Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region 1
Schools Division of Ilocos Sur
Sinait National High School
Sinait, Ilocos Sur

The Effectiveness of Water Lettuce (Pistia stratiotes) and Java

Fern (Leptochilus pteropus) to the quality of the water
A Quantitative Research

Presented to the teachers of Sinait National High School

Senior High School Department

Researchers:
Victoria Kim Pada
Shena Mae Manguerra
Alaina Claire Regpala
11 STEM Jaena

Coach:
JOANNA MARIE BAGAIN

Project Adviser:
CHARLES SALCEDO
 Research Plan

A. Statement of the Problem

This study will be conducted to determine the effect of aquatic plants to the water

quality of a pond water. Specially, it seeks to answer the following questions:

1. What is the effect of Java fern (Leptochilus pteropus) and Water Lettuce (Pistia

stratiotes) plants to the water quality in terms of the following parameters?

a. pH Level

b. High range pH level

c. Ammonia

d. Nitrite

e. Nitrate

2. Is there any significant difference between the quality of the pond water planted with

Java fern (Leptochilus pteropus) and Water Lettuce (Pistia stratiotes) in terms of:

a. pH Level?

b. High range pH level?

c. Ammonia?

d. Nitrite?

e. Nitrate?

3. Is there any significant difference between the water quality parameters tested in the

pond with aquatic and without aquatic plants?

B. Hypothesis

This study will be guided by the following hypotheses.

1. Java fern (Leptochilus pteropus) and Water Lettuce (Pistia stratiotes) affect the

water quality of the pond in terms of

a. pH Level

b. High range pH level

c. Ammonia

d. Nitrite

e. Nitrate

2. There is a significant difference between the quality of the pond water planted with

Java fern and Water Lettuce in terms of the following parameters:

a. pH Level

b. High range pH level

c. Ammonia

d. Nitrite

e. Nitrate

3. There is a significant difference between the quality of the water in the pond planted

with aquatic plants and the unplanted pond in terms of:

a. pH Level

b. High range pH level

c. Ammonia

d. Nitrite

e. Nitrate
C. Methodology

I. Data Gathering Procedure:

a. Preparation of the Experimental Setups

Nine (9) disposed water containers of the same size with 4 gallons of water

storage capacity will be used as a miniature of a pond. The spout will be enlarged by

removing the top part of the container. Two (2) kilograms of soil will be placed in each

of the nine (9) containers. These will be group into three (3), two of these will serve as

the experimental group to be planted with java fern and water lettuce and the other will

be the control group.

b. Collection of Aquatic Plants

Three (3) Java fern and three (3) Water lettuce plants will be collected in a pond

at Barangay Bliss Katipunan, Sinait, Ilocos Sur.

c. Planting Procedure

Each plant will be planted into the six containers with two kilograms of soil.

Three containers will be planted with Water lettuce and the other three containers will

be planted with Java fern. After planting, four (4) gallons of water will be placed in

each of the 9 containers. The other three containers will serve as the control. These

setups will be left undisturbed for 24 hours to let all the solid particles in the water to

settle at the bottom of the container.

 d. Observation Procedure:

The water quality parameters such as pH, high range pH, nitrate, nitrite, and

ammonia will be tested using a freshwater master analysis test kit which measures the

most important water quality of freshwater. The procedure in the analysis kit will be

followed to measure the parameters to be tested. These parameters will be compared to

determine if the water quality of the containers will be the same before putting fishes or

catfish in these containers. Once the water level in each container evaporates, the same

amount of water will be added to reach the desired water level in the container. The

fishes will be fed daily with the same amount of commercial feed. After one week, the

water quality of the water will again be tested to compare if there is a difference in the

water quality before and after the experiment and to test if there is a difference in the

water quality of the three set-ups. Testing the water quality was done weekly for a

period of one month.

D. Statistical Treatment of Data

Analysis of Variance will be used to compare if there is a difference in the water quality

of the planted and unplanted setups. To compare if there is a difference in the water quality

parameters tested before and after the experiment, t- test for correlated samples will be used. T-

test for uncorrelated samples will be used to test if there is a difference in the water quality

parameters tested in the containers planted with Java fern and Water lettuce.
E. Bibliography

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistia

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leptochilus_pteropus

 https://pets.thenest.com/aquarium-plants-absorb-ammonia-12314.html

 https://archive.epa.gov/water/archive/web/html/vms57.html#:~:text=Nitrates%20are
%20essential%20plant%20nutrients,that%20live%20in%20the%20stream.

 https://aquaticplants.animal-world.com/FernsMosses/FernsMosses.php

 https://www.knowyourh2o.com/indoor-6/nitrates-nitrites

 https://thefishsite.com/articles/how-to-achieve-good-water-quality-management-in-
aquaculture#:~:text=Water%20quality%20is%20the%20most,performance%20in
%20aquaculture%20production%20systems.&text=Different%20fish%20species%20have
%20different,can%20survive%2C%20grow%20and%20reproduce.

 https://draxe.com/nutrition/nitrates/

 https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Nitrite

 https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Ammonia
 Chapter I

Introduction

I. Background of the Study

The ideal water quality for pond water is essential in taking care of fishes. It shows the

survivability of fishes which live in a specific habitat. Fish farms and aquarium owners need to

replace the water every month for the maintenance of good water quality. Water cannot be

determined by only the naked eye whether it has the ideal water quality. Water can carry

different elements and wastes which can affect the growth of the fishes living in that specific

habitat. Even if they are left untouched, fishes will produce Ammonia – a toxic made by the

fishes’ metabolism.

Different nitrogen compounds are commonly found in aquariums and fish farms. These

commonly nitrogen compounds are Ammonia, Nitrite, and Nitrate. These nitrogen compounds

are toxic wastes that can affect their growth and even their immunity system which leads to

death.

Some aquatic plants can absorb nitrogen compounds like Ammonia and Nitrite. Java fern

and water lettuce are the most common aquatic plants seen in ponds and in planted freshwater

aquarium. These plants supply oxygen to the fishes because the leaves are submerged in the

water. However, there is a problem if the water quality is affected by these plants.

So this study was conducted to find out if these plants can prolong the quality of pond

water.
II. Statement of the Problem:

This study entitled “Aquatic Plants for the Maintenance of Water Quality for Pond

Water” was conducted to test if aquatic plants can prolong the water quality of ponds.

Specially, it sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the best aquatic plants that can prolong the water quality of a pond water

inhabited by Catfish?

2. Is there any significant difference between the water quality of a pond planted with

Java fern and Water Lettuce in terms of the following parameters:

a. pH

b. High range pH

c. Nitrate

d. Nitrite

e. Ammonia

3. Is there any significant difference between the water quality of the pond with and

without plants in terms of the following water quality parameters?

a. pH

b. High range pH

c. Nitrate

d. Nitrite

e. Ammonia
III. Hypothesis

This study was guided with the following hypotheses:

1. The best aquatic plants that can prolong the water quality of pond water are the Java

ferns.

2. There is a significant difference between the quality of the pond water planted with

Water Lettuce and Java fern.

3. There is a significant difference between the water quality of the pond water in

with and without plants in terms of the following parameters.

a) pH Level

b) High range pH level

c) Ammonia

d) Nitrite

e) Nitrate

IV. Significance of the study

Knowing the best aquatic plants that can prolong the quality of a pond is a prime

essential in attaining a good survivability of freshwater fish. The results of this study is

very useful to freshwater fish owners for them to minimize their time in changing the water

hence reducing their inputs. They can use the best aquatic plant in maintaining the water

quality thus increasing the survivability of the fish.

V. Scope and Limitations

 The study was conducted at Brgy. Namruangan, Cabugao, Ilocos Sur from April

15, 2022, to May 15, 2022. The use of a water analysis kit for freshwater was used to test

the water quality parameters such as Ph, high range Ph, Nitrate, Nitrite and Ammonia.

Java fern and Water Lettuce were the aquatic plants used.

VI. Review of Related Studies

Literature and Studies

Need for Good Water Quality Level

The need for good water quality level is a basic need for the survivability and

maintaining healthy aquatic animals. Fishes live in the same water or place in where they

can do anything like eat, live, and eliminate wastes like normal humans do also.

It’s very important for owners or caretakers to know the best water quality for the fishes

that they are living in because different fishes call for a different water quality level for

their survival, according to Delbeek et al (1994)

According to Swinstock (2017), a survey made on 1998 of 557 pond owners in

Pennsylvania and 10% of these pond owners had water quality problems which caused

muddy water to fish kills. A cause of this problem is that they never tested the water

quality of their ponds and they are usually only detected after they had caused these

casualties. Water quality conditions in a pond are control by natural processes done in the

water and human influences. That is why the water quality testing is needed every once in

a while.

Common Nitrogen Compounds Affecting Water Quality

 According to Murphy (2007), Nitrate (NO3) and Nitrate (NO2) are common forms

of nitrogen in water. Excessive concentration of the said compounds are extremely

harmful to both humans and the wildlife. Nitrate is broken down in our intestines to

become nitrite which will eventually react with hemoglobin to become methemoglobin,

which limits the red blood cells’ ability to carry oxygen.

Also to the fishes, they will produce what they call the “brown blood disease” which

cause their blood to become a chocolate-brown color. This also cause the brown blood to

limit their cells to carry oxygen which cause death.

Ammonia is another form of Nitrogen compound that is found in water. It is the least

stable form found. When left alone, it can turn into a toxic concentration that causes loss

of equilibrium, convulsions, coma, and death to humans. To fishes, it can affect hatching

and growth rates; changes in tissues of gills, livers, and kidneys may occur during the

fishes’ structural development.

Control of Nitrogen Compounds by Planting Aquatic Plants

According to Boumis (2017), the nitrogen cycle makes it possible to keep fish in

aquariums for more than a few days or weeks, in which, fish will produce ammonia as a

byproduct of their metabolism. Unlike animals, to aquatic plants, ammonia is a food

source and not a poison. “Nitrogen Sink” is a place to dump these compounds and get

them out of the aquarium water where they can harm fish.

Importance of Aquatic Food & Resources

According to Metian (2012), nearly 30% of humanity is suffering from

malnutrition and over 70% of the world crust is covered with water, aquatic food and
resources is a very important factor and essential component of the world’s food basket to

improve nutrition and health. In Japan, surveyed that has lowest report of health problems

incidents that is connected to obesity and other heart related illness, now also one of the

world’s top consumers of captured and farmed aquatic animal food products and aquatic

plants.

As one of the best aquatic animal food from a perspective, the consumption of pelagic

fish should be encouraged as well as promoted. The caring of these species is also

encouraged to the reduction of intake to terrestrial animals such as chicken, pigs and etc.
 CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY

I. Experimental Design

The Randomized Pre-Test- Post Test Control Group Design under True Experimental

Research Design was used in the study. We gathered the data analysis before and after

the insertion of the Catfish. Three replications per treatment were maintained.

a. Preparation of Water Containers

Nine (9) water containers of the same size and storage capability of storing

four (4) gallons of water were collected. The spout was enlarged by removing the

top part of the container.

b. Preparation of Soil

Eighteen (18) kilograms of ordinary topsoil were collected from Brgy.

Namruangan, Cabugao, Ilocos Sur. It was divided into nine (9) equal amounts of

two (2) kilograms.

c. Preparation of Test Plants

Six (6) plants namely three (3) Java Fern and three (3) Water Lettuce were

collected from Sinait, Ilocos Sur. The said plants were preserved by planting them in

another separate aquarium.

d. Preparation of Aquariums

Two (2) kilograms of the collected soil was inserted per container. Two and

a half (2 ½) buckets of water are putted in. The water was at rest for a week for it

clear.

e. Preparation of Treatments

Two (2) treatments and the control in three (3) replicates was prepared and

used in the study.

The treatments, including the control were:

Treatment 1 – Water Lettuce and Pond Water

Treatment 2 – Java Fern and Pond Water

Control – Pure Pond Water

f. Planting and Maintenance of Test Plants

The gathered plants were transplanted in each treatment. The plants were

going to kept in equal exposure to sunlight.

g. Preparation of Test subjects

Nine (9) fishes namely Catfish were collected from San Ildefonso, Ilocos,

Sur. A week after the Pre-test Data Gathering will be the insertion of the said fish

in each aquarium.
 h. Data Gathering Procedure

A week after the transplant and week after the insertion of the Catfish, the

water quality of the water was tested using the appropriate equipment to test the

following:

a) Ph Level

b) High Range Ph Level

c) Ammonia

d) Nitrite

e) Nitrate

i. Data Analysis

The consolidated data were arranged in appropriate table forms and will be

analyzed further using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) of Completely Randomized

Design (CRD).
 Chapter III

Results and Discussion

Table 1.a The pH level of Treatments and Control before Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 7.6 7.6 7.6 22.8 7.6

T2 7.6 7.6 7.6 22.8 7.6

Control 7.6 7.6 7.6 22.8 7.6

Table 1.a shows the pH level of the Treatments including the control before the insertion

of the fishes. It also shows that the water is alkaline since the pH level per replicate in each

treatment is higher than 7.0.

Table 1.b The High Range pH level of Treatments and Control before Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 8.0 8.0 8.2 24.2 8.1

T2 8.0 8.0 8.0 24 8.0

Control 8.2 8.2 8.2 24.6 8.2

Table 1.b shows the High range pH level of the Treatments also including the control

before the insertion of the fishes. It also shows that the different treatments including the control

have different High Range pH level.

Table 1.c The Ammonia level of Treatments and Control before Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

T2 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

Control 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

Table 1.c shows the Ammonia level of the treatments including the Control. It also shows

that the level of Ammonia is still not present or low in the treatments including the control.

Table 1.d The Nitrite level of Treatments and Control before Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

T2 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

Control 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

Table 1.d shows the Nitrite level of the treatments including the control. It also shows

that the level of Nitrite is the same and it is not present or low.

Table 1.e The Nitrate Level of Treatments and Control before Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

T2 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

Control 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

 Table 1.e shows the Nitrate level of the treatments including the control. It also shows

that the level of Nitrate is low or zero.

Table 2.a The pH level of Treatments and Control after Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 7.6 7.6 6.6 21.8 7.3

T2 7.6 7.6 7.6 22.8 7.6

Control 7.6 7.6 7.6 22.8 7.6

Table 2.a shows the pH level of treatments and control after the insertion of Fishes. It

also shows that in T2 and in the control in all replicates have the same pH level and also with T1

but only replicate #3 has a very low pH level.

Table 2.b The High Range pH Level of Treatments and Control after Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 7.4 7.4 7.4 22.2 7.4

T2 7.4 7.4 7.4 22.2 7.4

Control 8.0 7.4 7.4 22.8 7.6

Table 2.b shows the High Range pH level of the treatments and control after the insertion

of Fishes. It shows that almost all of the replicates in each treatment has the same High Range

pH level except the replicate #1 in the control. And compared to Table 1.b, this also shows that

the level of High Range pH lowered for the past week.

Table 2.c The Ammonia Level of Treatments and Control after Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 0.25ppm 0.25ppm 0.25ppm 0.75ppm 0.25ppm

T2 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

Control 0.25ppm 0.25ppm 0.25ppm 0.75ppm 0.25ppm

Table 2.c shows the Ammonia level of the treatments and the control after the insertion of

the fishes. It shows that the Ammonia level rose since the insertion of fishes in T1 and in the

Control. But in T2, the ammonia level of all replicates has not changed.

Table 2.d The Nitrite Level of Treatments and Control after Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

T2 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

Control 0.25ppm 0.25ppm 0.25ppm 0.75ppm 0.25ppm

Table 2.d shows the Nitrite level of the treatments and in the control after the insertion of

the fishes. It shows that the Nitrite level has not changed in the treatments but in the control,

there was a slight change in each replicate.

Table 2.e The Nitrate Level of Treatments and Control after Insertion of Fishes

R1 R2 R3 Total Average

T1 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

T2 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm 0ppm

Control 5ppm 5ppm 5ppm 15ppm 5ppm

 Table 2.e shows that the Nitrite level of the treatments and in the control after insertion of

the fishes. It shows the Nitrite level has not changed at all in the treatments except in the control

which rose to 5ppm.

 Chapter IV

Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendation

The study entitled “Aquatic Plants for the Maintenance of Water Quality for Pond Water”

was conducted at Brgy. Namruangan, Cabugao, Ilocos Sur from April 15, 2022, to May 15,

2022.. The study hope to establish a safe and effective way of taking care of fishes in the best

water quality in terms of pH level, high range pH level, ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate.

Specifically, it aimed to know the best aquatic plant for maintaining the best water quality. The

two plants used were water lettuce and java fern. The control used is the pure tap water. The

experiment made use of Randomized Pre-Test- Post Test Control Group Design under True

Experimental Research Design with three replications.

Catfish were used in each treatment in observing their water quality.

After the transplant, a week was waited for the testing of the water quality and after the

testing, the fishes we inserted in each aquarium. After the insertion of Fishes, another week was

waited for the testing of the water quality.

Summary of Findings

The mean of pH level before the insertion of fishes were 7.6 in all treatments, mean of

High Range pH level before the insertion of fishes were 8.1 in Treatment 1, 8.0 in Treatment 2

and 8.2 in the control, mean of Ammonia level before the insertion of fishes were 0ppm in all

treatments which is the same with the Nitrite level and Nitrate level that has the mean of 0ppm.

Meanwhile, the mean of pH level after the insertion of fishes were 7.3 in Treatment 1 while 7.6

in Treatment 2 and in the control, mean of High Range pH level after the insertion of fishes were
7.4 in both Treatment 1 and Treatment 2 while 7.6 in the Control, mean of Ammonia level after

the insertion of fishes were 0.25ppm in both Treatment 1 and Control while 0ppm in Treatment 2

and in both Nitrite and Nitrate has 0ppm in all Treatments.

Conclusion

Results of the study show that java fern is the best aquatic plant for the maintenance of

water quality because the ideal water quality in terms of pH level, High Range pH level,

Ammonia level, Nitrite and Nitrate level. The water lettuce is also effective in maintaining the

water quality, however it is slower than the java fern to clean up ammonia. In the control, the

ammonia will increase over time since there is nothing to clean it up.

Recommendations

Since the best aquatic plant for the maintenance of water quality is the java fern, this

must be used as an aquatic plant in fish farm and aquariums in maintaining the water quality.

This can therefore be useful to increase the survivability of freshwater fishes which is not useful

only to people but also as an environmental solution for the reduction of fishes caught in the

different bodies of water.

Similar study on the quality of water using other aquatic plants should be conducted on

fishes. 7.0 is the ideal pH level; lower the Ammonia level particularly to reduce risk of lowering

the survivability of fishes; lower the Nitrite level and Nitrate level particularly to reduce the

same effects of Ammonia. Different plants may be a factor hence should be studied further.
 Appendices

pH Level Before Insertion Of Fish

One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

7.27 3 0.577 T1
7.60 3 0.000 T2
7.60 3 0.000 T3
7.49 9 0.333 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.222 2 0.1111 1.00 .4219
Error 0.667 6 0.1111
Total 0.889 8      

Comparison of Groups
7.80
7.60
7.40
7.20
7.00
6.80
6.60
6.40
T1 T2 T3

pH Level After Insertion Of Fish      

One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

7.60 3 0.000 T1
7.60 3 0.000 T2
7.60 3 0.000 T3
7.60 9 0.000 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.000 2 0.0000 0.00 1.0000
Error 0.000 6 0.0000
Total 0.000 8      

Comparison of Groups
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
 3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
T1 T2 T3

High Range pH Level BeforeInsertion of Fish    

One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

8.07 3 0.115 T1
8.00 3 0.000 T2
8.20 3 0.000 T3
8.09 9 0.105 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.062 2 0.0311 7.00 .0270
Error 0.027 6 0.0044
Total 0.089 8      

Post hoc analysis

p-values for pairwise t-tests
T2 T1 T3
8.00 8.07 8.20
T2 8.00      
T1 8.07 .2666    
T3 8.20 .0104 .0498  

Tukey simultaneous comparison t-values (d.f. = 6)

T2 T1 T3
8.00 8.07 8.20
T2 8.00      
T1 8.07 1.22    
T3 8.20 3.67 2.45  

critical values for experimentwise error rate:

0.05 3.07
0.01 4.48
 Comparison of Groups
8.22
8.20
8.18
8.16
8.14
8.12
8.10
8.08
8.06
8.04
8.02
8.00
T1 T2 T3

High Range pH Level After Insertion of Fishes    

One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

7.40 3 0.000 T1
7.40 3 0.000 T2
7.60 3 0.346 T3
7.47 9 0.200 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.080 2 0.0400 1.00 .4219
Error 0.240 6 0.0400
Total 0.320 8      

8.10
8.00
7.90
7.80
7.70
7.60
 7.40
7.30
T1 T2 T3

Ammonia Before        
One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

0.0 3 0.00 T1
0.0 3 0.00 T2
0.0 3 0.00 T3
0.0 9 0.00 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.00 2 0.000 0.00 1.0000
Error 0.00 6 0.000
Total 0.00 8      

Comparison of Groups
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
T1 T2 T3
Ammonia After        
One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

0.250 3 0.0000 T1
0.000 3 0.0000 T2
0.250 3 0.0000 T3
0.167 9 0.1250 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.1250 2 0.06250 ########## 0.00E+00
Error 0.0000 6 0.00000
Total 0.1250 8      

Post hoc analysis

p-values for pairwise t-tests
T2 T1 T3
0.000 0.250 0.250
T2 0.000      
T1 0.250 1.0000    
T3 0.250 1.0000 1.0000  

Tukey simultaneous comparison t-values (d.f. = 6)

T2 T1 T3
0.000 0.250 0.250
T2 0.000      
T1 0.250 0.00    
T3 0.250 0.00 0.00  

critical values for experimentwise error rate:

0.05 3.07
0.01 4.48

Comparison of Groups
0.300

0.250

0.200

0.150

0.100
 0.050

0.000
T1 T2 T3

NitrateBefore          
One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

0.0 3 0.00 T1
0.0 3 0.00 T2
0.0 3 0.00 T3
0.0 9 0.00 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.00 2 0.000 0.00 1.0000
Error 0.00 6 0.000
Total 0.00 8      

Comparison of Groups
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
T1 T2 T3

Nitrate After          
One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

0.0 3 0.00 T1
0.0 3 0.00 T2
5.0 3 0.00 T3
1.7 9 2.50 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 50.00 2 25.000 ########## 0.00E+00
Error -0.00 6 -0.000
Total 50.00 8      

Post hoc analysis

p-values for pairwise t-tests
T1 T2 T3
0.0 0.0 5.0
T1 0.0      
T2 0.0 1.0000    
T3 5.0 1.0000 1.0000  

Tukey simultaneous comparison t-values (d.f. = 6)

T1 T2 T3
0.0 0.0 5.0
T1 0.0      
T2 0.0 0.00    
T3 5.0 0.00 0.00  

critical values for experimentwise error rate:

0.05 3.07
0.01 4.48

Comparison of Groups
 5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
T1 T2 T3

Nitrite Before          
One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

0.0 3 0.00 T1
0.0 3 0.00 T2
0.0 3 0.00 T3
0.0 9 0.00 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.00 2 0.000 0.00 1.0000
Error 0.00 6 0.000
Total 0.00 8      

Comparison of Groups
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
T1 T2 T3
Nitrite After          
One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev  

0.000 3 0.0000 T1
0.000 3 0.0000 T2
0.250 3 0.0000 T3
0.083 9 0.1250 Total

ANOVA table
Source SS df MS F p-value
Treatment 0.1250 2 0.06250 ########## 1.09E-47
Error 0.0000 6 0.00000
Total 0.1250 8      

Post hoc analysis

p-values for pairwise t-tests
T1 T2 T3
0.000 0.000 0.250
T1 0.000      
T2 0.000 1.0000    
T3 0.250 8.11E-48 8.11E-48  

Tukey simultaneous comparison t-values (d.f. = 6)

T1 T2 T3
0.000 0.000 0.250
T1 0.000      
T2 0.000 0.00    
T3 0.250 ######### 142359398.44  

critical values for experimentwise error rate:

0.05 3.07
0.01 4.48
 Comparison of Groups
0.300

0.250

0.200

0.150

0.100

0.050

0.000
T1 T2 T3
Pictorials
 Preparing each
container

Cutting the spout of

each container

Putting some soil in

each container
 Labeling each
container

Putting the water in each

container

Planting the aquatic

plants in each
treatment.
 Putting the Fishes per
replicate.

Data Gathering of Water Quality

(Pretest)
Data Gathering of Water Quality (Post Test)