Jillian Creveling

Mary Oswald
BIOL 114-01
29 October 2019
Pond Life Lab Report

Introduction:

In this study, my group and I investigated the water quality and drinkability of pond

water in Moscow, Idaho. We tested for abiotic factors such as the Turbidity, pH, Dissolved

Oxygen, Nitrate, and Phosphate of the sample and biotic factors such as number of Coliform and

E. coli present. We studied the abiotic factors in order to determine the type and extent of

contamination in each water source which would tell us what the water quality was like, and

whether the water is suitable for human consumption (Oswald 2019). The biotic factors are

investigated because when there are large amounts of coliform bacteria, it is likely that other

pathogenic bacteria are also present which would mean that the water is not safe for consumption

(Oswald 2019). The testing of pond water is important because the water sources in different

areas impact the ecosystem of an environment in large ways. Additionally, the environmental

impact on the natural water bodies has increased significantly in recent years due to continuous

exploitation to meet the human needs for economic and social development and could lead to

negative consequences on the whole ecosystem (Teodosiu et al 2015). The purpose of this study

was to determine the water quality of different samples of water from Moscow, Idaho; as well as

to discover whether the water sources would be suitable for consumption.

Methods:

In this study our pond water sample was taken from the lower pond of the arboretum at

the University of Idaho in Moscow. The sample location had a large amount of foliage. The

sample was taken near the shore of the pond; which had a large amount of dead leaves and other

vegetation around it. In order to test the abiotic factors of the water, we used an Earth Force

Water Monitoring Kit. We tested the pH, Turbidity, Dissolved Oxygen, Nitrate, and Phosphate

of the water. In order to test for the biotic factors, we performed a HACH M-coliBlue24 test and

an EFWM kit tube test. For the HACH M-coliBlue24 test, we placed a sterile absorbent pad into

a sterile petri dish using sterile forceps. We then poured an m-Endo Broth PourRite Ampule onto

the pad. This was repeated for the pond water sample as well as the positive and negative

controls. The sterile forceps were then used to place a membrane filter into the filtering

apparatus. Next, 100 mL of the sample were poured into the apparatus and the vacuum was

turned on to filter the sample. The filter paper was then removed, using sterile forceps, and

placed into the prepared petri dish. We then attempted to grow those bacteria on a petri dish

under coliform-friendly conditions. After a week, the number of colonies that had grown on each

dish was counted. The positive control was used to determine a sample of red and blue colonies,

which were the other species of coliform bacteria and E. coli. The negative control was used to

provide a sample with no colonies, as well as to provide feedback on any possible contamination

during the experiment-if any colonies did grow in that dish. In order to ensure that our sample

provided the best results, it was collected eight and a half hours before the tests were done. The

biodiversity of our sample was determined by creating wet mounts of our sample with one drop

of our water. The slides were then inspected under a microscope and any organisms we found

were recorded.
Results:

Table 8. Compiled water sample summary data.

Site Name Turbidit p Nitrat Phosphat Dissolve Colifor Colifor E. Species Bioma Relative
y H e e d m Tube m per coli Richne ss Abundanc
Oxygen Score mL per ss e
mL
Lower 4 3 2 3 1 1 21.14 0.02 7 500 Unbalance
Arboretu d
m
Lower 2 3 3 2 1 1 10 4.08 5 76 Unbalance
Arboretu d
m2
Freeman 2 3 3 2 1 1 1.28 0.8 5 320 Unbalance
Pond d
Spring 3 3 2 2 1 1 7.26 0.38 8 160 Balanced
Valley
Hordeman 2 4 2 2 1 1 7.2 0.3 5 47.5 Unbalance
n Pond d
Hordeman 2 3 0 2 1 1 34.6 1.1 15 50.4 Unbalance
n Pond 2 d

Table 9. Water sample analysis. Samples are ranked by ‘drinkability’ (low ranking=you wouldn’t want to drink from this
location).
Drinkability Rating Sample Name Suspected water quality level
1 Hordemann Pond 2 Organic Enrichment
2 Lower Arboretum (2) Organic Enrichment
3 Lower Arboretum Organic Enrichment
4 Spring Valley Organic Enrichment
5 Hordemann Pond Organic Enrichment
6 Freeman Pond Organic Enrichment

The Earth Force Water Monitoring Kit showed that for our abiotic factors, the Turbidity

was 60, which is a score of 2. The Nitrate was 0, which scores as a 3. The Phosphate was a 4,

which has a score of 2. The Dissolved Oxygen, or D.O., was 48, which scores as a 1. The pH

was 8, which is a score of 3. These scores were the same as most of the other sample sites. Our

Earth Force Water Monitoring Kit showed a positive result for coliform and scored a 1. Our

HACH M-coliBlue24 test showed that our positive sample had 524 red colonies, 424 blue

colonies, and no white colonies. Our negative sample had 2 red colonies, 3 blue colonies, and 0

white colonies. Our pond water sample had 296 red colonies, 204 blue colonies, and 0 white

colonies. In our pond water, we found 5 different species. Rotifer Eggs were the most common

species found and had almost double the number of individuals as the other species, leading to an
unbalanced Relative Abundance. Our Biomass was 76, which was in the middle of the ranges

from the other groups.

Discussion:

Our HACH M-coliBlue24 test provided more useful data than the EFWM kit tube test

because it was much more specific. It not only showed that our pond water contained coliform

but provided exact numbers and types of coliform colonies in our water sample. Both our abiotic

and biotic test results showed that our pond water was not suitable for consumption. Our sample

was rated number 2 in terms of drinkability (table 9). It was ranked low because it was relatively

even with the other sites in terms of the abiotic factors; however, it had a higher number of

Coliform and E. coli per mL of water sample as well as lower species richness and biomass.

Overall, this is important because the water quality of a region can have far reaching

consequences on everything in that ecosystem and in order to enhance the sustainability of

water-quality-management systems, in-depth research of the related barriers and the relevant

mitigation approaches is a necessity (). There may have been some contamination during our

HACH M-coliBlue24 test because our negative sample had blue and red colonies in it when it

should have had none. Also, the blue colonies for our pond water sample were very clustered

together which made them very difficult to count and may have led to an inaccurate number of

blue colonies identified.

Literature Cited:

Huang G, Xia J. 2001. Barriers to sustainable water-quality management. Journal of

Environmental Management. 61(1):1-23.

Oswald M. 2019. Pond Life Packet. BIOL 114 Laboratory Handout. Moscow (ID): Biology

Department, University of Idaho.

Teodosiu C, Robu B, Cojocariu C, Barjoveanu G. 2015. Environmental impact and risk

quantification based on selected water quality indicators. Natural Hazards. 75(1):89-105.