ipl-logo

Protozoan Lab

957 Words4 Pages

QUESTION: Our question was “What effect does the size of container have on the population of protozoans?
BACKGROUND: We had three jars; one control which was the size of the ones we initially used, one that was half that size, and one that was three times that size. They both had 1.2 grams of grass to 50 milliliters of water. We covered the jars starting on the second day. The experiment went on for 26 days, and we fully observed on 3 days. To try to make the test fair, we tried to do what made the most sense considering that there can’t be a small jar’s worth of grass and water in a big jar. We kept the ratios of grass and water simple and mostly proportional to the size of the jars. Also, when observing, we took observations from multiple …show more content…

The green represents control or Jar 1, the orange represents the smaller jar or Jar 2, and purple represents the larger jar or Jar 3.

EVIDENCE FOR COUNTERCLAIM: However, it could be the amount of air exposure that affected the population and not jar size. Jars 1 and 2 had the same amount of air exposure, and their populations remained more similar than Jar 3 throughout the experiment. On the other hand, Jar 3 had about 2 more days of air exposure than the first 2 jars, which may be why Jar 3’s population was so high. This is also supported by the fact that in the late stage of the experiment, the jars had been covered for so long, and that could be why the populations decreased so significantly. REASONING: I think that the reason that the protozoans’ population was larger in the larger jars is that a larger jar is a healthier habitat for the protozoans. I think this is because the protozoans are more spread out in a larger jar, so they can be separated from fungi and other …show more content…

Since Jar 1 and Jar 2 had an equal amount of air exposure and their populations were similar throughout the experiment, and their populations were much more similar than Jar 3’s, it may be that the extra air exposure in Jar 3 is what pushed its population to the top. To check this, I looked at the air exposure group. What I found was that even though the jar with the most air exposure had almost double Jar 3’s, the jar with no air exposure did even better, so I don’t think that it was air exposure that made Jar 3’s population

Show More
Related
301 Words | 2 Pages

Calculation: Initial Mass(g)－Final Mass (g)=Change in Mass (g) Trial 1 74.5-62.0=12.5(g) Trial 2 272.7－271.5=1.2（g） Percent Error: 272.7-271.5 x 100 272.7 ＝0.440% Percent Change: 74.5-62.0 x 100 74.5 (Trial 1) =16.778% 272.7-271.5 x 100 272.7 (Trial 2) ＝0.440%

Read More
775 Words | 4 Pages

In the first part of the experiment, Part A, the standard solutions were prepared. As a whole, the experiment was conducted by four people, however, for Part A, the group was split in two to prepare the two different solutions. Calibrations curves were created for the standard solutions of both Red 40 and Blue 1. Each solution was treated with a serial 2-fold dilution to gain different concentrations of each solution.

Read More
1222 Words | 5 Pages

The hypothesis made, the density calculated in the experiment will stay the same because the density of the unidentified object will never change, was supported. The results support the hypothesis because in every trial the density always came out to 9g/mL. In trial one the mass was 71.16g, the volume was 8mL, and the density was 8.895g/mL, but when rounded to the proper sig fig came out to 9g/mL. In trial two the mass was 71.12g, the volume was 8mL, and the density was 8.89g/mL, but when rounded to the proper sig fig came out to 9g/mL. In trial three the mass was 71.14g, the volume was 8mL, and the density was 8.8925g/mL, but when rounded to the proper sig fig came out to 9g/mL. When averaged the mass was 71.14g, the volume was 8mL, and the density was 9g/mL. Errors that could have occurred are, not calculating the density correctly, not completely submerging the unidentified object with water in the graduated cylinder to get the volume, not rounding the sig figs correctly when finding the density, not measuring the unidentified object’s mass in grams, not measuring the unidentified object’s volume in milliliters, and not writing the correct units with the proper number or not the correct unit at all.

Read More
567 Words | 3 Pages

8) Explain how each experiment type (question 7) differs from the

Read More
915 Words | 4 Pages

Human error played a factor because it was not made sure that air was trapped in each bag. In the class data the amount of seeds germinated on day three was higher than the amount of seeds germinated on day four. This is not possible as the amount of seeds germinated cannot decrease, rather they should stay the same or increase. A seed cannot go from being germinated to not being germinated. This could have occurred from miscounting or not accurately counting the number of seeds germinated.

Read More
566 Words | 3 Pages

In this lab we were trying to figure out if Salt Creek and Barker Lake had the correct chemical balances to sustain catfish for the years coming. In order to find this out, we tested the water using a Hach Water Testing Kit. Inside were dissolved oxygen reagent powder pillows 1, 2 and 3 which we added and mixed into our sample water to prepare it for testing. Then we added droplets of Sodium Thiosulphate Solution into the prepared water too see how much dissolved oxygen parts per million were in the water. Our independent variable in this experiment was the 5 different testing sites that we went to for water samples.

Read More
948 Words | 4 Pages

The data both supports and disproves the hypothesis, which was “The gobstoppers will not change in color nor will the liquid change color over time of the experiment in the different liquids”. This is because for both the Sprite and water the liquid changed in color, along with the gobstoppers within them. The gobstoppers either got lighter in color or changed in color, and the liquid changed into the original color of the gobstoppers, or something close. For Sprite trial 1 the liquid color for red went from clear, to pinkish, to red, back to pinkish, then to light orange, and finally ending with orange. For Sprite trial 2 it went from red to orange.

Read More
678 Words | 3 Pages

This means that there was significant difference and that more methyl eugenol added to the trap resulted in attracting more fruit

Read More
563 Words | 3 Pages

3. In this experiment, the percent yield was 90%. This number implies that there was little error in this experiment. However, this result could have been caused by certain external factors.

Read More
450 Words | 2 Pages

Stimulants and Depressants How do stimulants and depressants affect a Lumbriculus worm? These questions are answered with the Lumbriculus worm lab. Stimulants and depressants affect the system in different ways. Stimulants make neurons fire faster, and depressants make neurons fire slower. The nervous system of a Lumbriculus worm is very exposed and visible, so different plants and herbs were tested to see how it would affect the heart rate of the Lumbriculus worm.

Read More
1020 Words | 5 Pages

The volume stayed consistent because to decrease, the process needs activation energy. Once the activation energy was stored, the compost started to decrease almost linearly. The decreasing was due to worms eating the compost and disposing some of it as dirt, disposing some into the air (CO2), and using other part of the compost like the H’s as energy. This was due to cellular respiration; the worms used the compost for glucose, and due to homeostasis unused molecules were released through respiration.. The compost stayed constant again at the end of the experiment because worms started to die, and weren’t able reduce any more

Read More
233 Words | 1 Pages

In this laboratory exercise, I chose one peanut from a bowlful and made "identifying observations" about the peanut. Then placed the peanut back in the bowl and return later to try to find it again by using my observation skills. My hypothesis for this experiment is; if I make careful observations of a peanut, I will be able to identify the peanut at a later time. To prove this hypothesis I wrote down the measurements, weight, and unique characteristics of my original peanut (Color: light yellow-brown, Size: 2.5 cm long, Weight: 3.0 g, Characteristics: 1 wave on top, 2 lumps on the bottom, tip on the left side, curved end). After jotting down my observations I then proceeded to place Peanut #1 into the pile and then tried to find Peanut #1.

Read More
472 Words | 2 Pages

This experiment relied heavily on the goldfish, Carassius auratus. The materials needed were a tank, a jar, beaker, tweezers, sponge, fish net, spring water, calculator, a two liter bottle of ice, and oxygen probes. There was another group working, under the same conditions, while using the same tank with a different goldfish. It is important to note, that the only difference between these goldfish were their weight. Since these fishes were already pre-weighted, there was no need to weigh a beaker with water and then subtract the difference if the fish was put in the same beaker and weighed: fish and beaker of water subtracted by the beaker of water.

Read More
503 Words | 3 Pages

The results support the hypothesis, the amount of duckweed in the containers with vinegar might have decreased due to the low pH level of the vinegar. The vinegar used in the experiment had an acidity of 5% and a pH level of 2.4, which but duckweed need a pH level of 6-7 in order to survive (McClung, 2013). The vinegar was too acidic for the duckweed to grow in, resulting in containers one and two turning white and decreasing in size faster than container three which only contained tap water. An explanation for why all three containers had a decrease in duckweed is that there was no oxygen added to them.

Read More
728 Words | 3 Pages

Makes predictions, asks new testable questions and makes new hypotheses using the data A new testable question inspired by the experiment is: How does a particles hardness affect the infiltration rate? It may seem a little irrelevant, but is it possible that hardness can affect the rate of infiltration? Will a soft particle not delay the infiltration rate because it can get weathered by the water? The hypothesis for this experiment is: If a mineral is harder, then it will take longer for the water to drain because the water can’t easily travel down the funnel. Includes a potential application (How could we use your

Read More

More about Protozoan Lab

Related Topics

Open Document