# Assessing the Functional Response to Streamside Fencing of Pastoral Waikato Streams, New Zealand
## 3 Results
### Functional Variables
#### 3.2.4 Nutrient transformation  
We observed no significant difference in the \(\delta^{15}\)N of primary consumers between treatments (Table 2). Further, time since fencing did not influence \(\delta^{15}\)N (Table 3). Delta 15N ranged from 3.2% (Taupo unfenced) to 9.9% (Kakahu unfenced). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline
**Metric** & **Variables** & **Fenced Sites** & **(Min-Max)** & **Unfenced Sites** & **(Min-Max)** & **\(T\)-value** & **\(p\)-value** \\ \hline Physical & Stream depth (m) & 0.31 & (0.13-0.67) & 0.29 & (0.15-0.56) & 0.77 & 0.46 \\ Physical & Stream width (m) & 4.11 & (1.50–7.10) & 3.50 & (1.10-6.70) & 1.34 & 0.21 \\ Physical & Channel width (m) & 10.10 & (3.10-28.70) & 9.00 & (4.8–15.91) & 0.47 & 0.64 \\ Physical & Discharge (m\({}^{3}\)/s) & 0.25 & (0.02–0.78) & 0.19 & (0.02–0.60) & 1.47 & 0.17 \\ Physical & Slope (\%) & 0.62 & (0.03-3.28) & 0.80 & (0.11–24.5) & 1.23 & 0.25 \\ Physical & Silt (\%) & 17.45 & (0.00–89.00) & 16.80 & (0.00–100.00) & 0.07 & 0.95 \\ Physical & PumiceSand (\%) & 18.36 & (0.00–77.00) & 29.70 & (0.00–99.00) & 2.63 & 0.06 \\ Physical & Fines (\%) & 37.36 & (1.00–91.00) & 43.80 & (1.00–100.00) & 0.63 & 0.55 \\ Physical & Shade (\%) & 58.10 & (10.00–95.00) & 25.00 & (5.00–60.00) & 3.30 & -0.05 \\ Physical & Dissolved oxygen (\% saturation) & 95.80 & (81.60–128.20) & 93.90 & (76.9–102.90) & 1.20 & 0.25 \\ Physical & Max daily water temperature (C) & 14.60 & (0.06–20.20) & 14.80 & (10.7–21.40) & 0.76 & 0.46 \\ Functional & Retention down (\(V_{\rm dep}\); mm/s) & 3.50 & (0.30–14.90) & 1.60 & (0.60–4.10) & 1.40 & 0.18 \\ Functional & Retention ginging (\(V_{\rm dep}\); mm/s) & 2.10 & (0.27–5.90) & 2.10 & (0.50–60.0) & 0.08 & 0.93 \\ Functional & Retention triangle (\(V_{\rm dep}\); mm/s) & 5.90 & (0.80–1.81) & 6.50 & (7.10–14.4) & 0.43 & 0.67 \\ Functional & GFP (\(\rm\phi_{0}/m^{2}\)/day) & 3.10 & (0.10–10.9) & 2.10 & (0.03–5.20) & 1.02 & 0.33 \\ Functional & ER (\(\rm\phi_{0}/m^{2}\)/day) & 6.00 & (1.40–17.8) & 6.20 & (0.70–11.12) & 0.13 & 0.89 \\ Functional & Wood mass loss (\%/degree day) & 0.07 & (0.04–0.10) & 0.08 & (0.03–0.13) & 1.40 & 0.19 \\ Functional & Cotton tensile strength loss (\%/degree day) & 0.40 & (0.30–0.60) & 0.30 & (0.20–0.50) & 2.05 & 0.07 \\ Functional & Nutrient transformation (\(\rm\phi^{3}\)N; \%\%\) & 5.60 & (3.40–9.10) & 5.80 & (3.20–9.90) & 0.28 & 0.78 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Mean values and minimum/maximum ranges of variables observed (N = 11). \(T\) and \(p\)-values of paired \(t\)-test (two-sample for means) results and significance levels for the relationship between the change in fenced and unfenced sites for physical and functional indicators are also provided. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Physical**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Stream Depth**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Stream Width**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Channel Width**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Discharge**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Slope**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Shade**} \\ \cline{2-13} \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & **df** & **MS** & \(F\) & \(p\) & **MS** & \(F\) & \(p\) & **MS** & \(F\) & \(p\) & **MS** & \(F\) & \(p\) & **MS** & \(F\) & \(p\) & **MS** & \(F\) & \(p\) \\ \hline Time since fencing & 1 & 0.00 & 0.11 & 0.74 & 0.00 & 0.00 & 0.99 & 0.35 & 1.32 & 0.29 & 0.03 & 0.66 & 0.43 & 0.00 & 0.00 & 0.97 & 0.00 & 0.00 & 0.96 \\ Treatment & 1 & 0.00 & 0.48 & 0.51 & 0.07 & 1.63 & 0.23 & 0.00 & 0.00 & 1.00 & 0.01 & 2.01 & 0.18 & 0.14 & 4.04 & 0.08 & 5.43 & 8.73 & 0.01 \\ Site & 9 & 0.02 & 12.92 & 0.00 & 0.35 & 7.92 & 0.00 & 0.26 & 1.62 & 0.22 & 0.05 & 7.69 & 0.01 & 0.28 & 8.33 & 0.00 & 0.97 & 1.57 & 0.26 \\ Res & 10 & 0.00 & & & 0.04 & & 0.16 & & & 0.01 & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{13}{c}{**Temperature**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Max.