When collecting the results, we observed the different environments and conditions for each of the collection points. Point 1 to Point 3 had no fish in the canal, while the areas from Point 4 onwards all had fishes and complex life. One thing to note for Point 1 is that there was a mosquito larvae in the collection sample. Collection Point 2’s collection point came from the landed property. We had to go another day for Collection Point 2 as the data was wiped out for it on our first day. When we went to Collection Point 2 the first day, everything was normal. However, on the second day, the water was foamy. Another point to note is Point 5. It was only a little after Point 4. Water here also came straight from the condominium. There were minimal life forms. Point 6 was from another waterway. We observed that there were a lot of fish here. Point 7 and Point 8 had the most life out of all the points. Point 7 was straight after the Y-junction of the two combining waterways. We observed larger and more diverse fishes, and some turtles. Also, there were egrets roaming around this area. At Point 9, there were also a minimal amount of organisms.
After analysing the data, we can determine that the land use may affects the water quality, even though there were some points with the same land use had different readings. The water quality also has to do with what is being done at that time, such as in Point 2, where there was a car being washed, causing the data to change drastically. We had originally thought that places such as Point 9 would have a different reading as compared to the other points as we assumed that there would be waste material and pollutants being dumped there, but the readings show otherwise. The fact that it had rained very little during the period of time in which we collected our samples might be the reasons why our data was not consistent.
Evaluation of Hypothesis:
Our hypothesis was not so accurate as the factory area in fact was not the most polluted part of the canal, in fact, the most polluted area of the canal was collection point 2, the area near the landed property. The least polluted are was the area near the condominiums, otherwise known as Collection Point 6. From points 4-9, there were many fishes, however, the water still was not as polluted as point 2, thus proving that water with direct usage may not be as polluted as water with direct usage.