Www.savannahstate.edu



Senior Research/Internship I and II

MSCI 4902/4903

Savannah State University

Fall 2011

Instructor: Dr. M. Gilligan

Office: Marine Biology 102

Phone: 358-4098

e-mail: gilliganm@savannahstate.edu

Office Hours: 10:00-12:00 Daily

3:00-5:00 Daily

I am available at other times. Please stop my office any time; if I cannot meet then, we can set up an appointment. Alternatively, you may set up an appointment over e-mail or phone.

Course Description

This is an independent study opportunity to engage in original independent scientific research. The student must meet regularly with the research advisor (SSU or research institute faculty member), submit a complete research report, and make a presentation to peers and faculty.

Course Objectives

• Design and conduct an independent scientific research project.

• Gain experience in communicating the results of that research, both orally and in writing.

• Review literature critically in support of research topic.

Grading

Grades will be assigned based on a research plan and timetable (10%), research report (65%), and research presentation (25%). The graded drafts will be incorporated into the final grade for the research report. Grade of incomplete (IP) will be given only in cases in which significant effort has been made to stay on schedule in the designing, planning, and implementation of the research project and significant progress has been made on the research report, but due to the nature of the research project, the final report and/or final presentation cannot be completed by the end of the semester.

|Date |Topic and Assignments |

|8/19 |Class meeting: Introduction |

| |Work on Research (background literature and introduction, methods sections) |

| |Completed Contract Form due |

| |TIMETABLE DUE |

| |DRAFT I OF RESULTS DUE |

| |DRAFT DUE |

| |Work on background literature |

| |Work on Introduction and Materials and Methods Section |

| |DRAFT OF COMPLETE RESEARCH PAPER DUE |

| |DRAFT OF COMPLETE RESEARCH PAPER DUE |

| |Practice oral presentations |

| |Class meeting: ORAL PRESENTATIONS (Power Point) /FINAL RESEARCH PAPER DUE |

Savannah State University

College of Sciences and Technology, Department of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Marine Science Program

Writing in the Disciplines 6/25/2009

Writing a Research Report (from Gilligan, Kozel, and Richardson 1991, Gilligan 1995, with edits by T. Cox, C. Curran, and C. Pride 2009)

A laboratory report is a mini-version of the principal vehicle for the communication of scientific research findings: the journal article. The article is accepted for publication in a scientific journal by an editor who relies upon expert reviewers (scientists who specialize in the area) to advise whether or not the article is worthy of publication. The journal article is the solution to the underlying organizational and communication needs of science. It reflects all the elements of the scientific method (hypothesis, evidence, experimentation, validation or rejection of hypothesis, and interpretation or conclusion). It is the vehicle by which new knowledge in science is published. As mini-versions of journal articles, laboratory reports are useful exercises for future scientists.

Parts of the report

The elements of the laboratory report (or journal article) are: title, introduction, methods, results, discussion and literature cited (references) sections. The report may also include a summary, abstract, and acknowledgments.

The introduction describes what you planned to do and why. It includes a statement of the problem or question to be studied and an explanation of why the knowledge gained by this research is of interest and to whom.

An introduction states the hypothesis, an educated guess as to the process by which the phenomenon under investigation operates.

A general outline of an introduction would look something like the following example. Note: different people have different styles; it is okay to switch these around a bit to fit what flows best in your mind, but the last paragraph is critical.

1. Broad Context

a. What are the theoretical underpinnings of the study? How does your specific project fit into the broader context of knowledge on this topic?

b. Note: this is often the hardest part of a paper.

2. Specific background knowledge regarding topic

a. Use published literature and cite it.

b. However, do not make this simply a review of the literature. Make sure you note the relevance of the literature to your study.

3. Objectives

a. First, link the previous 2 paragraphs immediately to your objectives.

b. Then, state the specific hypothesis you are testing.

c. This should be the shortest part of the introduction. Be concise and straight-forward; you do not want the reader to have to search for what you did and why you did it.

You should have thoroughly reviewed the primary literature prior to writing the report, but only include the most relevant references in the paper.

The methods section is a concise description, written in the past tense, of the procedures used. It describes the equipment used and how information was collected: by laboratory or field experimentation, surveys, or literature review. This section contains the most explicit (exactly described) statements of how you did the experiment or study. It should contain enough detail for someone else to repeat the study.

The results section describes what you found out. It is a compilation and organization of the information (facts, data) collected in the study, typically organized into tables and graphs. Important data should be included in flowing sentences. ALL tables and graphs should be referenced to in the text. Tables and figures must be arranged in numerical order and on separate pages. Tables and figures must be referred to in chronological order (e.g., Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 {not 1, 3, 2}).

The discussion section includes explicit statements of what the results mean in a logically unfolding pattern. Simply, this is what you think the results mean or what the results reveal about the way nature works. The discussion should tie your findings back to your introduction – how do the results compare to a) what you expected to find (i.e., your hypothesis) and b) what can be found in the primary literature (i.e., what other researchers have found). It contains the conclusions and perhaps even recommendations for future investigation.

Literature cited is a list of references to substantiate statements in the introduction, methods, or discussion sections. References are written in a standard format which differs from journal to journal (see below for a sample format).

The laboratory report should contain all of these sections and a title that describes the specific investigation or experiment completed. Summary, abstract, and acknowledgments sections would also be expected in detailed reports, such as journal articles and other publications.

A summary is an abbreviated overview of the major findings of the study within the broader context of the project. It can contain a very condensed version of each section of the report. This goes after the discussion section.

An abstract is a condensed and concise summary found at the very beginning of scientific journal articles.

Acknowledgments sections thank people and organizations that helped with the study. This goes after the summary section and before the references.

How is writing a laboratory report different from writing a narrative of what you did and what you found out? In technical writing the goal is to state facts, procedures, processes, and concepts as clearly as possible, concealing the writer’s own opinions or feelings about the problem. Typically, expository writing, such as an English composition, concentrates instead on commentary based on opinion and personal values.

Good technical writing is: clear (not diffuse, vague, or general), accurate (data honestly gathered, accurately reported, edited and proof-read to ensure that it is error-free), concise (not wordy), conventional and consistent (following accepted patterns for reporting information consistently throughout), mechanically correct (proper grammar, -spelling, and usage), and interesting (has enough stylistic character to be interesting as well as informative to the reader).

Some of the keys to good writing in general are:

1. Avoid sentence fragments and run-on sentences.

2. Keep tense, person, and number consistent within sections.

3. Use the active (rather than passive) voice. Maintain agreement between pronouns and antecedents. Keep the placement of modifiers consistent and search for parallel constructions.

4. Avoid long words when short ones will do the job equally well. Avoid wordiness, redundancy, clichés, jargon (e.g. officialese, bureauquack, engineerese, gobbledygook), overblown phrases, misused words.

5. Keep ideas together within paragraphs of moderate length and make clear transitions between paragraphs.

6. Write naturally while remaining detached from your subject (objective).

7. Avoid overwriting and over-explaining.

8. Concentrate on clarity and coherence.

9. Use graphs and tables for clarity, simplification, emphasis, summary, reinforcement, interest, impact, credibility, or coherence.

10. Do not excuse, diminish or find fault with the study. Let the reader judge the quality and significance of it.

Standard Format:

Title

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results

Discussion

Summary (optional)

Acknowledgments (optional, but recommended)

Literature Cited (sometimes called References)

Tables (such as site information, summary statistics, t-test results)

Figures (such as study location map, data)

Literature Cited

(Example of format)

Alverson, D., M. Freeberg, J. Pope, and S. Murawski. 1994. A global assessment of fisheries by-catch and discards. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. FAO, Rome, pp. 339.

Barnes, R.S.K. and R.N. Hughes. 1999. An Introduction to Marine Ecology: third edition. Blackwell Science LTD, Malden, MA. pp 202-204.

Gilligan, M.R., T. Kozel and J.P. Richardson. 1991. Environmental Science Laboratory: A Manual of Lab and Field Exercises. Halfmoon Pub. Savannah, GA, 156 pp.

Gilligan, M.R. 1995. Improving Your Technical Writing. Fisheries 20(5):36

Murray, J.D., J.J. Bahen, and R.A. Rulifson. 1991. Management considerations for by-catch in the North Carolina and southeast shrimp fishery. Fisheries 17:21-26.

Rulifson, A.R., D.M. Murray, and J.J. Bahen. 1992. Finfish catch reduction in South Atlantic shrimp trawls using three designs of by-catch reduction devices. Fisheries 17:9-20.)

Research Internship Paper Name______________________________

| |Beginning |Developing |Accomplished |Exemplary | |

| |1 pt. |2 pts. |3 pts. |4 pts. |Score |

|Introduction |Information provided is |Gives very little relevant |Gives too much information on|Presents a concise lead-in| |

|(lead-in) |not directly relevant to |information |project specifics – more like|to the report | |

| |the report | |a summary or abstract | | |

|Introduction |Does not give any |Unclear on objectives of the|Hints at questions addressed |Concisely defines question| |

|(intro material |information about what to |project |by the research and report |addressed by the research | |

|for your project)|expect in the report | |but it is not concisely |and report | |

| | | |spelled out | | |

|Methods |Not sequential, many steps|Some of the steps are |Most of the steps are |Presents easy-to-follow | |

| |missing and/or confusing |understandable; most are |understandable; some lack |steps which are logical | |

| | |confusing and lack detail |detail or are confusing |and adequately but not | |

| | | | |overly detailed | |

|Results |Tables and graphs not |Tables and graphs not |Most tables and graphs |All tables and graphs | |

| |properly referenced; many |properly referenced or many |properly referenced and |properly referenced and | |

| |significant trends in data|significant trends in data |nearly all significant trends|all significant trends in | |

| |or other findings not |or other findings not |in data and significant |data and significant | |

| |discussed; excessive |discussed |findings discussed |findings discussed | |

| |listing of data that could| | | | |

| |be put in a table | | | | |

|Discussion |Provides illogical |Provides illogical |Most explanations for |All explanations of | |

| |explanations for findings;|explanations for many |findings are logical; |findings are logical; many| |

| |does not compare our |findings or does not compare|inclusion of many relevant |comparisons are made | |

| |results with those in |our results with those in |comparisons or our results to|between our results and | |

| |published literature; much|published literature or much|those in published |those in published | |

| |of discussion is |of discussion is irrelevant |literature; most of |literature; all included | |

| |irrelevant to project |to project |discussion is relevant to |information is relevant to| |

| |objectives | |project |project | |

|Conclusion |Conclusions do not |Conclusions are relevant to |Conclusions include summary |Conclusions include | |

|or |represent material in |report but not concisely |of major points in results |concise summary of major | |

|Summary |results and discussion |written and/or significant |and discussion, but also |points in results and | |

| | |amount of important points |includes extraneous and/or |discussion without | |

| | |left out and/or introduction|new material |introduction new material | |

| | |of new material | | | |

|Graphs/Tables |Incomplete, poorly represent |2 of the following: Incomplete, |1 of the following: Incomplete, |Clearly highlight | |

| |data, and bad formatting |poorly represent data, or bad |poorly represent data, or bad |major results | |

| | |formatting |formatting | | |

|Cited Literature |3 or more of the following: |2 of the following: citations |1 of the following: citations |Multiple papers cited| |

|(citations |citations rare and not following |rare and not following proper |rare and not following proper |in proper context, | |

|w/in text |proper format (first author, yr);|format (first author, yr); |format (first author, yr); |proper use of | |

|and reference |excessive use of quotations; few |excessive use of quotations; few |excessive use of quotations; few |citations within | |

|section) |papers cited; papers cited, but |papers cited; papers cited, but |papers cited; papers cited, but |text; reference | |

|See plagiarism |irrelevant; reference section |irrelevant; reference section |irrelevant; reference section |section complete | |

| |incomplete |incomplete |incomplete | | |

|Grammar |Very frequent grammar and/or |More than 4 errors |Only 1 or 2 errors. |All grammar and | |

|and Spelling |spelling errors | | |spelling correct | |

|Timeliness |Report handed in 4 or more days |Report handed in 2-3 days late |Report handed in 1 day late |Report handed in on | |

| |late | | |time | |

|Plagiarism: Incidences of plagiarism will result in a grade of zero. | TOTAL: | |

Adapted from

MSCI 4902 and 4903 Senior Research/Internship -- Research Presentation Evaluation

Name of Speaker __________________Name of Evaluator _________________Total Score _________

Very Needs Needs Significant

Good Good Work Improvement

Was the problem/question statement clearly stated? 3 2 1 0

Quality and usefulness of graphics 3 2 1 0

Quality and appropriate use of text 3 2 1 0

Spoke at appropriate level given the audience 3 2 1 0

Clarity in explaining concepts 3 2 1 0

Clarity and confidence in tone of voice 3 2 1 0

Ability to answer questions 3 2 1 0

Overall organization of the presentation 3 2 1 0

(logical sequence and filled allotted time)

Overall quality of talk 3 2 1 0

Write suggestions for the speaker on the back.

MSCI 4902 and 4903 Senior Research/Internship -- Research Presentation Evaluation

Name of Speaker __________________Name of Evaluator _________________Total Score _________

Very Needs Needs Significant

Good Good Work Improvement

Was the problem/question statement clearly stated? 3 2 1 0

Quality and usefulness of graphics 3 2 1 0

Quality and appropriate use of text 3 2 1 0

Spoke at appropriate level given the audience 3 2 1 0

Clarity in explaining concepts 3 2 1 0

Clarity and confidence in tone of voice 3 2 1 0

Ability to answer questions 3 2 1 0

Overall organization of the presentation 3 2 1 0

(logical sequence and filled allotted time)

Overall quality of talk 3 2 1 0

Write suggestions for the speaker on the back.

Contract Form – MSCI 4902/4903 Senior Research/Internship

These courses will oversee an independent study research project or internship experience by students relevant to their area of study. The student must submit this formal request (Contract Form) signed by the student’s research project mentor/supervisor and their academic advisor. It is preferable that the student have a research project or internship planned and this form signed prior to enrollment in these courses. The form must be signed and submitted to the course instructor of record in order to continue to be enrolled in these courses. If it is not, then the student will be administratively withdrawn from the course by the instructor. The 4902 course can be taken for 1, 2, or 3 credits, and can be repeated as 4903 for 1, 2, or 3 credits.

Name _______________________ Student ID ____________

Address _______________________ Phone ____________

_______________________ ____________ _______________________ e-mail ____________

Major _______________________

Academic Advisor _______________________ printed name

_______________________ signature

(signature required for admission to course)

MSCI 4902 or 4903 (circle) – Senior Research Internship

Semester to be enrolled _____ Course section & CRN ___________

Credits to registered ______ Instructor _____________________

If more than 1 credit hour is to be earned by student, answer in the spaces below and provide a supporting letter from the host site or research mentor for the research or internship.

Description of Research Project or Internship (use additional space if needed):

Name and contact information of mentor/supervisor for the research project:

Name __________________________ Signature__________________

phone__________________

Address ______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

E-mail _____________________

A separate letter or e-mail will be sent to the mentor/supervisor of the research project or internship requesting verification of successful efforts by the student.

The Relationship Between Nesting Time and High Tide in Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta) from Blackbeard Island, McIntosh County, Georgia, U.S.A.

J. Ian Paige

3/20/2008

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of

MSCI 4902 Research Internship

Marine Sciences

Savannah State University

Introduction

The loggerhead sea turtle (Carretta caretta) is the second largest, hard-shelled sea turtle in the world. Loggerhead sea turtles live in both tropical and temperate waters (Bowen et al., 1993), and nest on the beaches of coastal counties in Georgia. The international conservation status of loggerhead sea turtles is classified as a threatened species (Crouse et al., 1987). Loggerhead sea turtles are listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Crowder et al., 1994).

The incubation period for a clutch of eggs ranges from 50 to 75 days (Ruckdeschel et al., 2000). After this period hatchlings emerge from the nest and crawl to the water. Hatchlings swim out to sea until they reach the Gulf Stream where they remain until they are adolescents and are strong enough to swim back to coastal waters. A female turtle reaches sexual maturity at 20 years or older (Ruckdeschel et al., 2000). Once a turtle has reached sexual maturity, it will migrate to breeding grounds near the beach. Mating occurs from March to June (Ruckdeschel et al., 2000). Once a female has mated she will return to land to make a nest and lay eggs. Loggerhead sea turtles wait for the dark cover of night to crawl on the beach and lay eggs (Fritts and Hoffman 1982). It takes approximately 11/2 hours for a loggerhead sea turtle to complete the nesting process (Johnson et al. 1996). Nesting season occurs from May through July. Before turtles begin to lay eggs, they are very alert and can easily be disturbed (Johnson et al. 1996). One female turtle can lay several nests in a single season (Hays and Speakman 1991). Loggerhead sea turtles can live to be over 100 years old.

The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between nesting times of loggerhead sea turtles and high tide. By investigating sea turtle nesting patterns on Blackbeard Island, GA, I tested the hypothesis that the majority of turtles will nest close to or near high tide.

Materials and Methods

Loggerhead sea turtles were monitored on Blackbeard Island, McIntosh County, Georgia, from May through July of 2007. The beach (13 km) was monitored on ATVs every night from (dusk) 9:00 PM to 6:00 AM. A total of 42 turtles and 70 nests were monitored. When a turtle was observed nesting the time was recorded and the turtle was tagged if it had no previous tags. An inconel (flipper) tag was attached to one scute on each flipper and a PIT (passive integrated transponder) tag was inserted into the right shoulder. Each tag has a personal identification number on or in it. After all nesting data was collected; analysis was run among nest time and high tide, nest time and time of night, and nest times of 4 individual repeat nesters. The r2 values for the nest time and high tide relationships were attained by using a regression analysis on Microsoft Excel.

Results

Forty-seven nests (67.14%) were produced within 3 hours of high tide, 32 nests (45.71%) were produced within 2 hours of high tide, and 10 nests (14.29%) were produced within 1 hour of high tide (Figure 1). Thirty-eight percent of the variability of nest time was attributed to high tide (r2 = 0.3866) (Figure 1). If the population was evenly distributed among each time frame, 35 nests (50%) would have been produced within 3 hours of high tide.

A relationship was found between nesting times and the time of night. Forty-four nests (62.86%) were produced within the first 41/2 hours of night and 26 nests (37.14%) were produced within the last 41/2 hours of night (Figure 2). Thirty-one percent of the variability of nest time was attributed to the first hour of night (r2 = 0.3197) (Figure 2). If the population was evenly distributed among each time frame, 35 nests (50%) would have been produced within the first and last 41/2 hours of night.

A pattern was also found between the 1st and 4th nests of four different turtles. The mean difference between nest times and high tide for the 1st nests was 2:46 hrs. ± 0:50 SD and the mean difference between nest times and high tide for the 4th nests was 0:50 hrs. ± 0:41 SD (Table 1). The greatest mean difference between nest times and high tide for consecutive nests occurred from nest #2, 3:06 hrs. ± 0:28 SD to nest #3, 1:09 hrs. ± 0:36 SD (Table 1). One individual turtle (RRC886) consistently nested 1 hour closer to high tide with each nesting event (Figure 3).

Discussion

A relationship was found between nesting times of turtles and high tide. The major findings of this study was that 38% of the variability of nesting times was attributed to high tide (r2 = 0.3866) (Figure 1). The nesting behavior of loggerhead sea turtles may be determined by tide phases, this relationship may be due to several factors; energy exertion, predation, nest erosion and flooding. Many barrier islands of Georgia experience a tide range of 6 to 9 feet. Nests that are located closer to the ocean have a greater possibility of becoming flooded or eroded, ultimately leading to egg loss (Wood and Bjorndal 2000). Nesting at low tide requires a turtle to crawl a much farther distance to suitable nesting areas. By nesting at high tide, a turtle will exert less energy crawling to a suitable nesting area, therefore having more energy to dig a nest, lay eggs, and return to the ocean. Barrier islands of Georgia are home to a number of predators including raccoons, feral hogs, and armadillos. These predators eat turtle eggs and hatchlings. So nesting at high tide reduces the time spent to produce a nest and reduces the possibility of predators locating a nest.

During this study 10 nests (14.29%) were produced within 1 hour of high tide (Figure 1). This percentage was lower than the anticipated percentage because the majority of nests expected to be produced near high tide. However nests that are washed over or eroded by a high tide could become unproductive or die (Wood and Bjorndal 2000). This might explain the low percentage of nests produced within 1 hour of high tide. During the 2 hour time frame 22 nests (31.43%) were produced, which was the highest nest percentage of the 6 different time frames (Figure 1). So it is possible that turtles nested within the 2 hours time frame to decrease the likelihood of nests being washed over.

Forty-four nests (62.86%) were produced within the 1st 41/2 hours of night and 26 nests (37.14%) were produced within the last 41/2 hours of night (Figure 2). This indicates that the majority of turtles prefer nesting during the early hours of the night. The possible reasoning behind this is that turtles wait for the dark cover of night to lay eggs (Fritts and Hoffman 1982), so when they sense darkness, it is crucial to lay eggs before the sunrise to decrease the chance of being detected by predators.

Analyses of the difference between nesting times of 4 different turtles and high tide revealed that there is a notable pattern among nesting times and high tide of repeat nesters. The average difference between nesting times and high tide for the 1st nests of these 4 individuals was greater than the difference for the 4th nests (Table 1). This indicates that by the 4th nesting event of these individuals, they were nesting significantly closer to high tide. So perhaps these individual turtles are becoming more experienced with each nesting event; specifically one turtle (RRC886), nested about 1 hour closer to high tide with each nesting event (Figure 3). This is the first evidence I have see of loggerhead sea turtles consistently changing nesting times relative to tidal phase.

Future study of this topic would include looking at different variables that may be attributed to nesting times among a consistent group of (repeat nesting) individuals. I would like to look at a larger group/sample size of individuals to determine if certain individuals are consistently nesting within a specific time related to high tide. I would also like to observe these individuals to determine if they are consistently nesting above or below the high tide line and if the height of the tide at which they exit the water is related to with whether or not the turtle will nest above or below the high tide line.

Literature Cited

Bolten, A.B., K.A. Bjorndal, H.R. Martins, T. Dellinger, M.J. Biscotto, S.E. Encalada, and B.W. Bowen. 1998. Transatlantic developmental migrations of loggerhead sea turtles demonstrated by mtDNA sequence analysis. Ecological Applications 8:1-7.

Bowen, B., J.C. Avise, J.I. Richardson, A.B. Meylan, D. Margaritoulis, and S.R. Hopkins-Murhpy. 1993. Population structure of loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. Conservation Biology 7:834-844

Crouse, D.T., L.B. Crowder, and H. Caswell. 1987. A stage-based population model for loggerhead sea turtles and implications for conservation. Ecology 68:1412-1423.

Crowder, L.B., D.T. Crouse, S.S. Heppell, and T.H. Martin. 1994. Predicting the impact of turtle excluder devices on loggerhead sea turtle populations. Ecological Applications 4:437-445.

Fritts, T.H. and W. Hoffman. 1982. Diurnal nesting of marine turtles in southern Brevard County, Florida. Journal of Herpetology. 16:84-88.

Hays, G.C. and J.R. Speakman. 1991. Reproductive investment and optimum clutch size of loggerhead sea turtles. Journal of Animal Ecology 60:455-462.

Johnson, S.A., K.A. Bjorndal, and A.B. Bolten. 1996. Effects of organized turtle watches on loggerhead (Caretta caretta) nesting behavior and hatchling production in Florida. Conservation Biology 10:570-577.

Wood, D.W. and K.A. Bjorndal. 2000. Relation of temperature, moisture, salinity, and slope to nest site selection in loggerhead sea turtles. Copeia 2000:119.

|Table 1. The difference between nest times of 4 different turtles and high tide |

|Tag # Nest # 1 Nest # 2 Nest # 3 Nest # 4 |

|RRC999 3:36 3:07 1:43 1:38 |

|SSX917 2:03 3:23 0:20 1:05 |

|TTG664 2:04 3:29 1:05 0:02 |

|RRC886 3:24 2:25 1:29 0:35 |

| |

|Mean 2:46 ± 0:50 SD 3:06 ± 0:28 SD 1:09 ± 0:36 SD 0:50 ± 0:41 SD |

Figure 1. The number of nests produced within each hour before or after high tide.

[pic]

Figure 2. The number of nests produced within each hour after dusk.

[pic]

Figure 3. The difference between nesting times and high tide of 4 different turtles and each of their 4 nests.

[pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download