Barnett Shoals Elementary School

• Quad Map for Athens-Clarke County
• Aerial Photograph
• Plat
• Site Description
• Table of Trees
• Table of Herbs
• Table of Ants
• References

  Quad Map for Athens-Clarke County

  
  
  Quad Map of Barnett Shoals Elementary School Area
  Property of John Pickering. Copyright Dept. of Ecology, Univ. of Georgia, Athens. All rights reserved.
  
  

  Aerial Photograph

  
  
  Aerial Photograph of Barnett Shoals Elementary School
  Property of Athens-Clarke County. 1995. All rights reserved.
  
  

  Plat

  
  
  Plat
  Property of Athens-Clarke County. 1995. All rights reserved.
  Note: A legal description in words that was taken by a citizen or the public, known as a plat, was not available. However, this map was known as a plat and was available.
  
  

  Site Description

  
  
  Barnett Shoals Elementary School is located at 3220 Barnett Shoals Road in the eastern portion of Athens/Clarke County. Its habitats included shallow forested ares, large grassy fields, student planted gardens, and several moderately sized landscaping plots. There are two parking lots on the property. The east lot contains approximately twenty parking spaces, the south has close to fifty. The arial photograph shows the school to consist of one major school building. After further investigation, we found out that the school was built as a smaller unit, and now exists as a larger builing with additions and renavations throughout its history. There are trailers located to the north of the main school building that are used for educational instruction and development. Barnett Shoals is located in a rural area with a moderately traveled road running in front. There is not a major highway within five miles of this site. Neighborhoods surround two sides of the property, to the south and west. There is not a constant source of water located near this school.
  
  The presence of two major neighborhoods around the boundaries of Barnett Shoals limit the depth of the forest areas from two to five feet in width. This property does not show visible signs of public abuse from loitering and defacing behaviors. This could be because the property is located away from significant urban development. The children that attend this elementary school, people in the surrounding neighborhoods, as well as groundskeeping personnel would have the most direct impact on the natural communities. The lack of a river, stream, or lake on this property limits the floral and faunal species populations to those that are not dependent on water for reproduction, food sources, etc.
  
  
  

  Table of Trees

  Common Name	Scientific Name	Native/Exotic	Country if Exotic	Planted/Natural	Forest Habitat	Grassy Habitat	Other Habitat
  Magnolia	Magnolia hypoleuca	Exotic	Japan	Planted	Yes	No	Yes
  Himalayan Cedar	Cedrus deodara	Exotic	Western Himalayas	Planted	Yes	No	No
  Acer Lobelii	Acer lobelii	Exotic	Southern Italy	Planted	Yes	No	No
  Halian Maple	Acer opalus	Exotic	Southwest Europe	Planted	Yes	Yes	Hills and Mountains
  Himalayan Cedar	Cedrus deodara	Exotic	Western Himalayas	Planted	Yes	Yes	Hills and Mountains
  Japanese Maple	Acer palmatum	Exotic	Asia	Planted	No	No	Thickets
  Paper Mulberry	Broussonetia papyritera	Exotic	Asia	Planted	Yes	No	No
  American Sycamore	Plantus occidentalis	Native		Planted and Natural	Yes	No	Rich, Moist Soil
  White or Weymouth Pine	Pinus strobus	Native		Natural	Yes	No	No
  Redbud	Carus canadensis	Native		Planted	Yes	No	No
  Red Oak	Quercus rubra	Native		Natural and Planted	Yes	Yes	No
  White Oak	Quercus alba	Native		Natural and Planted	Yes	Yes	No
  White Cypress	Chamaecyparis thyoides	Native		Natural	Yes	No	Moist Areas
  Silver Maple	Acer saccharinum	Native		Natural	Yes	Yes	River Banks
  Black Jack Oak	Quercus marilandica	Native		Natural	Yes	No	No
  Yellow Birch	Betula alleghaniensis	Native		Natural	Yes	No	No
  Flowering Dogwood	Cornus florida	Native		Planted and Natural	Yes	No	Acidic Soil
  Sorrel	Oxydendrum arboreum	Native		Natural	Yes	No	No

  
  
  
  

  Table of Herbs

  Common Name	Family	Scientific Name	Native/Exotic	Country if Exotic	Planted/Natural	Forest Habitat	Grassy Habitat	Link to Picture
  Indian Strawberry	Rosacea	Duchesnea indica	Exotic	India	Planted	Yes	No	Picture
  Woolly Grass	Gramineae	Imperata cylindrica	Exotic	Japan	Planted	No	Yes	Picture
  Queen Anne's Lace	Umbelliferae	Daucus carota	Exotic	Europe Westward to India	Planted	Yes	Yes	Picture Picture
  Dandelion	Asteracea	Taraxacum officinale	Exotic	Eurasia	Planted	No	Yes	Picture
  White Clover	Fabaceae	Trifolium repens	Exotic	Europe	Planted	Yes	Yes	Picture Picture
  Venus' Looking Glass	Campanulacea	Specularia perfoliata	Native		Natural	No	Yes	Picture
  English Plantain	Plantaginaceae	Plantago ianceolata	Exotic	Europe	Planted	Yes	Yes	Picture
  Sorrel	Polygonaceae	Rumex crispus	Native		Natural	No	Yes	Picture
  Rabbitbrush	Compositae	Chrysothamnus nauseosus	Native	From Western N. America	Natural	No	Yes	Picture
  Pleurisy Root	Asclepiadaceae	Asclepias tuberosa	Native		Natural	No	Yes	Picture
  Oxeye Daisy	Aster	Chrysanthemum leucanthemum	Native		Natural	No	Yes	Picture
  Lavender	Labiatae	Lavandula angustifolla	Native		Planted	No	Yes	Picture
  Virginia Chain Fern	Chain Fern	Woodwardia virginica	Native		Natural	Yes	No	Picture
  Rabbit Foot Clover	Fabaceae	Trifolium arvense	Native		Natural	No	Yes	Picture
  Smooth Crab Grass	Poaceae	Digitaria ischaemum	Native		Natural	Yes	Yes	Picture
  Wild Black Rasberry	Rosaceae	Rubus occidentalis	Native		Natural	Yes	No	Picture

  
  
  
  
  

  Table of Ants

  Vial Barcode	Habitat	Trap Method	Morpho species		Vial Barcode	Habitat	Trap Method	Morpho species
  UGCA143193	Grassy	Hotdog	#1=233 #2=3 #3=20 #4=7 #5=0		UGCA143176	Forest	Hotdog	#1=0 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143195	Grassy	Hotdog	#1=82 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143200	Forest	Hotdog	#1=126 #2=1 #3=0 #4=2 #5=0
  UGCA143197	Grassy	Hotdog	#1=192 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143181	Forest	Hotdog	#1=44 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143182	Grassy	Hotdog	#1=184 #2=0 #3=10 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143180	Forest	Hotdog	#1=28 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143179	Grassy	Hotdog	#1=120 #2=2 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143177	Forest	Hotdog	#1=0 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=4
  UGCA143199	Grassy	Hotdog	#1=89 #2=28 #3=2 #4=34 #5=0		UGCA143188	Forest	Pitfall	#1=2 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143178	Grassy	Hotdog	#1=0 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143192	Forest	Pitfall	#1=0 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143175	Grassy	Hotdog	#1=155 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143185	Forest	Pitfall	#1=1 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143187	Grassy	Pitfall	#1=0 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143183	Forest	Pitfall	#1=0 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143190	Grassy	Pitfall	#1=0 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143184	Forest	Pitfall	#1=1 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143194	Forest	Hotdog	#1=128 #2=8 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143189	Forest	Pitfall	#1=0 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143196	Forest	Hotdog	#1=201 #2=2 #3=6 #4=10 #5=0		UGCA143191	Forest	Pitfall	#1=4 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0
  UGCA143198	Forest	Hotdog	#1=3 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0		UGCA143186	Forest	Pitfall	#1=3 #2=0 #3=0 #4=0 #5=0

  
  
  

  In the United States, the fire ant density is extremely high, especially in the Southeast region. Mounds are large and constitute a large fraction of the local and community because of the lack of biological control. Both the grassy and forested regions of Barnett Shoals Elementary School were studied, using two differnt trap methods in both regions. Hot dogs were placed in vials for thirty minutes and cups with ethanol were stuck in the ground overnight to catch the ants. The traps were called hot dog and pitfall traps, reprectively.

  Once collected, the ants were divided up into five categories, Species#1-5. Species #1 was small with two stripes on the abdomen, and the body ranged from a dark brown to black. Species #2 had a black abdomen without any stripes. The thorax was in two sections. Species #3 looked similar to species #1 but was three to four times as large. These possibly could have been the queens of the #1's but they also could have been a different species. Species #4 had an extremely long thorax and a black abdomen without stripes. Species#5 was very large and red.

  The pitfall traps were attempted 5/26/99-5/27/99, 5/28/99-5/29/99, and finally partially successful on 6/5/99-6/6/99. The hotdog traps were collected on 6/5/99. As far as trap types, the hot dog traps were very successful in comparison to the pitfall traps. Most traps with hot dogs attracted many ants of different species. Pitfall traps in the forested areas were moderately successful, probably due to leaf coverage. Unfortunantely, many of the pitfall traps in the grassy area were repeatedly destroyed. Twice it rained and it was also evident (on 6/6/99) that people had come over to the area and crushed the pitfall trap cups and moved all marker flags in to different random locations. This is the reason there are only 26 vials with barcodes instead of 32. Keeping this in mind, it was evident that Species#1 outnumbered the other species. They also seemed to prefer the grassy areas over forested ones. However this is not apparent from Barcodes #UGCA143194, UGCA143196, or UGCA143200. When seeing the high numbers of Species #1 in these vials, it is important to recall from the site description that forest areas were very limited and shallow and these vials were barely in to forest due to the lack of forest land.
  

  In reading about fire ants in the Identification Guide to the Ant Genera of the World, it was noted that fire ants typically are found in grassy, sandy areas. Fire ants "are much more common and widely distibuted in dryer, disturbed sites" (Fowler), making the grassy area behind the school a perfect location. Fire ants prefer the grassy regions because they are dry and more condusive to building the large mounds that are typically connected to other mounds in the same area via underground connections. "The fire ant sometimes forms multiple queen colonies, which are larger than single queen colonies" (Grisham). "Active colonies organized brood raids, which ended when victorious colonies aquired the brood and workers of one or more neighbors" (Adams). With these ideas in mind, the fire ants would probably be Species #1 with the queens actually being #3.
  

  A chi-square analysis would be beneficial in determining the statistical differences between trap types and sites. Unfortunantley, time was limited and the chi-square requirement was dropped.
  
  
  
  Photograph of a White Oak
  Property of Dr. John Pickering.
  Copyright Dept. of Ecology, Univ. of Georgia, Athens.
  All rights reserved.
  
  
  
  
  

  References

  
  
  Adams, E.S. and Tschinkel, W.R. 1995. Density-dependant Copetition in fire ants: Effects on colony suvivorship and size variation. Journal of Animal Ecology. vol. 64. no. 3. 315-324.
  
  Alden,P., Cassie, B., Oches, E., Zirlin, H., and Zomlefer, W. 1999. National Audubon Society Field Guide to the Mid-Atlantic States. Chanticleer Press Inc. New York.
  
  Bell, R. and Justice, W. Wild Flowers of North Carolina. University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill, NC.
  
  Bolton, Barry. 1994. Identification Guide to the Ant Genera of the World. The President and Fellows of Harvard College. USA.
  
  Bremmes, Lesely. 1994. Herbs Dorling Kindersley Limited. New York,NY.
  
  Fowler, H.G., MacKay, W.P., Porter, S., and Vinson, S.B. 1994. The Disrtibution of Fire Ants (Solenopsis spp.) in the State of Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology. vol. 24. no. 3. 307-312.
  
  Foote, L., and Jones, S. 1989. Native Shrubs and Woody Vines of the Southeast. Timber Press, Inc. Portland, OR.
  
  Grisham, Julie. 1994. Attack of the Fire Ant.
  Niering, W. and Olmstead. N. 1995. National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Wildflowers. Chanticleer Press Inc. New York.
  
  Porcher, RIchard. 1995. Wildflowers of tre Carolina Low Country and Lower Pee Dee. The University of South Carolina Press, Inc. Columbia, SC.