded the decrease in temperature. Then,

back at the lab, the I-button software allowed for the data to be converted into usable data in

Microsoft Excel and the ANOVA software. Through these calculations, the final results

supported the hypothesis in showing that the puddle microhabitat allowed for a faster rate of

decrease in temperature as well as an overall lower final temperature. This could be attributed to

the higher rate of convection at the surface of the puddle in comparison to the rates of both

convection and conduction at the branch microhabitat.

Introduction

This lab focuses on the concept of biophysical ecology, or the idea that the different

behaviors or forms of an organism might alter its bodys temperature. Two types of organisms

are endotherms and ectotherms. Endotherms are capable of regulating their own body

temperature by using metabolic heat and are therefore not greatly affected by the temperature of

their environment. Ectotherms, however, are of interest in the experiment because they typically

have body temperatures similar to their environments, and therefore, must change their location

in order to regulate their body temperature. This is important because a difference of only a few
 Pettit 3

degrees can drastically affect the individuals performance, its interspecific relationships, and its

fitness (Chapperon, 2012). The different habitats that an ectotherm would occupy are referred to

as microhabitats, and even slight changes in temperature of these microhabitats can have a direct

affect on the organism itself.

When referring to a change in an animals body temperature, an equation exists for the

change in heat content. This is referred to as the heat budget, and the equation is: change in heat

content = metabolism evaporation +/- convection +/- conduction +/- radiation. Since this

experiment focuses on ectotherms that do not have a high-energy metabolism, the important

aspects of the equation to measure are evaporation, convection, conduction, and radiation.

Evaporation can be defined as the heat transfer that occurs when water is converted from

a liquid to a gas. As water evaporates from a surface, heat is lost. No heat can be gained through

evaporation. Convection is the transfer of heat energy to the outside environment through a

moving material, be it a fluid or wind (Chapperon, 2012). If the air or fluid is warmer than the

individual, the body temperature of that individual will rise. The movement of the material

regulates how quickly a heat exchange will occur between the individual and the environment.

Conduction occurs when there is a transfer of heat between a solid surface and an organism. If

the organism is warmer than the surface it is resting on, the temperature of the organism will

drop. If the surface is warmer, however, the organisms temperature will rise. The larger the

surface area that exists between the organism and the solid surface, the larger the rate of heat

exchange will be (Marshall, 2012). Radiation occurs when energy from the sun is either absorbed

or released in an environment. The ability of an organism to absorb this solar radiation, and as a

result heat up, rises or falls based on the amount of sunlight, the angle at which the sunlight hits

the organism, and the ability of the surface on which the organism rests to absorb the solar
 Pettit 4

radiation. The addition of cloud cover, however, drastically decreases the levels of solar radiation

(Marshall, 2012).

In this experiment, the simulated organism of study was a Marshmallow Peep with a

small I-button data logger placed inside a hole cut into the back of the marshmallow. These

simulated organisms were to act as ectotherms by having the temperatures that were recorded by

the I-buttons regulated by the environment in which they were placed. This is significant because

it is necessary to be able to study how small changes in temperature affect how organisms

function, since changes in the climate are very relevant today.

The basis of this experiment was to observe the effects of placing the simulated

ectotherms in different microhabitats. The two microhabitats were a magnolia trees branch about

seven feet off the ground and a puddle within the roots of the same magnolia tree. The day that

the experiment was conducted was overcast, so there was little radiation to affect the

temperatures of the microhabitats. As a result of the lack of sunlight, there was also little to no

evaporation taking place. This means that convection and conduction were the main forces in the

transfer of heat between the Marshmallow Peeps and the microhabitats. Convection at the

surface of water occurs more rapidly than wind convection does at a solid surface (Poindexter,

2013). The convection at the surface of the puddle can then occur at a greater rate than the

combination of convection and conduction at the tree branch. A temperature difference should

exist between the two microhabitats. Therefore, if the rate of convection were greater at the

puddle microhabitat, then we would support the idea that the simulated organisms in the puddle

microhabitat would decrease more rapidly and to a lower temperature than the simulated

organisms in the branch microhabitat.

 Pettit 5

Materials and Methods

This experiment was performed on February 4th, 2015 in Maxcy Gregg Park. First, a bag

containing several infrared thermometers, 10 I-button data loggers, packages of gingerbread man

shaped Peeps brand Marshmallow Peeps, and scissors was obtained. Then, two locations in

Maxcy Gregg Park to use as habitats for the experiment were selected. Within these two habitats,

two separate microhabitats to compare the temperature differences were chosen, keeping in mind

how they might affect an ectotherm. Using the infrared thermometers, 5 temperature

measurements of each microhabitat were recorded, as well as descriptions of the habitats,

including the type of ground cover, shading, and water availability. The first habitat was located

in the brush, underneath large trees near a creek. Within the brush two areas were selected to act

as microhabitats, with one in the brush underneath the trees, and the other on a low-hanging

branch of one of the trees in the brush. The second habitat was a large magnolia tree with many

visible roots.

The microhabitats selected in the magnolia tree were a low hanging branch

approximately seven feet high and the puddles located within the roots of the tree. When the five

temperature measurements in each habitat were obtained, the means between the two were

calculated and compared. Since the lab group contained enough people for two groups, instead of

choosing the habitat with the larger temperature difference between the two microhabitats as the

directions instructed, both habitats were used. I chose to work with the second habitat, which was

the large magnolia tree.

In performing the experiment, first, slits were cut into the back of the Marshmallow

Peeps with the scissors, and then, the I-button data loggers were inserted into the backs of the
 Pettit 6

peeps. Prior to inserting the I-buttons into the peeps, they were placed in extremely hot water to

set a base for the initial temperature recording. The Marshmallow Peeps with the I-buttons

inserted into them served to act as the simulated organisms, which were ectotherms. Five of the

peeps were placed onto the low-hanging limb of the magnolia tree at 2:05 PM. The other five

remaining peeps were placed in a small puddle within the roots of the tree at 2:07 PM. Then, a

timer was set on a cell phone for 20 minutes. After this time elapsed, the peeps were removed

from the microhabitats, the I-button data loggers were removed, and the serial numbers of the

data loggers were recorded into a chart, keeping track of which serial numbers were located in

which microhabitat. Then, the data was returned to the lab to be recorded into the I-button

software.

Once the data from the I-buttons was obtained in a computer using the I-button software,

it was moved into a Microsoft Excel data sheet. Then, the average temperature recorded, the

standard deviation, a confidence interval, and the upper and lower confidence intervals were

calculated. Using the results of these calculations, a graph was created in Excel, which displayed

the puddle and branchs average temperatures and upper and lower confidence intervals. Lastly,

an ANOVA test on the final data points was run in order to obtain a p-value for the data. In

observing this data, the hypothesis in question of whether the puddle microhabitat decreases in

temperature more rapidly in comparison to the branch microhabitat was addressed.

Results

Figure 1 below displays the average temperature as well as the upper and lower

confidence intervals for both the branch and puddle microhabitats in our magnolia tree habitat.

By looking at the lines, it is evident that the average puddle temperature was initially higher than

the average branch temperature, but in the twenty minutes where data was collected, the average
 Pettit 7

puddle temperature dropped more rapidly and in the end was lower than the average branch

temperature did. Initially both microhabitat temperatures dropped more rapidly, but after about

ten minutes, the temperature began to level out.

The Variations of BranchPuddle

and Puddle Temperature over Time
Average

25
Puddle Upper 95% Confidence Interval

20
Puddle Lower 95% Confidence Interval

Branch15Average

Average Temperature (C)

Branch Upper 95% Confidence Interval
10

Branch Lower 95% Confidence Interval

5

Figure 1: This graph displays the variation in the temperature between the Marshmallow Peeps

placed on the tree branch and those placed in the puddle. It includes the upper and lower

confidence intervals as well as the average temperature for each location. The x-axis displays the

time over the 20-minute period, while the y-axis shows the average temperature range in degrees

Celsius.

Displayed on the next page, Table 1 shows the average temperatures throughout the

twenty minutes of measurement for both the puddle and the branch microhabitat. The puddle

average at 8.7 degrees Celsius was lower than the branch average of 10.3. Table 1 also shows the

variance of each microhabitat. The puddle microhabitat had a larger variance, at .325, than the
 Pettit 8

branch microhabitat, which had a variance of .2. Using the ANOVA software and the values from

Table 1, a P-value of .00138 was calculated.

GROUPS AVERAGE VARIANCE

Puddle 8.7 .325
Branch 10.3 .2
Table 1: This table shows the average temperature and the variance in the temperatures for the

Marshmallow Peeps that were placed in either the puddle or on the branch.

Discussion

The results that are shown above support the idea that the reduction in temperature of the

Marshmallow Peeps would occur more rapidly at the site of the puddle when compared to the

branch microhabitat. The average temperature of the puddle, shown in Table 1, is 8.7, which is

lower than the branchs average temperature of 10.3. The variance of the puddle microhabitat

(.325) is higher than that of the branch (.2), meaning that there exists a greater distribution

around the mean in the measurements of the puddle temperatures. This would indicate that the

simulated ectotherms experience a larger variation in temperature throughout the twenty-minute

measurement period.

In looking at the data presented in Figure 1, the temperature of the puddle microhabitat

began at a higher temperature, dropped at a higher rate, and to a lower temperature than the

branch temperature did. This supports the idea that the puddle microhabitat would experience a

greater change in temperature than the branch microhabitat. The calculated p-value was .00138,

which is below the significance level of .05. This means that we can reject the null hypothesis

that states that no significant temperature difference exists between the two microhabitats and

conclude that a temperature difference does in fact exist. It can also be concluded that convection

does play a greater role at the surface of the water in comparison to the air (Poindexter, 2013).
 Pettit 9

This is because the puddle experiences a higher exchange of energy and is therefore cooler in

temperature than the branch.

In the future, using the results obtained from this experiment, it might be helpful to

conduct the study in different types of weather. This sky was overcast on the day that this

experiment was conducted so it could also be repeated on sunny days, very windy days, or even

days on which it rains or snows. Another helpful direction could be repeating the study during

different seasons and comparing the results between all different circumstances.

The purpose of this experiment was to study the potential for slight changes in

environment to affect a simulated ectotherm, which would show how easily affected these

organisms are in real life. Just a small change in temperature or conditions could have

detrimental effects on many different animal populations, and with the evidence of changing

climates, it is important to understand this process as much as possible in order to try to better

understand the environment and the balance of ecosystems. Learning more about ectotherms and

the types of heat exchanges that affect them can help researchers to better understand these types

of species.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my lab partners Robert Faust and Lee Ferrell who assisted me in

completing this experiment and helping to upload all of the data that was collected. I would also

like to thank Marvin Brown and Nikki Gates for supervising and instructing us in addition to the

Biology Department at the University of South Carolina for providing the funding and the

resources necessary to conduct this experiment.

References

Coraline Chapperon, Laurent Seuront. Keeping warm in the cold: On the thermal benefits of
 Pettit 10

aggregation behaviour in an intertidal ectotherm, Journal of Thermal Biology, Vol. 37,

No. 8, (December, 2012), pp. 640-647.

Cristina M. Poindexter, and Evan A. Variano. "Gas Exchange in Wetlands with Emergent

Vegetation: The Effects of Wind and Thermal Convection at the Air-Water Interface."

Journal of Geophysical Research.G.Biogeosciences. Vol. 118, No. 3 (2013), pp. 1297-

306.

David J. Marshall, Teddy Chua. Boundary layer convective heating and thermoregulatory

behaviour during aerial exposure in the rocky eulittoral fringe snail Echinolittorina

malaccana, Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, Vol. 430431,

(November, 2012), pp. 25-31.

Resources

ANOVA Software

I-Button Software

Microsoft Excel

Thermal Environments: Pattern Recognition and Experimental Design Handout