Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />8 <br />Data analysis <br />• <br />Data was transferred from data sheets to database files on an IBM <br />compatable computer using fields identified in Appendix B. Additional data <br />fields were added to the data base to aid in data stratification, calculations <br />and compatability with other databases. Negative velocities were converted to <br />positive values in calculation of descriptive statistics and on histograms. • <br />Each field observation of a fish consituted one record within the <br />database. There are 1332 records within the database "master" file. These <br />records were compressed into a "working" file of 317 records. Each record in <br />the "working" file contains the time interval that the fish spent in each <br />location and the microhabitat measurements from that location. A particular <br />map location could have several entries depending on the number of times a • <br />fish frequented it during an observation period. Also, several radiotagged <br />squawfish could use the same location during an observation period. <br />Based on study design, data were partitioned into two groups. The long <br />term (24 hour) partition consisted of one 24 hour observation on each of 10 <br />fish. The short term (2.5 hour) partition contained 2.5 hour observations <br />conducted biweekly on each fish. Target group observations scheduled at • <br />different times were combined with non-target observations which usually <br />occurred during daylight hours. When simultaneous observations were being <br />conducted on additional fish (other than the fish scheduled for observation) <br />the additional data was entered as extra data. Extra data were removed for <br />micro-habitat analysis since there was not an equal chance of collecting it on <br />all fish and because of potential spiking of histogram intervals where several • <br />fish were observed together at the same site location (Bovee 1986). <br />The long term (24 hour) data partition was used to examine behavioral <br />differences between morning, afternoon, evening, and night time partitions. <br />The analysis was conducted to investigate temporal differences in depth, <br />velocity, substrate, and habitat type use. <br />Determination of differences among the time periods was conducted by • <br />visual examination of histograms of the microhabitat parameters and comparison <br />of summary statistics of means, variances, and range of depth and velocity. <br />Statistical tests were not used in this comparison because of a lack of <br />independence in the data. <br />Measurements were compared between the 24 hour and 2.5 hour data sets to <br />determine if the two sampling techniques would produce similar results and if • <br />combining the data sets was warranted. Measurements were also compared between <br />the main, inner, and outer holes using 2.5 hour, 24 hour, and.combined 2.5 and <br />24 hour data sets. <br />Comparisons of "in" and "out" measurements were made to examine <br />variability of habitat near fish locations and determine if there was <br />selection of certain habitat parameters by the fish. • <br />This preliminary data analysis approach was taken to enable comparisons <br />between data collected in this study with that collected on a similar study on <br />the Green River. <br />• <br />0