4 resultados para Daily mobility
em eResearch Archive - Queensland Department of Agriculture
Resumo:
In this study, we examined the photosynthetic responses of five common seagrass species from a typical mixed meadow in Torres Strait at a depth of 5–7 m using pulse amplitude modulated (PAM) fluorometry. The photosynthetic response of each species was measured every 2 h throughout a single daily light cycle from dawn (6 am) to dusk (6 pm). PAM fluorometry was used to generate rapid light curves from which measures of electron transport rate (ETRmax), photosynthetic efficiency (α), saturating irradiance (Ek) and light-adapted quantum yield (ΔF/F′m) were derived for each species. The amount of light absorbed by leaves (absorption factor) was also determined for each species. Similar diurnal patterns were recorded among species with 3–4 fold increases in maximal electron rate from dawn to midday and a maintenance of ETRmax in the afternoon that would allow an optimal use of low light by all species. Differences in photosynthetic responses to changes in the daily light regime were also evident with Syringodium isoetifolium showing the highest photosynthetic rates and saturating irradiances suggesting a competitive advantage over other species under conditions of high light. In contrast Halophila ovalis, Halophila decipiens and Halophila spinulosa were characterised by comparatively low photosynthetic rates and minimum light requirements (i.e. low Ek) typical of shade adaptation. The structural makeup of each species may explain the observed differences with large, structurally complex species such as Syringodium isoetifolium and Cymodocea serrulata showing high photosynthetic effciciencies (α) and therefore high-light-adapted traits (e.g. high ETRmax and Ek) compared with the smaller Halophila species positioned lower in the canopy. For the smaller Halophila species these shade-adapted traits are features that optimise their survival during low-light conditions. Knowledge of these characteristics and responses improves our understanding of the underlying causes of changes in seagrass biomass, growth and survival that occur when modifications in light quantity and quality arise from anthropogenic and climatic disturbances that commonly occur in Torres Strait.
Resumo:
Line-transect distance sampling is a widely used method for estimating animal density from aerial surveys. Analysis of line-transect distance data usually relies on a requirement that the statistical distribution of distances of animal groups from the transect line is uniform. We show that this requirement is satisfied by the survey design if all other assumptions of distance sampling hold, but it can be violated by consistent survey problems such as responsive movement of the animals towards or away from the observer. We hypothesise that problems with the uniform requirement are unlikely to be encountered for immobile taxa, but might become substantial for species of high mobility. We test evidence for non-uniformity using double-observer distance data from two aerial surveys of five species with a spectrum of mobility capabilities and tendencies. No clear evidence against uniformity was found for crabeater seals or emperor penguins on the pack-ice in East Antarctica, while minor non-uniformity consistent with responsive movement up to 30 m was found for Adelie penguins. Strong evidence of either non-uniformity or a failure of the capture-recapture validating method was found for eastern grey kangaroos and red kangaroos in Queensland.
Resumo:
We compared daily net radiation (Rn) estimates from 19 methods with the ASCE-EWRI Rn estimates in two climates: Clay Center, Nebraska (sub-humid) and Davis, California (semi-arid) for the calendar year. The performances of all 20 methods, including the ASCE-EWRI Rn method, were then evaluated against Rn data measured over a non-stressed maize canopy during two growing seasons in 2005 and 2006 at Clay Center. Methods differ in terms of inputs, structure, and equation intricacy. Most methods differ in estimating the cloudiness factor, emissivity (e), and calculating net longwave radiation (Rnl). All methods use albedo (a) of 0.23 for a reference grass/alfalfa surface. When comparing the performance of all 20 Rn methods with measured Rn, we hypothesized that the a values for grass/alfalfa and non-stressed maize canopy were similar enough to only cause minor differences in Rn and grass- and alfalfa-reference evapotranspiration (ETo and ETr) estimates. The measured seasonal average a for the maize canopy was 0.19 in both years. Using a = 0.19 instead of a = 0.23 resulted in 6% overestimation of Rn. Using a = 0.19 instead of a = 0.23 for ETo and ETr estimations, the 6% difference in Rn translated to only 4% and 3% differences in ETo and ETr, respectively, supporting the validity of our hypothesis. Most methods had good correlations with the ASCE-EWRI Rn (r2 > 0.95). The root mean square difference (RMSD) was less than 2 MJ m-2 d-1 between 12 methods and the ASCE-EWRI Rn at Clay Center and between 14 methods and the ASCE-EWRI Rn at Davis. The performance of some methods showed variations between the two climates. In general, r2 values were higher for the semi-arid climate than for the sub-humid climate. Methods that use dynamic e as a function of mean air temperature performed better in both climates than those that calculate e using actual vapor pressure. The ASCE-EWRI-estimated Rn values had one of the best agreements with the measured Rn (r2 = 0.93, RMSD = 1.44 MJ m-2 d-1), and estimates were within 7% of the measured Rn. The Rn estimates from six methods, including the ASCE-EWRI, were not significantly different from measured Rn. Most methods underestimated measured Rn by 6% to 23%. Some of the differences between measured and estimated Rn were attributed to the poor estimation of Rnl. We conducted sensitivity analyses to evaluate the effect of Rnl on Rn, ETo, and ETr. The Rnl effect on Rn was linear and strong, but its effect on ETo and ETr was subsidiary. Results suggest that the Rn data measured over green vegetation (e.g., irrigated maize canopy) can be an alternative Rn data source for ET estimations when measured Rn data over the reference surface are not available. In the absence of measured Rn, another alternative would be using one of the Rn models that we analyzed when all the input variables are not available to solve the ASCE-EWRI Rn equation. Our results can be used to provide practical information on which method to select based on data availability for reliable estimates of daily Rn in climates similar to Clay Center and Davis.
Resumo:
Spot measurements of methane emission rate (n = 18 700) by 24 Angus steers fed mixed rations from GrowSafe feeders were made over 3- to 6-min periods by a GreenFeed emission monitoring (GEM) unit. The data were analysed to estimate daily methane production (DMP; g/day) and derived methane yield (MY; g/kg dry matter intake (DMI)). A one-compartment dose model of spot emission rate v. time since the preceding meal was compared with the models of Wood (1967) and Dijkstra et al. (1997) and the average of spot measures. Fitted values for DMP were calculated from the area under the curves. Two methods of relating methane and feed intakes were then studied: the classical calculation of MY as DMP/DMI (kg/day); and a novel method of estimating DMP from time and size of preceding meals using either the data for only the two meals preceding a spot measurement, or all meals for 3 days prior. Two approaches were also used to estimate DMP from spot measurements: fitting of splines on a 'per-animal per-day' basis and an alternate approach of modelling DMP after each feed event by least squares (using Solver), summing (for each animal) the contributions from each feed event by best-fitting a one-compartment model. Time since the preceding meal was of limited value in estimating DMP. Even when the meal sizes and time intervals between a spot measurement and all feeding events in the previous 72 h were assessed, only 16.9% of the variance in spot emission rate measured by GEM was explained by this feeding information. While using the preceding meal alone gave a biased (underestimate) of DMP, allowing for a longer feed history removed this bias. A power analysis taking into account the sources of variation in DMP indicated that to obtain an estimate of DMP with a 95% confidence interval within 5% of the observed 64 days mean of spot measures would require 40 animals measured over 45 days (two spot measurements per day) or 30 animals measured over 55 days. These numbers suggest that spot measurements could be made in association with feed efficiency tests made over 70 days. Spot measurements of enteric emissions can be used to define DMP but the number of animals and samples are larger than are needed when day-long measures are made.