Ali Askar Shaik,
NRM NRM 1401-002,
Hayden Hays,
10-15-2024.
Ecosystem
Part I – Introduction
1. Correlation under the Primary Productivity Hypothesis:
The primary productivity hypothesis suggests that as environmental conditions improve
(think warmer weather and more rain), plants grow better, giving moose more food to eat.
With more food, moose populations increase, which means wolves have more prey. So, the
populations of fir trees, moose, and wolves all move in sync: better conditions lead to more
plants, more moose, and more wolves.
2. Correlation under the Trophic Cascade Hypothesis:
In the trophic cascade hypothesis, the relationship is a bit more complex. If the moose
population increases, they start eating more balsam fir, which causes the fir to grow less. But
if wolf populations rise (since they feed on moose), moose numbers drop, and the fir trees get
a chance to bounce back. In this case, there’s a negative link between moose and fir growth—
more moose means less fir.
3. Effect of Wolf Removal on Plant Growth:
According to the primary productivity hypothesis, if wolves were taken out of the equation,
moose numbers would likely surge. With more moose around, they'd probably overgraze the
plants, slowing down their growth.
On the other hand, the trophic cascade hypothesis also predicts that taking wolves away
would cause a spike in moose populations, leading to overbrowsing and harming plant
growth. In both cases, the end result is the same: more moose means more pressure on plant
life.
4. Assumptions Regarding Growth Rates in Balsam Fir:
Several assumptions are made about how to measure balsam fir growth:
First, we assume that the width of the tree rings reliably shows how much the trees have
grown each year.
Second, it’s assumed that past growth rates still reflect current conditions, unaffected by new
factors like disease or competition.
Lastly, we assume that moose eating the fir trees has a direct impact on how much the trees
grow over time.
These assumptions seem reasonable, but long-term data would be necessary to really confirm
that other factors aren’t distorting the results.
Part II – Trophic System Data
1. Purpose of Each Figure:
The figures show how the populations of moose and wolves interact with the growth of
balsam fir (measured by ring width) and environmental conditions like how much water is
available for plants to grow (AET, or actual evapotranspiration). These visuals help explain
how changes in the environment and in species populations affect the ecosystem as a whole.
2. Maxima and Minima of Ring-Width Indices and Moose Density:
The ups and downs in ring width seem to line up with the moose population. When there are
fewer moose, the trees grow more (the rings are wider), but when moose numbers go up, the
trees suffer, and the rings shrink. This supports the trophic cascade hypothesis, showing that
moose eating the fir trees can seriously affect their growth.
3. Response of Fir Trees to Moose Density:
Interestingly, fir trees on different sides of the island react differently to moose. Fir trees on
the west side (in a hardwood forest) show a different pattern than those on the east side (in a
boreal forest). I think this could be because of variations in climate, soil, and forest types,
which affect how trees in each area respond to moose herbivory.
4. Maxima and Minima of Wolves and Moose Density:
As we would expect with predator-prey relationships, when wolf populations are high, moose
numbers tend to drop. This pattern makes sense because more wolves mean fewer moose,
which in turn allows plants to grow better since there’s less grazing pressure.
5. Hypothesis Supported by AET Data:
The data on AET (basically, how much water is available for plants) likely supports the
primary productivity hypothesis. When there’s more water, plants grow more, which boosts
the entire food chain, supporting larger populations of herbivores (moose) and carnivores
(wolves).