Impact of Anthropogenic Ativity on Bulk Density of Wetland Soils

Physical Geography Lab

ENVL 2105
Tori Robbins
April 24, 2020
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Table of Contents

Introduction 2

Methodology

Site Maps 4

Site Description 7

Field Sampling Methodology and Laboratory Analysis 8

Statistical Methodology 8

Results 9

Discussion 10

Conclusion 12

References 13

1
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Introduction​:
Humans are the dominant species on planet earth. We have the ability to take any action
and tend to overlook the potential consequences. One such action humans take is continuous
construction to accommodate our growing desires. This involves leveling and compacting the
ground, which can result in negative environmental and ecological repercussions. Our actions to
grow and develop can result in increased pollution, destruction of native vegetation, and
extinction or pressure of native species. Prior to taking such actions we need to consider the
negative impact on soil density which is foundational to the surrounding environment and
ecology.
Soil bulk density impacts rooting and available nutrition to vegetation, available water
capacity, soil porosity, microorganism activity, and as a result soil processes and productivity
(Agriculture & Service). It is an indicator of soil health and compaction (Agriculture & Service).
Bulk density is dependent on factors such as quantity of organic matter, soil texture, mineral
density, and packing arrangement (Agriculture & Service). Soil bulk density is the weight of dry
soil per unit of volume (Agriculture & Service). Primarily, a lower bulk density measurement is
indicative of healthier soil, with large concentrations of organic matter and high porosity
(Agriculture & Service). Generally, as depth increases so does bulk density as organic matter
decreases (Agriculture & Service).
Both humans, animals, and naturally occurring events can impact soil bulk density, with
human actions having the potential to have some of the largest impacts. Activities that impact
soil coverage, organic matter, soil structure, compaction, and porosity result in a change to soil
bulk density (Agriculture & Service). Any activity in which weight is applied to the surface of
the soil increases the bulk density. This increase is relative to the amount of weight and pressure
being applied. An animal or human walking across the soil will increase density, but minimally.
However, plowing and the movement of heavy equipment over the soil will result in a much
higher increase in soil bulk density. Heavy rainfall can also lead to an increase in density, as soil
particles become more compact from the movement of water and erosion. Tilling is one activity
that temporarily decreases density (Agriculture & Service). Activities that limit soil disturbance
and increase organic matter decrease density.
A 2001 study conducted in boreal forests in Canada, studied the impact of human activity
at various levels on key soil indicators, including bulk density and porosity (McNabb, 2001).
They conducted their measurement on a natural soil setting, and after skidding a wide tire 3, 7,
and 12 cycles over the soil (McNabb, 2001). Their measurements indicated an increase in soil
density, and a decrease in porosity that was parallel to the increase in human activity (McNabb,
2001). This is expected, since soil bulk density increases relative to the amount of weight,
pressure or activity frequency being applied to the soil. Zero to three skids of the tire resulted in
the most significant change (McNabb, 2001). This means even a minor activity, such as
walking, on the soil surface can result in decreased soil health. They also found compaction to

2
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

be associated with wet soils, meaning wetlands and their transitional areas are at the highest risk
of suffering from even the smallest human activity (McNabb, 2001). This negative impact on
wetland soils can be detrimental to the surrounding ecosystem, since soil bulk density affects
rooting and available nutrition to vegetation, available water capacity, soil porosity, and
microorganism activity. This results in a ripple effect, impacting the carbon cycle by decreasing
the decomposition of organic matter and decreasing vegetation, which results in less available
food for wildlife.
To counteract the negative impacts on naturally occuring wetlands and the decimation of
these ecosystems, humans have begun to artificially create wetlands that are designed to
sustainably function as natural wetlands (Campbell, 2002). A 2002 study in Pennsylvania
compared these created wetlands to naturally occuring wetlands (Campbell, 2002). While the
created wetland is engineered to have the same qualities as the naturally occuring wetland, key
features like bulk density were higher, and organic matter was lower in the man-made wetlands
(Campbell, 2002). This is indicative of poorer soil health and quality, resurfacing the negative
impacts on the ecosystem and surrounding environment. This study demonstrates that human
activity intended to be beneficial to the environment, like the restoration of wetlands to their
original state, still results in negative differences from naturally occuring environments and
cannot support the same ecosystem, or not as well, as a naturally occuring wetland.
This study intends to identify the impact of varying levels of human activity on soil bulk
density of wetlands. The results from this study can be beneficial in understanding human
impact on wetland specific ecosystems and soil health.

3
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Methodology​:

Figure 1: Map of sampling locations and transects at Wetland 1.

4
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Figure 2: Map of Galloway land use.

5
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Figure 3: Map of Stockton University Campus in relation to NJ counties.

6
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Site Description​:
The three wetlands studied are located on Stockton University’s 1,600-acre campus in
Atlantic County, New Jersey. Amongst the Pinelands National Preserve, the coastal plain
landscape is relatively flat, with slopes between 0.06-0.38% (Rhodehamel, 1998). The elevation
of the topography rarely exceeds 46m (150 feet) above sea level (Rhodehamel, 1998).
Measured at the nearby Atlantic City Airport (5.5 km from Stockton University Galloway
Campus), the average regional temperature is 54.4 degrees F, but varies by season (Arguex et.
Al., 2010 & Boyd 1998). Seasonal temperature variance can fluctuate as much as 40 degrees F,
consistent with the continental climate of the region (Boyd, 1991). The Atlantic City Airport
receives an annual average of 41.75 inches of precipitation, spread throughout the year relatively
evenly (Arguez et al., 2010). Monthly averages range from 2.87 to 4.21 inches (Arguez et al.,
2010).
The soil types represented at the study site include Atsion, Galloway, Downer, and
Mullica series (Soil Survey Staff, nd). These soil types have textures of sand (Atsion), sandy
loam (Mullica), and loamy sand (Downer and Galloway) (Soil Survey Staff, nd). They support a
variety of drainage classes- well drained (Downer), poorly drained (Atsion), somewhat poorly
drained (Galloway) and very poorly drained (Mullica) (Soil Survey Staff, nd). However, all soils
present have a high saturated hydraulic conductivity, resulting in the quick vertical movement of
water despite their predominantly poor drainage status (Soil Survey Staff, nd).
These distinct features that represent the Pineland National Preserve support unique
vegetation. Pinelands vegetation can be classified into two categories, upland and lowland
communities (McCormick, 1998). Lowland vegetation consists of overstory, shrubs, and ground
cover (McCormick, 1998). Pineland overstory vegetation includes white cedar, black tupelo and
red maple (McCormick, 1998). Shrubs include leatherleaf, and highbush blueberry, and
sphagnum moss represents ground coverage (McCormick, 1998). Pineland upland vegetation
has minimal diversity, consisting of pine-oak or oak-pine forests (McCormick, 1998). Canopy
species are dominated by pitch pine, shortleaf pine, and various oak species (McCormick, 1998).
Supporting this unique ecosystem is the Kirkwood Cohansey unconfined aquifer, which
lies beneath the study area of this experiment (Witt, personal communication). This aquifer may
contribute to more than two dozen seasonal wetlands on Stockton University’s Campus, playing
a major role in the ecosystem by impacting the soil, vegetation and wildlife (Witt, personal
communication).

7
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Field Sampling Methodology and Lab Analysis​:

On January 29, 2020 soil samples were taken from 3 wetlands on Stockton University’s
campus with varying human impact. Two of the wetlands were naturally occuring, located in the
woods behind the Stockton University Police Department and beside Vera King Farris Drive.
The other wetland was man-made across from the Arts and Science Building. The distance from
the center of the wetland was noted in feet. Soil samples were taken from the backslope and
summit in the center, north, south, east, and west directions of the three wetlands. A metal core
that was 12.5 cm tall with a diameter of 7.5 cm was partially driven into the ground and extracted
a soil sample. The samples were placed and sealed in zip lock bags, and labeled with their
wetland ID, direction, and location of sample (summit, backslope or center of wetland).
To analyze bulk density, subsamples were oven dried to determine soil moisture content
and dry soil weight for bulk density.

Statistical Methodology​:
A p-value of 0.05 was pre-set to determine significance for all tests. All statistical
analyses were processed in SAS Enterprise. The Shapiro Wilk test was used to evaluate data
normality. Results of this test showed a p-value of 0.32, therefore a parametric comparison was
used to detect differences among wetlands.

8
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Results​:
The mean bulk density for wetland 1 was 1.058 g/cm3, wetland 2 was 0.610 g/cm3, and
wetland 3 was0.736 g/cm3. Wetland 1 has the highest overall bulk density, followed by wetland
3, and finally wetland 2.
Wetland 1’s average bulk density at the backslope position was 1.037 g/cm3, at the
summit 0.960 g/cm3, and at the center 1.294 g/cm3. Wetland 2’s bulk density at the backslope
position was 0.306 g/cm3, at the summit 0.842 g/cm3, and at the center 0.763 g/cm3. Finally,
Wetland 3’s bulk density at the backslope position was 0.698 g/cm3, at the summit 0.647 g/cm3,
and at the center 0.980 g/cm3. There was an observable difference in bulk density between slope
positions at the three wetlands.
Standard Deviation for wetland 1 was 0.297, wetland 2 was 0.493, and wetland 3 was
0.340.
Results from the One-Way ANOVA Analysis of Variance conducted for all three
wetlands for bulk density was a p-value of 0.0019. This is indicative of statistically significant
data, since it is less than 0.05. A t Test for the bulk density for the three wetlands indicated 4
comparisons were statistically significant at the 0.05 threshold; the comparisons of wetland 1 to
3, wetland 1 to 2, wetland 3 to 1, and wetland 2 to 1, were statistically significant. The
comparisons of wetlands 3 to 2, and 2 to 3, were not statistically significant.

Figure 4: Graph of mean soil bulk density in g/cm3 at the three wetlands studied. Subdivided by
slope position.

9
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

Figure 5: Graph of mean soil bulk density in g/cm3 for the three wetlands studied with error bars
(standard error) and letters to denote statistical differences.

Discussion​:
The three wetlands studied had suffered from a wide variety of human impact. Wetland 3
was secluded in woods that were primarily untouched by human activity. Wetland 2 was beside
a road. It suffered from some human activity, but not heavily. Wetland 1 was located in a
heavily populated region, immersed between buildings, roads, parking lots, and paths. Wetland
1 was also a man-made water retention basin. It was expected that wetland 1 would have the
highest bulk density, followed by wetland 2, with wetland 3 having the lowest bulk density. In
other words, bulk density was expected to increase as the level of human activity increased at the
three wetlands, as demonstrated in prior studies of human activity on soil density. Hence,
wetland 1, which was man-made utilizing compaction devices and is victim to heavy water
runoff would have the highest density. Wetland 2 was expected to have the second highest
density since it is subject to more human traffic and heavy water flow than wetland 3. Wetland 3
was expected to have the lowest density since it is secluded from civilization, suffering less from
human traffick, and is surrounded by dense foliage, reducing the impact of water flow and
erosion.
​The higher bulk density of wetland 1, compared to wetland 2 and 3, reflects the 2001
study of boreal forest soil in Canada, which tested the effect of no human activity, 3, 7, and 12
tire skidding cycles on the soil bulk density (McNabb, 2001). Both studies found soil bulk
density to be high with heavy human activity.. Similarly, a 2002 project studied the difference in
soil bulk density between natural wetlands, created wetlands, and created wetlands that had been
untouched for various intervals. Like this study, it was identified that man-made wetlands had

10
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

significantly higher levels of bulk density than naturally occuring wetlands. This explains why
wetland 1, a man-made wetland suffered from drastically higher bulk density. While wetland 1
followed the results and conclusions of prior studies, wetland 2 and 3 contradicted them. It was
expected that wetland 1 would have the highest density, followed by wetland 2 and then 3,
however wetland 3 had the second highest bulk density. As expected and in-line with prior
studies, wetland 1, which was the man-made wetland had the highest bulk density at 1.058
g/cm3. Wetland 2, which was expected to be in between wetland 1 and 3, had the lowest bulk
density with 0.610 g/cm3. Finally, wetland 3 had a bulk density of 0.736 g/cm3.
Wetland 2 and 3 still had the lowest density compared to wetland 1, but their results were
switched from the project's expectations. Wetland 2 had the lowest bulk density and wetland 3
was in the middle. This contradicts prior studies. Wetland 3, is secluded in the woods,
experiencing minimal to no human activity compared to wetland 1 and 2. It had dense organic
matter in the form of leaves, and the densest foliage coverage. These factors decrease soil bulk
density by protecting the soil’s integrity, reducing runoff, erosion, and compaction. However,
one factor was likely to increase bulk density, soil moisture content. Wetland 3 suffered from
the highest moisture content, with the most water contained in the wetland. While the numerous
factors likely to decrease bulk density were expected to counteract those that increase it, soil
moisture content, and wetland water and depth content seem to play a larger role then expected
in bulk density. Wetland 2, which was beside a road suffered from increased human activity,
less foliage coverage than wetland 3, and decreased organic matter. These factors are likely to
increase runoff, compaction and as a result soil bulk density. However, this wetland had the
least amount of water contained in the wetland, possibly explaining its significantly lower bulk
density. More studies should be conducted to identify the significance of the amount of water
contained in a wetland on soil bulk density.
The study on “​Soil Wetness and Traffic Level Effects on Bulk Density and Air-Filled
Porosity of Compacted Boreal Forest Soil”, discussed the relationship between soil moisture
content and soil compaction (McNabb et;al, 2001). Their study concluded that as soil moisture
increased, so did soil compaction and hence density. Based on this study, it was expected that
moving from the summit downhill to the center of the wetland, the soil density would increase.
This was found to be true for wetland 1 and 3, but not for wetland 2. At wetland 2, the summit
had the highest density, closely followed by the center, with the backslope having the lowest
density. It is possible that wetland 2 suffered from heavy traffic around the perimeter, or summit
of the wetland resulting in a significantly higher density. Other possible explanations include
erosion or intense rainfall. These are feasible explanations considering the wetland is directly
beside a busy road and can suffer from human foot traffic. However, more studies would need to
be conducted to confirm this phenomenon, or to identify whether this was a systematic or
random error.

11
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

This study was limited to Stockton Universities campus, and the three wetlands present.
This study should be conducted in multiple other locations and with other wetlands of varying
human activity and impact to confirm findings from this study and elaborate the data and
conclusions that can be drawn.

Conclusions​:
The wetland with the highest human activity or impact also suffered from the highest
level of soil bulk density. Moving downhill, into more saturated soil, the soil bulk density
increased, for all but one wetland. The wetland beside the road and with medium human impact,
broke the trend with the summit recording the highest density. More studies need to be
conducted to confirm this data and trends that are seen. Studies of soil density, especially in
wetlands, is necessary and vital to understanding the human impact on ecosystems, water,
nature's filter, and soil health. Our actions have consequences. While increased soil density may
appear mild, it can result in a ripple effect. More compact, and dense soil can result in decreased
water penetration to ground water sources and decreased vegetation as a result of roots inability
to penetrate the soil and absorb nutrition because of lower porosity. This will impact the
surrounding ecosystem and wildlife. Denser soil also results in decreased microorganism
activity, soil processes and productivity. Humans should care about the repercussions of their
actions to the environment, ecosystem, and biological creatures, but at a minimum at the
decreased productivity of crops, resulting in less available food.

12
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

References

Dalton, R. (2003). Physiographic provinces of New Jersey. New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection and New Jersey Geological Survey.

ttps://doi.org/doi:10.7282/T3JW8FMH. Accessed 02/11/2020.

A. Arguez, Durre,I., Applequist, S., Squires, M., Vose, R., Yin, X., and Bilotta, R. (2010).
NOAA's

U.S. Climate Normals (1981-2010); Atlantic City Airport. NOAA National Centers for

Environmental Information. DOI:10.7289/V5PN93JP. Accessed 2/11/2020.

Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of

Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at the following

link: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. Accessed 02/11/2020.

Boyd, H.P. (1991). A field guide to the pine barrens of New Jersey: its flora, fauna, ecology and

historic sites. Plexus Publishing.

Rhodehamel, E.C. (1998). Geology of the pine barrens of New Jersey. In Pine Barrens
Ecosystem

and Landscape, R.T.T. Forman ed. Rutgers University Press.

McCormick, J. (1998). The vegetation of the New Jersey pine barrens. In Pine Barrens
Ecosystem

and Landscape, R.T.T. Forman ed. Rutgers University Press.

Agriculture, U. S., & Service, N. R. (n.d.). ​Soil Bulk Density/ Moistuire Aeration.​ Retrieved from
Soil Quality Kit; Guides for Educators:
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_053260.pdf

Campbell, D. A., Cole, C. A., & Brooks, R. P. (2002). ​Wetlands Ecology and Management,​
10​(1), 41–49. doi: 10.1023/a:1014335618914

13
Wetland Soil Bulk Density Tori Robbins

McNabb, Startsev, & Nguyen. (2001, July 1). Soil Wetness and Traffic Level Effects on Bulk
Density and Air-Filled Porosity of Compacted Boreal Forest Soils. Retrieved from
https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/sssaj/abstracts/65/4/1238

14