Code
library(tidyverse)
library(readxl)
library(ggplot2)
options(scipen=999)
::opts_chunk$set(echo = TRUE)
knitr
<-options(pillar.sigfig = 2) old
Julian Castoro
August 2, 2022
# A tibble: 6 × 2
`Wet body weight [g]` `Population size`
<dbl> <dbl>
1 5.5 532194.
2 7.4 389806.
3 7.8 3165107.
4 8.6 2592997.
5 9.1 604766.
6 11. 3524193.
While this data source is lacking the names of each bird, it appears the wet body weight in grams was collected for a variety of birds(146). This weight is then tied to an estimated population size, I say estimated because the numbers are not integers.
Wet body weight[g] reflects the weight of a particular bird while alive as well as that birds (est?) population size.
Smallest bird:
# A tibble: 1 × 2
`Wet body weight [g]` `Population size`
<dbl> <dbl>
1 5.5 532194.
Largest bird:
# A tibble: 1 × 2
`Wet body weight [g]` `Population size`
<dbl> <dbl>
1 2054. 20661.
To give some perspective:
Robin average weight: 70g.
Pelican average weight: 11,000g
Here I wanted to show how body weight correlates with population size. The raw chart had some outliers which led me to focus in on birds with a body weight of less than 2.5kgs
We see once we focus in on smaller birds, weight< 500g, a bit more of a clear trend in pop size vs weight
This data could be used to draw conclusions about the populations of birds based on their wet body mass.
---
title: "Homework 1"
author: "Julian Castoro"
desription: "Challenge 1 submission on wild bird data"
date: "08/02/2022"
format:
html:
toc: true
code-fold: true
code-copy: true
code-tools: true
categories:
- hw2
- challenge1
- Julian Castoro
- wild_bird_data
-
---
```{r}
#| label: setup
#| warning: false
library(tidyverse)
library(readxl)
library(ggplot2)
options(scipen=999)
knitr::opts_chunk$set(echo = TRUE)
old<-options(pillar.sigfig = 2)
```
### With only skipping the first line here is what wild_bird_data.xlsx looks like
```{r}
birdsData <- read_excel("_data/wild_bird_data.xlsx",skip=1)
birdsData%>%
head()%>%
arrange(`Wet body weight [g]`)
```
While this data source is lacking the names of each bird, it appears the
wet body weight in grams was collected for a variety of birds(146). This weight is
then tied to an estimated population size, I say estimated because the numbers
are not integers.
Wet body weight[g] reflects the weight of a particular bird while alive as well
as that birds (est?) population size.
```{r}
count(birdsData)
```
## Body weight stats
Smallest bird:
```{r}
smallestBird<-birdsData%>%
slice(1)
smallestBird
```
Largest bird:
```{r}
birdsData%>%
tail(n=1)
```
To give some perspective:
Robin average weight: 70g.\n
Pelican average weight: 11,000g
### Average
```{r}
birdsData%>%
summarise('average weight'=mean(`Wet body weight [g]`))
```
## population size vs body weight plot
Here I wanted to show how body weight correlates with population size. The
raw chart had some outliers which led me to focus in on birds with a
body weight of less than 2.5kgs
### raw graph
```{r}
#| message: false
graph<-
birdsData%>%
ggplot(aes(`Wet body weight [g]`,`Population size`)) + geom_point() + geom_smooth(method="lm")
graph
```
### With constraints
We see once we focus in on smaller birds, weight< 500g, a bit more of a clear
trend in pop size vs weight
```{r}
#| warning: false
#| message: false
graph + xlim(c(0, 500))
```
# Conclusions
This data could be used to draw conclusions about the populations of birds based
on their wet body mass.