Environmental monitoring results: Chatsworth data

One of our newest environmental monitoring sites is Chatsworth. Set up last year, our volunteers have been collecting temperature, humidity, and water table depth data. As it's too soon to compare yearly or seasonal data, let's have a look at these three variables together.

Thanks again to Andy Burn for producing these graphs. We look forward to seeing how this year's data compares.

Environmental monitoring results: Holme temperature

As the temperature starts to drop outside this week, let's have a look at the temperature results from Holme Moss. This environmental monitoring site is situated at about 540m above sea level.

Thanks again to Andy Burn for producing these graphs which show the monthly and seasonal average (mean) air temperatures collected over the last three years by our volunteers.

Environmental monitoring results: Edale temperature

Over the next few weeks, we'll post a series of blogs showing some of the results for our Community Science monitoring sites in graphical format.

We'll start with here temperature information collected from our Edale site on Kinder Scout  - which shows monthly as well a seasonal averages across the years of monitoring so far.

Huge thanks to volunteer Andy Burn for producing these graphs:

 

 

On the seventh day of Christmas my true love sent to me...

...7 sites now set up,

 

Community Science volunteers have now set up and are monitoring seven 'eco-lab' sites across the South Pennine Moors and beyond. Edale, Black Hill, Marsden, Burbage, Chatsworth, Roaches and Holcombe Moor are now regularly having detailed information about their vegetation and climate collected. These long-term datasets will allow our volunteer scientists to see how the sites are changing over time in response to climate change.

6 leaves a-prickling,

 

5 red deer!

 

4 hare prints, 

 

3 lizards,

 

 

2 mating toads,

 

and a bilberry bumblebee!

 

Analysing otter spraint

Guest blog post by Community Science volunteer Barry Soames.

Moors for the Future have a new Community Science Project, looking for signs of mammals in the uplands, the Tails of the Uplands Survey. (Follow the link for details of how to get involved and training courses available.)

Barry analysing a spraint sample

A key target species is the otter, one of our most attractive and endearing mammals, which nearly disappeared from England in the 1960s and 1970s, but which is now starting to recover across much of the animal's former range.

As I have had an interest in looking for signs of otters for over 20 years (when working in Scotland), I decided that I would like to get involved.


Evidence for otter presence is indicated by a number of signs, one of which is their droppings, known as spraint. As well as indicating presence, analysis of spraint can help us find out what the otters are eating. Traditionally this was done by examining spraint under a low power microscope, and identifying bones (and other undigested material, such as fur and feathers).

However, nowadays, more sophisticated methods are available using DNA analysis. It is interesting to compare results of both techniques, and I have been examining samples from which DNA has been extracted and sequenced to identify prey items. The genetic analyses were performed at the Molecular Ecology Laboratory at the University of Sheffield as part of the Otterly Amazing project run by the Sheffield and Rotherham Wildlife Trust.

The first step in identifying prey remains involves cleaning the spraint. Otter spraint tend to be surprisingly sweet smelling, with the remains embedded in a sort of oily matrix. To dissolve the matrix and leave the cleaned bones, I used denture cleaning tablets. The spraint is dropped in an inch or two of hot water in a beaker, a denture tablet added and then left overnight. After the spraint has been cleaned in this way, it is then filtered to leave just the bones, and any fur.

Sample '119' contained mainly fish bones

Not all the droppings collected were otter spraint, for instance at least one specimen seems to be mink. I found out that my cleaning method only really works well with otter spraint, other droppings often had to be teased apart using tweezers.


Once this is done, the harder part comes in - identifying a small pile of assorted bones. To do this, I started with a very useful Mammal Society publication, "A Guide to the Identification of Prey Remains in Otter Spraint" This small booklet is mainly aimed at identifying fish bones, and concentrates on those bones which have the clearest differences between species. Much of the booklet deals with caudal vertebrae (the parts of the backbone in the tail), with additional clues coming from parts of the jaw, particularly pharyngeal teeth (teeth found on the gill arches).

This sample was probably mink scat, with mammal remains, in particular field vole, having been identified from the teeth and jaw remains.

So far I have identified bones from minnow and bullhead, as well as crayfish shell. It is noticeable that the prey identified so far has been of small fish, compared to the larger fish found when, several years ago, I examined spraint from rivers in Scotland. Not all the material examined was from otters, with one sample consisting mainly of fur with a few bones. Parts of jaw and teeth found in this sample enabled identification of field vole. (This dropping would seem to be mink).

If you would like to see some of the results, I have a page on my website for results.