Method: Soil was collected under both apple and peach trees. The samples were then weighed and dried out in an oven for two weeks. After the water was evaporated out of the soil, it was weighed again. Calculations were performed to determine the percentage of moisture in soil for each condition by subtrating the final value from the initial value, dividing that by the initial value and then multiplying by 100 to get the percent moisture content.

Data Analysis

Evidence: 

After calculating the percentage of moisture in soil, it was found that on average apple trees have 23.5% moisture content and peach have 13.7% moisture content. Condition 1 (apple) had a much higher moisture percentage in its soil than condition 2(peach). When looking at the data for condition 1, the standard deviation of 7.58 shows that there is more inconsistency and variability in the data collected. 

Conclusion:

The moisture content of condition 1 soil was less consistent overall than condition 2 which had a standard deviation of 2.88. The p value calculated after conducting an unpaired t-test assuming unequal variance for this data was 0.016. This value is much less than 0.05 which concludes that the data is significantly different between condition 1 and condition 2. However, for optimal growth, the target moisture content should be around 30%(Utah State University) because at 50% of this readily available moisture content, the plant begins to enter a drought stress. This could be adjust by introducing a more suitable soil type to the garden or by moving the apple and peach trees to a different location within the garden.

Explanation:

The soil moisture content of peach soil and apple soil is statistically different. The moisture content of apple tree soil is higher than that of the peach tree soil. The p value, which was calculated by the t-test, of 0.016958 is smaller than the p value of 0.05. This means that the p-value is significant because it shows that the t-test p-values are inconsistent. Visually, the graph is able to indicate that condition 2, peach is about half the moisture content than our condition 1, apple.

The soil sample of condition one, apple, provided more moisture content than condition two, peach. Our soil sample from condition one portrays more inconsistency and varying data than our soil sample from condition two. We are confident about this conclusion because when comparing the two, the moisture content of the apple tree was 23.5% and the moisture content of the peach tree was 13.7%.  This means that the apple tree has only 9.8% more moisture than the peach tree. Even though the apple tree had a higher moisture content, there was no significant difference in the moisture contents between each.

Based on our tactical perception of the soil, we hypothesize that the specific type of soil in the garden is sandy loam. The average soil moisture percent of sandy loam soil is 20% (Cornell). Shown in the figure above the soil moisture percent of apple is 23.50125% and for peach it is 13.749%. However the apple tree has statistically different moisture content when compared to peach tree soil. A possible explanation for these results is that the apple tree was up the small slope from the peach tree which could have reduced the soil moisture in the peach tree soil. This would happen because the rain water would start at the top of this slope and the apple tree would be able to absorb it first. Another possible explanation could be because of the bricks covering the base of the peach tree while the apple tree wasn’t covered in bricks. The bricks could have affected the ability of rainwater to penetrate the soil, causing a decreased moisture content in the peach tree soil. 

While the results differ between the apple and peach tree samples, it would be beneficial for GrowLocal to consider a stronger irrigation-management technique or to introduce a soil like