The mean and standard error was calculated for the 15m and 25m depth, temperature, and salinity. The depth at 15m was 36.7 +/- 7.89 and the depth at 25m was 70.7 +/- 11.3. The temperature at 15m was 23.3 +/- 0.68 and at 25m it was 23.1 +/- 0.59. The salinity at 15m was 28.5 +/- 0.41 and at 25m it was 29 +/- 0.41. There is no significant difference between turtle grass at 15m and 25m (t= 1.667, p= .171). The turtle grass at 15m was .0000 +/- .0000 and at 25m was 20.0 +/- 20.0. There was no significant difference between 15m and 25m of manatee grass (t= -1.153, p=.368). While at 15m .0000 +/- .0000 and 25m was 22.0 +/- 19.1. Shoal grass showed no difference between 15m and 25m (t=1.613, p=.182). The shoal grass 15m was 71.3 +/- 35.4 and at 25m …show more content…
At 15m the abundance of epifauna was 1.33 +/- .333 and at 25m was .333 +/- .333. No significant difference was found for epifauna taxa richness at 15m and 25m (t=2.00, p= .184) while at 15m the richness was 1.00 +/- .000 and at 25m it was .333 +/- .333. Fish activity in the 15m and 25m quadrats showed no significant difference (t=-0.744, p=.513). The fish activity at 15m was 13.0 +/- 12.5 and at 25m was 23.3 +/- 6.06. The infauna abundance showed no significant difference at 15m and 25m (t=-1.061, p= .349). The abundance at 15m was 0.67 +/- 0.67 and at 25m was 1.67 +/- 0.67. The infauna taxa richness also appeared to be no significant difference at 15m and 25m (t= -0.894, p= .422) and at 15m the richness was 0.67 +/- 0.67 and at 25m was 1.33 +/- .333. The total wet weight of the sediment at 15m was 978 +/- 130.3 and at 25m was 747 +/- 94.7. The total dry weight of the sediment at 15m was 628 +/- 85.1 and at 25m was 541 +/- 76.0. The dry weight of roots (below ground biomass) showed no significant difference at 15m and 25m (t=-1.579. p= .190). The dry weight of the roots at 15m was 1.72 +/- 0.94 and at 25m was 3.52 +/- 0.64. The dry weight of the shoots (above ground biomass) at 15m and 25m displayed no significant difference (t= -1.044, p= .355). The 15m of dry weight shoots was 0.35 +/- 0.22 and at 25m was 0.64 +/- …show more content…
The grain size for the second 15m quadrat had an abundant of weight for phi sizes 2 and 3 (Figure 2). At the third transect for 15m phi size 3 had the largest amount of sediment dry weight (Figure 3). The dry weight of sediment for the first transect at 25m phi size was 3 (Figure 4). At the second transect for 25m the largest phi size for the dry weight of the sediment was 2 (Figure 5). The phi size 2 was the most abundance for the transect three at 25m (Figure 6). The cumulative dry weight of transect one 15m shows and increasing amount as the phi size increases (Figure 7). In transect two 15m the cumulative dry weight of the sediment showed an increase between phi size 1 and 3 (Figure 8). Transect three at 15m showed an increase at phi size 1 through 3 and leveling off (Figure 9). In the first transect at 25m there is a significant increase between the phi size 1 and 3 (Figure 10). The cumulative dry weight of the second transect at 25m displayed an increase at phi size -1 to 3 and then leveling off (Figure 11). The third transect at 25m has also displayed an increase in cumulative dry weight at the phi size of -1 to 3 (Figure