Collaborators: Cooper Green, Hannah Whitt, Riordan

Introduction: In this experiment, we were testing the small-scale effects of deforestation and
development on erosion. We started the experiment over two weeks ago by laying down a two liter
bottle that was cut in half, filling it halfway with soil and then growing grass. This would be one of our
experimental groups later in the experiment representing a highly vegetated area. Next, we filled up
two more of the same type of two liter bottles halfway with soil. We placed rocks over one of the soils,
and we simply left one bottle with just soil in it. After preparing all three test groups, we were ready to
start the experiment. We placed each different bottle on an inclined plane. We then poured 500 mL of
water onto the soils, measured how much water leaked from the bottle, and timed how long it took for
the water to stop leaking. We found that the experimental group containing the grass caused the least
amount of erosion. It actually caused a small amount of erosion and the water was much cleaner. 170
mL of water leaked out after being poured onto the rocks. Next, we found that the other experimental
group of soil with rocks caused a fair amount of erosion. 225 mL of water leaked from this bottle,
stopping after 13 seconds. The water collected contained a little bit of soil, but there was still good
clarity of the water. In the control group with just soil, we found erosion took place. 175 mL of water
leaked, stopping after 9.8 seconds. The water collected had zero clarity. It was a very dark color with
large particles of soil. We completed this entire experiment to test how grass effects the movement of
water in an ecosystem and to see the environmental effects of degrading land within an ecosystem.
Problem: How does grass effect the movement of water in an ecosystem?
Hypothesis: If we add 500 mL of water to each type of soil (with grass, with ground-cover and with
soil only), then the soil growing the grass will have the least amount of erosion because the roots will
hold the soil in place and absorb the water.
Parts of the Experiment:
Control Group- The bottle containing only soil
Experimental Group- The bottles containing grass and ground-cover
Independent Variable- The contents of the soil (what's holding it in place)- either grass or groundcover.
Dependent Variable- Clarity and amount of soil-water solution collected
Controlled Variables- How much water poured onto the soil, type of soil, size of bottle, incline of the
bottle
Note: The amount of soil in the bottles was supposed to be controlled, but our amounts were not exact
Materials:
2 Liter bottles, cut in half
Potting soil
Grass seed
Water
Pebbles, gravel or leaf litter

Procedure/Methods:
Sowing the seeds
1. Place soil in an empty 2L bottle that has been cut in half. Spread grass seed evenly throughout the
soil.
2. Water grass seeds every 2-4 days and allow it to sit near a source of sunlight or under a plant grow
lamp.
1. When the grass has grown 2-4 inches in height, you are ready to test the effects.
2. Fill two more empty 2L bottles with soil. Cover one with a top cover of your choice (gravel,
pebbles, or leaf litter) and leave the other one alone as a control.
3. Line the three bottles up on top of an elevated surface. Place an empty beaker underneath the mouth
of each bottle.
4.Prepare 4 graduated cylinders with 100 mL of water in each.
5. Have a student start a timer and say GO. When the timer says go, all 3 graduated cylinders should
be poured onto the soil bottles.
6. Record the time, amount, and color of the water discharge in the table below. Then, answer the
questions.
Data:
Note: Our group added 500mL of water to each bottle
Bottle
Water Collected
Tine for water to stop
flowing

Qualitative
Observations

Grass

170 mL

15.8 seconds

This water was much

clearer than the water
with just soil. The grass
holds the soil in places
which holds the dirt and
makes the water clean.

Rocks

225 mL

6.3 seconds

This soil was the

clearest.

Soil

175 mL

9.8 Seconds

This soil was by far the

dirtiest.

The first soil that we tested is the bottom one. As you can see, it is growing grass. It was one of our
experimental groups. We set the bottle on an elevated plane, and poured in 130 mL of water. 170 mL
of water leaked in this first test.

The second soil that we tested is the top one. It contained rocks. We repeated the same steps shown
above, and approximately 225 mL of water leaked. It was mostly water with some soil mixed in with
it.

The last soil that we tested is in the middle. It was our control group with simply soil. After pouring in
the water, 170 mL of water leaked. There was a lot of soil in the water, and there was no clarity at all.

Analysis and Conclusions Specific to the Lab:

1.

Describe the difference in the water collected from each of the 3 bottles.

As you can see in the pictures directly above, there are very noticeable differences in the water
collected. The beaker on the left represents the erosion from the bottle with just soil. There is zero
clarity in this water, and it contains large particles of soil in it. The middle beaker represents the
erosion from the rocks. Only a few soil particles became suspended in the water, but there was still
some clarity to the water. The beaker on the right represents the erosion from the grass.

2.

Using your data to support your answer, after deforestation, what would be most effective:

planting grass seed, leaving rotting material behind, or leaving bare soil? Support your answer.
This answer is very obvious from our results. The most effective way to reduce erosion after
deforestation would be to plant grass seed. Grass holds the soil in place. Also, by planting grass, there
would be improved water quality in nearby water sources, more nutrients held in place in the soil,
increased gross primary productivity in the ecosystem and improved air quality. Grass not only reduces
erosion, but it also completes the following services listed.

3.

Which setting would allow the greatest chance of water filtration (for cleaning pollutants, etc)?

Explain your answer.

I think the setting that would allow for the greatest chance of water filtration would be the one with
ground-cover. This is due to the fact the setting with grass simply absorbs too much of the water (not
allowing it to filter). The one with rocks uses the holes of the soil to let water filter through it. The
rocks on top would also help for water to be filtered rather than just absorbing all of it.

4.

Describe how this lab could be done on a larger scale to test the effects over a longer period of

time. Give a complete description.

This lab could possibly be completed in an actual ecosystem that is altered in order to test the effects

over a longer period of time. For example, you could find a large strip of land located on an inclined
plane/hillside with a stream below it. This area would have to be subjected to large amount of rain.
Clear-cutting one section of this land and bulldozing it to expose only soil would represent one of our
test groups. Next, leaving a large forest area or planting grass could represent another group. Lastly,
clear-cutting and leaving behind leaf litter, pine straw or putting down gravel could represent the last
test group. You could test the water below these areas for nutrient amounts, water clarity and runoff
totals. Checking and comparing this data over time would give you better results.

General Analysis and Conclusions:

The hypothesis that I created at the beginning of this

experiment was based off of the information that we have learned throughout this unit and this class in
general. We've discussed what causes a positive feed-back loop of erosion and ways to prevent it. The
main way to prevent erosion is by not clear cutting or deforesting large areas. I based my hypothesis
off of knowing this. After completing the experiment, I found that my hypothesis was very accurate.
The test soil/group that had the least amount of erosion after adding 500 mL of water was the soil that
was growing the grass. Not surprisingly, the grass roots soaked up the water and held the soil in place.
We tried to limit the amount of variables in this experiment as much as possible, however, I think it
was not as accurate as it could have been. Firstly, each bottle did not contain the exact same amount of
soil. This possibly threw off how much erosion occurred. Also, the rate at which we poured the water
differed each time. It was not the same for each bottle which may have affected our erosion water
totals. Lastly, our grass was in need of water. I don't believe that anyone in our group had watered it
for at least two days. This means that when the water was poured onto the grass, it was immediately
soaked up. This does not represent an actual ecosystem in which it rains heavily every day. If our
grass was already saturated with water, we may have found different results.

Citations:
Tonneijck, Femke, Bregje Van Wesenbeeck, and Mark Spalding. "How Mangroves Help in Reducing
Flooding and Coastal Erosion." Environmental
Expert. Wetlands International, n.d. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. <http://www.environmental-

expert.com/articles/how-mangroves-help-in-reducingflooding-and-coastal-erosion-401349>.