Michael Lambert September, 12, 2010

Ecology Lab Paper One final version BIOL. 3060

Using Freshwater Snails to Test the Accurateness of the Population Estimation

Techniques Enumeration, Mark and Recapture, and Depletion

Abstract
The purpose of our study was to determine if there were any differences
between three population density estimate methods, and if so, which method was
the most accurate. The methods used were enumeration, mark & recapture, and
depletion. The site where the experiment took place was a small section of
Choctafaula Creek in Macon County, Alabama. The species of snail we studied
was Elimia flava. Our hypothesis was that all three methods would yield equally
accurate findings. The null hypothesis was that the separate methods would yield
different results. The final results according to the enumeration technique were
76 snails per sqr. m; the mark and recapture method yielded 141 snails per sqr.
m; and the depletion method resulted in 55 E. flava per sqr. m. These results
contradicted our hypothesis since the three techniques yielded different findings.

Introduction

The purpose of our study was to use three different techniques regarding
population density and to determine which was the most accurate. Population
estimation is important because “measur[ing] changes in population size over
space and time... [helps researchers] to understand how different physical or
biological factors influence the distribution or abundance of species” (BIOL 3060
Teaching Staff, 2009). Population estimations may be used by researchers to
determine the effects that human actions have on the environment. The three
techniques we used to determine population density were enumeration, mark &
recapture, and depletion.
The enumeration method only counts the number of individuals in any
specific study area. The assumptions for enumeration were:
“(1) that all individuals were captured
(2) that the removal of the captured individuals did not attract more individuals
into the vacated study area (i.e., no migration)...
(3) The method also assumes that no individuals are born or die during the
period over which sampling is done” (BIOL 3060 Teaching Staff, 2009).
The mark & recapture method tags all individuals captured in a population,
releases them back into the study area and recaptures them at a later date. The
assumptions for the mark & recapture technique were:
 “1) ... No new individuals were born or immigrated into the population and
none died or emigrated.
2) All individuals are equally likely to be caught within each capture period.
3) Marked individuals must not become either easier or more difficult to catch
during the second capture period compared to unmarked individuals.
4) Sufficient time... [permitted] all marked individuals to be randomly
dispersed throughout the population” (BIOL 3060 Teaching Staff, 2009).
The depletion method assumes that a specific fraction of a population will
decrease at a constant rate over a measured time interval. The assumptions for
the depletion technique were:
“1) ... No births, deaths or migration occur.
2) The probability of capture is the same for each individual in the population.
3) The probability of capture does not change from one sample to the next”
(BIOL 3060 Teaching Staff, 2009).
We examined different methods of population estimation with the intent to
find out which one was the most accurate.

Our working hypothesis was that all three techniques used would give
similar results. If the final results were significantly different from each other then
our hypothesis would be disproved.

Methods

The study site was a small creek about seven meters across. It was only a
few centimeters deep in most places and had many small rocks jutting out the
surface of the water. On either end of the study area the water got much deeper,
down to about one meter. Both banks were sandy and most plant life started
about a meter away from the water’s edge. A bridge was directly above part of
the study area which cast a large shadow over about half of it. Near one of the
banks, just outside of the bridge’s shadow’s reach, was a patch of aquatic
grasses that was about four meters long and two meters wide. On the other side
of the creek was a very small mound of sand that made a tiny island. Several
logs were partially submerged just outside the study area.
The animal whose population we measured was the Elimia flava.
This is an aquatic snail that lives in freshwater streams and creeks. The E. flava
was appropriate for this study because of the ease of capture and marking. They
only live for a few years. They travel slowly, covering only a few centimeters a
day, and stay in the study area over the duration of the experiment. This makes
them good subjects for the mark & recapture method.
 To begin the experiment, we took measurements of the study area,
including air and water temperatures, water depth and clarity, along with the
velocity of the current and the area of the study area. These measurements are
provided in the following table.

Week Week
1 2

Environmental Mon. Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thur. Fri.
Air temp. 29 34 28 31 30.5 C 27 27 33 30 30.5 C
Water temp. 24 25 25.5 25 24.5 C 22 24 23 24 23 C
clarity before .15m 0.19 Same 0.19 17cm 0.166 Same 17.5
clarity after .15m 0.19 0.19 17cm 0.166 17.5
Depth (m) 0.15 0.19 0.13 0.14 0.19 0.17 0.166 0.18 0.145 17.5
Velocity
(sec/m) 0.213 0.225 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.286 0.25
Study site 100 76 49 23 109
area (sqr. m)

Simple measurements taken around the study area

Once the basic measurements of the study area were taken, we began
collecting E. flava. The way we captured the snails was very simple. We waded
around in the water and picked them off of the small rocks there. We placed them
in buckets and then pooled them all together to tag them. This continued until
200 person minutes had been spent collecting snails.
While some people gathered the snails, others tagged them. The captured
E. flava were dried with a towel and placed in a shallow pan to finish air drying.
Once the snails were mostly dry, a small dab of highly visible paint was applied to
the ventral surface (underside) of their shells. They were once more set aside so
the paint would dry. Afterwards, they were placed in another large bucket with
creek water in it. After each harvest, the E. flava were brought back to the lab to
be counted.
This entire procedure was conducted Monday through Friday for one week,
each day using a different color. At the end of the week all E. flava were released
into the same area. They were scattered randomly and given the weekend to
disperse. The following monday we began to recapture them, which used the
same procedures as the original capture week. At the end of the second week
the snails were again released into the same area of the creek.
To calculate enumeration, we summed the total snails and divided the total
by the area. This formula was:
 (5,497 snails / 72 m^2 = 76.35 snails per m^2)
The mark & recapture method compared the number of snails captured
and then released in week one to the number recaptured in week two. The
formula used was:
(Total captured in week 2 (recaptures and new captures) x Total captured in week
one/ recaptured)
This gave numerical results of:
(3,816 x 2,697/1,016 = 10,130)
(10,130 / 72 m^2 = 140.7 snails per m^2)

Results

According to the enumeration method, there are roughly 76 snails per sqr.
m in the study area. According to the mark & recapture method, there are about
141 E. flava per sqr. m in the study area, and according to the depletion method,
there are about 55 E. flava per sqr. m in the study area.
Here is a regression line showing the expected population of E. flava in the
study area. Where the lines would intersect with the x-axis are the expected
populations of E. flava.
 Chart showing the depletion of snail population over a period of two weeks

Discussion
We fulfilled our objective of using and comparing three separate population
estimation techniques. The results of our experiment contradicted our hypothesis.
Because there is no way to guarantee that all individuals were captured,
the enumeration method is subject to possible error. Because the study area was
searched by multiple groups of students, the same rocks were searched multiple
times. This could have led to an influx of additional E. flava being found and thus
increasing the enumeration total. A way to improve this would be to have a larger
study area. This would make it easier to assign certain portions of the study area
to specific groups of students.
Due to the new captures in week two, it can be concluded that additional
snails immigrated into the study area, thus, violating the first assumption of the
mark & recapture method. Isolating the study area from outside populations could
eliminate this potential error.
 Due to immigration, the first assumption of the depletion method was
violated. This could have overestimated the final population count. Again,
isolating the study area could potentially eliminate this problem.

Though the three methods yielded different results, mark & recapture
appeared to be the most accurate because only one of its assumptions was
violated.
 Literature Cited

BIOL 3060 Teaching Staff. 2009. Principles of Ecology. Auburn University.