Our results did not support our prediction. We predicted that as canopy coverage increased, native species would decrease and as the number of trees in the area increased, native species would decrease. In our results, canopy coverage of tree one was 52.68% and there was one native species around the tree. Canopy coverage of tree two was 83.88% and there were two native species around the tree. Sea purslane was the native plant present around the Casuarina equisetifolia. We did not collect data on the number of Australian pine in the experimental area.
However, we do not believe that our results were representative of the area for several reasons. First of all, we had a very small sample size. Due to weather, we were not able to carry out our experiment at the original planned site. However, we were able to observe the original area and we noted very thick coverage of Casuarina and the ground underneath this area was covered with the leaves. There were no native species around the Australian pine. We got our results from the area where we did another beach seine, which was an area not as infested with Australian pine. We expect zero native species in areas with large amounts of Australian pine. In areas with no Australian pine we observed many native species. The ground was covered and there were about five native species present. To repeat this experiment, data should be collected concerning the number of trees in the area. Also, the amount of leaves on the ground around the trees is important. A large sample size is also needed.
I did not know that these trees were causing so many problems. How long have the Australian Pines been in Bimini? How did they get there? Are they found through out the Bahamas?