1 CE 321 PRINCIPLES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAB WORKSHEET No. 1 Due: One (1) Week After Each Lab Section, respectively MICROBIOLOGY Environmental engineers employ microbiology in a variety of applications. Testing for coliform bacteria is used to assess whether pathogens may be present in a water or wastewater sample. Coliforms are a type of bacteria that live in the intestines of warm blooded mammals, such as humans and cattle. They are not pathogens, but if they are present in a sample, it is taken as an indication that fecal material from humans or cattle has contacted the water. If fecal material is present, pathogens may be present, too. In water treatment, coliform counts must average less than one colony per 100 milliliters of sample tested. In wastewater treatment, typical acceptable levels might be 200-colonies/100 mL. There are two standard ways to test for coliforms, the Most Probable Number test, MPN (also called the multiple tube fermentation technique, MTF) and the membrane filter test, MF. Several companies market testing systems that are somewhat simpler, but these cannot be used by treatment plants until they receive EPA approval. Two recently accepted methods are the Minimal Media Test (Colilert system), and the Presence-Absence coliform test (P-A test). Wastewater treatment plant operators study the microorganism composition of the activated sludge units in order to assess and predict the performance of the biological floc. A sample of mixed liquor from the aeration basin is examined under the microscope, and based on the relative predominance of a variety of organisms that might be present; the operator can tell if the BOD application rates and wasting rates are as they should be. For your worksheet, please submit the items requested below (10 pts. each): 1. Examine a sample of activated sludge under the microscope (To be done together in class). Use the Atlas, Standard Methods, or other references to identify at least 5 different organisms you observed. List them and sketch them neatly on unlined paper. Describe their motility and any other distinctive characteristics as you observed it. 2. Explain what types of organisms you might expect to find in sludge with a high mean cell residence time (MCRT), and explain why these would predominate over the other types. 3. How can the predominance of a certain kind of microorganism in activated sludge affect the settling characteristics of the sludge? Give several examples. 2 4. Explain why coliforms are used as “indicator organisms” for water and wastewater testing. Name two pathogenic bacteria, two pathogenic viruses, and one pathogenic protozoan sometimes found in water supplies. 5. There is also a test for fecal coliforms. Use your class notes and outside references to explain the distinctions between the tests for total and fecal coliforms. Explain why one would use the fecal coliform test instead of the test for total coliforms. 6. Using outside references, indicate typical coliform limits for surface waters used for swimming and fishing; potable water; and wastewater treatment plant effluent. 7). In the recent past, EPA instituted regulations designed to insure that Giardia are removed from the water. Using your text or other references, explain what kind of organism this is, and explain the way in which EPA has set standards to insure they are removed during water treatment. 8. What is meant by “population dynamics”? What two factors usually control the population dynamics of a mixed culture? 9. Use the MPN test data from the samples prepared for class prior to determine the number of coliforms present in the wastewater samples. Please show your work and explain your reasoning. Total Coliforms Raw Intermediate Effluent Sample Volume No. Positive No. Positive No. Positive 10 5 5 4 1 5 5 2 0.1 5 3 1 0.01 5 1 0 0.001 2 1 —- 0.0001 1 —- —- FecalColiforms Raw Intermediate Effluent Sample Volume No. Positive No. Positive No. Positive 10 5 5 2 1 5 4 0 0.1 5 2 1 0.01 1 0 0 0.001 0 0 —– 0.0001 2 —– —– 3 10. Use the membrane filter test data given in class to determine the number of total coliforms and fecal coliforms present in the sample. Please show your work and explain your reasoning. Total Coliforms Fecal Coliforms Dilution Colonies Dilution Colonies Raw Influent 0.1 mL/100 mL 58 1 mL/100 mL 47 Intermediate 1 mL/100 mL 13 10 mL/100 mL 28 Wetland Effluent 10 mL/100 mL 10 100 mL/100 mL 15

1 CE 321 PRINCIPLES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAB WORKSHEET No. 1 Due: One (1) Week After Each Lab Section, respectively MICROBIOLOGY Environmental engineers employ microbiology in a variety of applications. Testing for coliform bacteria is used to assess whether pathogens may be present in a water or wastewater sample. Coliforms are a type of bacteria that live in the intestines of warm blooded mammals, such as humans and cattle. They are not pathogens, but if they are present in a sample, it is taken as an indication that fecal material from humans or cattle has contacted the water. If fecal material is present, pathogens may be present, too. In water treatment, coliform counts must average less than one colony per 100 milliliters of sample tested. In wastewater treatment, typical acceptable levels might be 200-colonies/100 mL. There are two standard ways to test for coliforms, the Most Probable Number test, MPN (also called the multiple tube fermentation technique, MTF) and the membrane filter test, MF. Several companies market testing systems that are somewhat simpler, but these cannot be used by treatment plants until they receive EPA approval. Two recently accepted methods are the Minimal Media Test (Colilert system), and the Presence-Absence coliform test (P-A test). Wastewater treatment plant operators study the microorganism composition of the activated sludge units in order to assess and predict the performance of the biological floc. A sample of mixed liquor from the aeration basin is examined under the microscope, and based on the relative predominance of a variety of organisms that might be present; the operator can tell if the BOD application rates and wasting rates are as they should be. For your worksheet, please submit the items requested below (10 pts. each): 1. Examine a sample of activated sludge under the microscope (To be done together in class). Use the Atlas, Standard Methods, or other references to identify at least 5 different organisms you observed. List them and sketch them neatly on unlined paper. Describe their motility and any other distinctive characteristics as you observed it. 2. Explain what types of organisms you might expect to find in sludge with a high mean cell residence time (MCRT), and explain why these would predominate over the other types. 3. How can the predominance of a certain kind of microorganism in activated sludge affect the settling characteristics of the sludge? Give several examples. 2 4. Explain why coliforms are used as “indicator organisms” for water and wastewater testing. Name two pathogenic bacteria, two pathogenic viruses, and one pathogenic protozoan sometimes found in water supplies. 5. There is also a test for fecal coliforms. Use your class notes and outside references to explain the distinctions between the tests for total and fecal coliforms. Explain why one would use the fecal coliform test instead of the test for total coliforms. 6. Using outside references, indicate typical coliform limits for surface waters used for swimming and fishing; potable water; and wastewater treatment plant effluent. 7). In the recent past, EPA instituted regulations designed to insure that Giardia are removed from the water. Using your text or other references, explain what kind of organism this is, and explain the way in which EPA has set standards to insure they are removed during water treatment. 8. What is meant by “population dynamics”? What two factors usually control the population dynamics of a mixed culture? 9. Use the MPN test data from the samples prepared for class prior to determine the number of coliforms present in the wastewater samples. Please show your work and explain your reasoning. Total Coliforms Raw Intermediate Effluent Sample Volume No. Positive No. Positive No. Positive 10 5 5 4 1 5 5 2 0.1 5 3 1 0.01 5 1 0 0.001 2 1 —- 0.0001 1 —- —- FecalColiforms Raw Intermediate Effluent Sample Volume No. Positive No. Positive No. Positive 10 5 5 2 1 5 4 0 0.1 5 2 1 0.01 1 0 0 0.001 0 0 —– 0.0001 2 —– —– 3 10. Use the membrane filter test data given in class to determine the number of total coliforms and fecal coliforms present in the sample. Please show your work and explain your reasoning. Total Coliforms Fecal Coliforms Dilution Colonies Dilution Colonies Raw Influent 0.1 mL/100 mL 58 1 mL/100 mL 47 Intermediate 1 mL/100 mL 13 10 mL/100 mL 28 Wetland Effluent 10 mL/100 mL 10 100 mL/100 mL 15

info@checkyourstudy.com Whatsapp +919911743277
BI 102 Lab 1 Writing Assignment How did the different concentrations of sucrose impact osmotic rate? This assignment requires you to evaluate a hypothesis and communicate the results of your experiment on the rate of osmosis into sucrose solutions of varying concentrations. The questions below are meant to guide you to reporting the key findings of your experiment and help you think through how to explain the findings and draw conclusions from them in a scientific manner. ASSIGNMENT: Please respond to the following questions to complete your laboratory write up. For this assignment you will only focus on the osmosis of water into sucrose concentrations of varying concentration. Make sure that your write up is accurate, and clearly written so that it is easily readable. A grading rubric is provided on the second page of this assignment. To earn full points on your write up, you must provide answers that align to the “meets” column of your grading rubric as well as meeting all “Quality of Writing and Mechanics” elements described in the rubric. There are also some tips on pages 3-4 of this assignment to help you succeed. FORMAT: • Type your responses, using 1.5 or double spacing. • Include the section headings (Hypothesis, Results, Analysis) and question number (example: 1, 2, 3, etc) in your answers but do not rewrite the question. • Graphs may be made with a computer program (example: Microsoft excel, Mac numbers, etc) or may be neatly produced with a ruler on graphing paper. • Print out the cover sheet on page 2 of this assignment, read and sign the academic honesty statement, and submit it with your write up. Your instructor WILL NOT accept a write up without the signed cover sheet. DUE DATE: Your write up is due at the beginning of class next week. Late assignments will have 1 point deducted per day up to 5 days, at which point the assignment will be assigned 0 points. Hypothesis and Prediction – Part 1 of Rubric 1. What did you think was going to happen in this experiment and why? You may find it helpful to state your answers to these questions as an “if-then” hypothesis-prediction. Be sure you have included a biological rationale that explains WHY you made this hypothesis/prediction. (You worked on this in question 2 on page 10 of this lab activity) Results – Part 2 of Rubric 2. How did the different concentrations of sucrose impact osmotic rate? Answer this question by creating a line graph that shows the results of your experiment. If you need assistance building a graph, there is a Guide to Graphing resource available on your Moodle lab course site. Analysis- Part 3 of Rubric 3. Explain why you think that the results shown in your graph support or refute your hypothesis (remember we never “prove” anything in science). Consider all your data and the overall data pattern as you answer this question. Don’t ignore unusual data that may not seem to fit into a specific patterns (“outliers”). Explain what you think might be behind these unusual data points. 4. What is the biological significance of your results? What biological concepts explain completely why these events happened in the experiment? How do these results help you understand the biology of the cell and how materials move back and forth across the cell membrane? (A hint: refer back to questions 1A-1F on page 10 of this lab activity). Think about giving a specific example. References- Mechanics Checklist 5. Provide at least one full citation (make sure you include an in-text citation that pinpoints where you used this resource) for a resource you made use of in performing the experiment, understanding the concepts and writing this assignment. (Perhaps your lab manual? Your textbook? A website?) If you used more than one resource, you need to cite each one! If you need help with citations, a Guide to Citing References is available on your Moodle lab course site. Please print out and submit this cover sheet with your lab writeup! Lab Writeup Assignment (1) Assessment Rubric-­‐ 10 points total Name: ________________________________________ Element Misses (1 point) Approaches (2 points) Meets (3 points) Hypothesis Clarity/Specificity Testability Rationale ___Hypothesis is unclear and hardto- understand ___Hypothesis is not testable ___No biological rationale for hypothesis or rationale is fully inaccurate ___Hypothesis included is clearly stated, but not specific or lacks specific details __Hypothesis is testable, but not in a feasible way in this lab ___Some foundation for hypothesis, but based in part on biological inaccuracy ___Hypothesis included is clearly stated and very specific ___Hypothesis is testable and could be tested within lab parameters ___Rationale for hypothesis is grounded in accurate biological information Graph Title Axes Variables Key Graph clarity Data accuracy ___Graph lacks a title ___Axes are not labeled ___Variables not addressed in graph ___No key or way to tell data points apart ___Graph is hard to read and comparisons cannot be made: Inappropriate graph type or use of scale ___Data graphed is inaccurate or does not relate to experiment ___Graph has a title that is not very descriptive ___Axes are either unlabeled, or units are unclear or wrong ___Variables addressed in graph, but not on correct axes ___Key included, but is hard to understand ___Graph is somewhat readable, comparisons can be made with difficulty: Appropriate graph type, but not scaled well ___Data graphed is partially accurate; some data is missing ___Graph has a concise, descriptive title ___Axes are labeled, including clarification of units used ___Variables on correct axes ___A clear, easy-to-use key to data points is included ___Graph is clearly readable and comparisons between treatments are easy to make: Graph type and scale are appropriate to data ___Data graphed is accurate and includes all relevant data, including controls (if needed) Analysis Hypothesis Scientific language Data addressed Explanation ___Hypothesis is not addressed ___Hypothesis is described using language like proven, true, or right ___No explanations for data patterns observed in graph or data does not support conclusions. ___No biological explanation for data trends or explanations are completely inaccurate ___Hypothesis is mentioned, but not linked well to data ___Hypothesis is not consistently described as supported or refuted ___Some data considered in conclusions but other data is ignored. Any unusual “outliers” are ignored ___Explanations include minimal or some inaccurate biological concepts ___Hypothesis is evaluated based upon data ___Hypothesis is consistently described as supported or refuted ___All data collected is considered and addressed by conclusions, including presence of outliers, ___Explanations include relevant and accurate biological concepts Quality of Writing and Mechanics: Worth 1 point. Writeup should meet all of the following criteria! Yes No ☐ ☐ Write up includes your name, the date, and your lab section ☐ ☐ Write up is free from spelling and grammatical errors (make sure you proofread!!) ☐ ☐ Write up is clear and easy-to-understand ☐ ☐ Write up includes full citation for at least one reference with corresponding in-text citation ☐ ☐ All portions of write up are clearly labeled, and question numbers are included Plagiarism refers to the use of original work, ideas, or text that are not your own. This includes cut-and-paste from websites, copying directly from texts, and copying the work of others, including fellow students. Telling someone your answers to the questions (including telling someone how to make their graph, question #2), or asking for the answers to any question, is cheating. (Asking someone how to make the graph for this assignment is NOT the same as asking for help learning excel or some other software). All forms of cheating, including plagiarism and copying of work will result in an immediate zero for the exam, quiz, or assignment. In the case of copying, all parties involved in the unethical behavior will earn zeros. Cheating students will be referred to the Student Conduct Committee for further action. You also have the right to appeal to the Student Conduct Committee. I have read and understand the plagiarism statement. ____________________________________________________ Signature Guidelines for Good Quality Scientific Reports Hypothesis and Prediction: The hypothesis is a tentative explanation for the phenomenon. Remember that: • A good hypothesis and prediction is testable (and should be testable under the conditions of our lab environment; For example, if your hypothesis requires shooting a rocket into space, then its not really testable under our laboratory conditions). • Your explanation can be ruled out through testing, or falsified. • A good hypothesis and prediction is detailed and specific in what it is testing. • A good hypothesis provides a rationale or explanation for why you think your prediction is reasonable and this rationale is based on what we know about biology. • A good prediction is specific and can be tested with a specific experiment. Examples*: I think that diet soda will float and regular soda will sink. {This hypothesis misses the goal. It is not specific as we don’t know where the sodas are floating and sinking, and it does not provide any explanation to explain why the hypothesis makes sense} Because diet soda does not contain sugar and regular soda does, the diet soda will float in a bucket of water, while regular soda will sink. {This hypothesis approaches the goal. It is more specific about the conditions, and it provides a partial explanation about why the hypothesis makes sense, but the connection between sugar and sinking is unclear} If diet soda does not contain sugar, then its density (mass/volume) is lower than that of regular soda which does contain sugar, and so diet soda will float in a bucket of water while regular soda sinks. {This hypothesis meets the goal. It is specific and the rationale- sugar affects density and density is what determines floating or sinking in water- is clearly articulated} *Note that these examples are for different experiments and investigations and NOT about your osmosis lab. They are provided only to help you think about what you need to include in your write up. Graph: The graph is a visual representation of the data you gathered while testing your hypothesis. Remember that: • A graph needs a concise title that clearly describes the data that it is showing. • Data must be put on the correct axes of the graph. In general, the data you collected (representing what you are trying to find out about) goes on the vertical (Y) axis. The supporting data that that describes how, when or under what conditions you collected your data goes on the horizontal (X) axis. (For this reason time nearly always goes on the X-axis). • Axes must be labeled, including the units in which data were recorded • Data points should be clearly marked and identified; a key is helpful if more than one group of data is included in the graph. • The scale of a graph is important. It should be consistent (there should be no change in the units or increments on a single axis) and appropriate to the data you collected Examples: {This graph misses the goal. There is no title, nor is there a key to help distinguish what the data points mean. The scale is too large- from 0 to 100 with an increment of 50, when the maximum number in the graph is 25- and makes it hard to interpret this graph. The x-axis is labeled, but without units (the months) and the y-axis has units, but the label is incomplete- number of what?} {This graph meets the goal. There is a descriptive title, and all of the axes are clearly labeled with units. There is a key so that we can distinguish what each set of data points represent. The dependent variable (number of individuals) is correctly placed on the y-axis with the independent variable of time placed on the x-axis. The scale of 0-30 is appropriate to the data, with each line on the x-axis representing an increment of 5.} 0 50 100 Number Month 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 March April May June July Number of individuals Month (2011) Population size of three different madtom catiCish in the Marais de Cygnes River in Spring/Summer 2011 Brindled madtom Neosho madtom Slender madtom Analysis: You need to evaluate your hypothesis based on the data patterns shown by your graph. Remember that: • You use data to determine support or refute your hypothesis. It is only possible to support a hypothesis, not to “prove” one (that would require testing every possible permutation and combination of factors). Your evaluation of your hypothesis should not be contradicted by the pattern shown by your data. • Refer back to the prediction you made as part of your hypothesis and use your data to justify your decision to support or refute your hypothesis. • In the “if” part of your hypothesis you should have provided a rationale, or explanation for the prediction you made in your hypothesis (“then” part of hypothesis”). Use this to help you explain why you think you observed the specific pattern of data revealed in your graph. • You should consider all of the data you collected in examining the support (or lack of support for your hypothesis). If there are unusual data points or “outliers” that don’t seem to fit the general pattern in your graph, explain what you think those mean. Examples: I was right. Diet Pepsi floated and so did Apricot Nectar. Regular Pepsi sank. Obviously the regular Pepsi was heavier. This helps us understand the concept of density, which is a really important one. {This analysis misses the goal. The hypothesis isn’t actually mentioned and the data is only briefly described. There is no explanation of the importance of the Apricot Nectar results. Finally, there is no connection to how these results help understand density or why it is biologically important} I hypothesized that diet soda would float, and all three cans of diet Pepsi did float while the regular Pepsi sank. This supports my hypothesis. Both types of Pepsi were 8.5 fluid ounces in volume, but the regular Pepsi also contained 16 grams of sugar. This means that the regular Pepsi had 16 more grams of mass provided by the sugar in the same amount of volume. This would lead to an increase in density, which explains why the regular soda cans sank. When we put in a can of Apricot Nectar, which had 19 grams of sugar, it floated. This was unexpected, but I think it is explained by the fact that an Apricot Nectar can had a volume of 7 fluid ounces, but the dimensions of the can are the same as that of a Pepsi can. A same-sized can with less liquid probably has an air space that helped it float. The results of this experiment help us understand how the air bladder of a fish, which creates an air space inside the fish, helps it float in the water and also how seaweeds and other living things with air spaces or other factors that decrease their density keep from sinking to the bottom of the water. {This analysis meets the goal. It clearly ties the hypothesis to the results and outlines what they mean. It describes how the results support the hypothesis, but also explains a possible reason behind the unusual results of the Apricot Nectar. Finally, there is a link to how this experiment helps us understand biology}

BI 102 Lab 1 Writing Assignment How did the different concentrations of sucrose impact osmotic rate? This assignment requires you to evaluate a hypothesis and communicate the results of your experiment on the rate of osmosis into sucrose solutions of varying concentrations. The questions below are meant to guide you to reporting the key findings of your experiment and help you think through how to explain the findings and draw conclusions from them in a scientific manner. ASSIGNMENT: Please respond to the following questions to complete your laboratory write up. For this assignment you will only focus on the osmosis of water into sucrose concentrations of varying concentration. Make sure that your write up is accurate, and clearly written so that it is easily readable. A grading rubric is provided on the second page of this assignment. To earn full points on your write up, you must provide answers that align to the “meets” column of your grading rubric as well as meeting all “Quality of Writing and Mechanics” elements described in the rubric. There are also some tips on pages 3-4 of this assignment to help you succeed. FORMAT: • Type your responses, using 1.5 or double spacing. • Include the section headings (Hypothesis, Results, Analysis) and question number (example: 1, 2, 3, etc) in your answers but do not rewrite the question. • Graphs may be made with a computer program (example: Microsoft excel, Mac numbers, etc) or may be neatly produced with a ruler on graphing paper. • Print out the cover sheet on page 2 of this assignment, read and sign the academic honesty statement, and submit it with your write up. Your instructor WILL NOT accept a write up without the signed cover sheet. DUE DATE: Your write up is due at the beginning of class next week. Late assignments will have 1 point deducted per day up to 5 days, at which point the assignment will be assigned 0 points. Hypothesis and Prediction – Part 1 of Rubric 1. What did you think was going to happen in this experiment and why? You may find it helpful to state your answers to these questions as an “if-then” hypothesis-prediction. Be sure you have included a biological rationale that explains WHY you made this hypothesis/prediction. (You worked on this in question 2 on page 10 of this lab activity) Results – Part 2 of Rubric 2. How did the different concentrations of sucrose impact osmotic rate? Answer this question by creating a line graph that shows the results of your experiment. If you need assistance building a graph, there is a Guide to Graphing resource available on your Moodle lab course site. Analysis- Part 3 of Rubric 3. Explain why you think that the results shown in your graph support or refute your hypothesis (remember we never “prove” anything in science). Consider all your data and the overall data pattern as you answer this question. Don’t ignore unusual data that may not seem to fit into a specific patterns (“outliers”). Explain what you think might be behind these unusual data points. 4. What is the biological significance of your results? What biological concepts explain completely why these events happened in the experiment? How do these results help you understand the biology of the cell and how materials move back and forth across the cell membrane? (A hint: refer back to questions 1A-1F on page 10 of this lab activity). Think about giving a specific example. References- Mechanics Checklist 5. Provide at least one full citation (make sure you include an in-text citation that pinpoints where you used this resource) for a resource you made use of in performing the experiment, understanding the concepts and writing this assignment. (Perhaps your lab manual? Your textbook? A website?) If you used more than one resource, you need to cite each one! If you need help with citations, a Guide to Citing References is available on your Moodle lab course site. Please print out and submit this cover sheet with your lab writeup! Lab Writeup Assignment (1) Assessment Rubric-­‐ 10 points total Name: ________________________________________ Element Misses (1 point) Approaches (2 points) Meets (3 points) Hypothesis Clarity/Specificity Testability Rationale ___Hypothesis is unclear and hardto- understand ___Hypothesis is not testable ___No biological rationale for hypothesis or rationale is fully inaccurate ___Hypothesis included is clearly stated, but not specific or lacks specific details __Hypothesis is testable, but not in a feasible way in this lab ___Some foundation for hypothesis, but based in part on biological inaccuracy ___Hypothesis included is clearly stated and very specific ___Hypothesis is testable and could be tested within lab parameters ___Rationale for hypothesis is grounded in accurate biological information Graph Title Axes Variables Key Graph clarity Data accuracy ___Graph lacks a title ___Axes are not labeled ___Variables not addressed in graph ___No key or way to tell data points apart ___Graph is hard to read and comparisons cannot be made: Inappropriate graph type or use of scale ___Data graphed is inaccurate or does not relate to experiment ___Graph has a title that is not very descriptive ___Axes are either unlabeled, or units are unclear or wrong ___Variables addressed in graph, but not on correct axes ___Key included, but is hard to understand ___Graph is somewhat readable, comparisons can be made with difficulty: Appropriate graph type, but not scaled well ___Data graphed is partially accurate; some data is missing ___Graph has a concise, descriptive title ___Axes are labeled, including clarification of units used ___Variables on correct axes ___A clear, easy-to-use key to data points is included ___Graph is clearly readable and comparisons between treatments are easy to make: Graph type and scale are appropriate to data ___Data graphed is accurate and includes all relevant data, including controls (if needed) Analysis Hypothesis Scientific language Data addressed Explanation ___Hypothesis is not addressed ___Hypothesis is described using language like proven, true, or right ___No explanations for data patterns observed in graph or data does not support conclusions. ___No biological explanation for data trends or explanations are completely inaccurate ___Hypothesis is mentioned, but not linked well to data ___Hypothesis is not consistently described as supported or refuted ___Some data considered in conclusions but other data is ignored. Any unusual “outliers” are ignored ___Explanations include minimal or some inaccurate biological concepts ___Hypothesis is evaluated based upon data ___Hypothesis is consistently described as supported or refuted ___All data collected is considered and addressed by conclusions, including presence of outliers, ___Explanations include relevant and accurate biological concepts Quality of Writing and Mechanics: Worth 1 point. Writeup should meet all of the following criteria! Yes No ☐ ☐ Write up includes your name, the date, and your lab section ☐ ☐ Write up is free from spelling and grammatical errors (make sure you proofread!!) ☐ ☐ Write up is clear and easy-to-understand ☐ ☐ Write up includes full citation for at least one reference with corresponding in-text citation ☐ ☐ All portions of write up are clearly labeled, and question numbers are included Plagiarism refers to the use of original work, ideas, or text that are not your own. This includes cut-and-paste from websites, copying directly from texts, and copying the work of others, including fellow students. Telling someone your answers to the questions (including telling someone how to make their graph, question #2), or asking for the answers to any question, is cheating. (Asking someone how to make the graph for this assignment is NOT the same as asking for help learning excel or some other software). All forms of cheating, including plagiarism and copying of work will result in an immediate zero for the exam, quiz, or assignment. In the case of copying, all parties involved in the unethical behavior will earn zeros. Cheating students will be referred to the Student Conduct Committee for further action. You also have the right to appeal to the Student Conduct Committee. I have read and understand the plagiarism statement. ____________________________________________________ Signature Guidelines for Good Quality Scientific Reports Hypothesis and Prediction: The hypothesis is a tentative explanation for the phenomenon. Remember that: • A good hypothesis and prediction is testable (and should be testable under the conditions of our lab environment; For example, if your hypothesis requires shooting a rocket into space, then its not really testable under our laboratory conditions). • Your explanation can be ruled out through testing, or falsified. • A good hypothesis and prediction is detailed and specific in what it is testing. • A good hypothesis provides a rationale or explanation for why you think your prediction is reasonable and this rationale is based on what we know about biology. • A good prediction is specific and can be tested with a specific experiment. Examples*: I think that diet soda will float and regular soda will sink. {This hypothesis misses the goal. It is not specific as we don’t know where the sodas are floating and sinking, and it does not provide any explanation to explain why the hypothesis makes sense} Because diet soda does not contain sugar and regular soda does, the diet soda will float in a bucket of water, while regular soda will sink. {This hypothesis approaches the goal. It is more specific about the conditions, and it provides a partial explanation about why the hypothesis makes sense, but the connection between sugar and sinking is unclear} If diet soda does not contain sugar, then its density (mass/volume) is lower than that of regular soda which does contain sugar, and so diet soda will float in a bucket of water while regular soda sinks. {This hypothesis meets the goal. It is specific and the rationale- sugar affects density and density is what determines floating or sinking in water- is clearly articulated} *Note that these examples are for different experiments and investigations and NOT about your osmosis lab. They are provided only to help you think about what you need to include in your write up. Graph: The graph is a visual representation of the data you gathered while testing your hypothesis. Remember that: • A graph needs a concise title that clearly describes the data that it is showing. • Data must be put on the correct axes of the graph. In general, the data you collected (representing what you are trying to find out about) goes on the vertical (Y) axis. The supporting data that that describes how, when or under what conditions you collected your data goes on the horizontal (X) axis. (For this reason time nearly always goes on the X-axis). • Axes must be labeled, including the units in which data were recorded • Data points should be clearly marked and identified; a key is helpful if more than one group of data is included in the graph. • The scale of a graph is important. It should be consistent (there should be no change in the units or increments on a single axis) and appropriate to the data you collected Examples: {This graph misses the goal. There is no title, nor is there a key to help distinguish what the data points mean. The scale is too large- from 0 to 100 with an increment of 50, when the maximum number in the graph is 25- and makes it hard to interpret this graph. The x-axis is labeled, but without units (the months) and the y-axis has units, but the label is incomplete- number of what?} {This graph meets the goal. There is a descriptive title, and all of the axes are clearly labeled with units. There is a key so that we can distinguish what each set of data points represent. The dependent variable (number of individuals) is correctly placed on the y-axis with the independent variable of time placed on the x-axis. The scale of 0-30 is appropriate to the data, with each line on the x-axis representing an increment of 5.} 0 50 100 Number Month 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 March April May June July Number of individuals Month (2011) Population size of three different madtom catiCish in the Marais de Cygnes River in Spring/Summer 2011 Brindled madtom Neosho madtom Slender madtom Analysis: You need to evaluate your hypothesis based on the data patterns shown by your graph. Remember that: • You use data to determine support or refute your hypothesis. It is only possible to support a hypothesis, not to “prove” one (that would require testing every possible permutation and combination of factors). Your evaluation of your hypothesis should not be contradicted by the pattern shown by your data. • Refer back to the prediction you made as part of your hypothesis and use your data to justify your decision to support or refute your hypothesis. • In the “if” part of your hypothesis you should have provided a rationale, or explanation for the prediction you made in your hypothesis (“then” part of hypothesis”). Use this to help you explain why you think you observed the specific pattern of data revealed in your graph. • You should consider all of the data you collected in examining the support (or lack of support for your hypothesis). If there are unusual data points or “outliers” that don’t seem to fit the general pattern in your graph, explain what you think those mean. Examples: I was right. Diet Pepsi floated and so did Apricot Nectar. Regular Pepsi sank. Obviously the regular Pepsi was heavier. This helps us understand the concept of density, which is a really important one. {This analysis misses the goal. The hypothesis isn’t actually mentioned and the data is only briefly described. There is no explanation of the importance of the Apricot Nectar results. Finally, there is no connection to how these results help understand density or why it is biologically important} I hypothesized that diet soda would float, and all three cans of diet Pepsi did float while the regular Pepsi sank. This supports my hypothesis. Both types of Pepsi were 8.5 fluid ounces in volume, but the regular Pepsi also contained 16 grams of sugar. This means that the regular Pepsi had 16 more grams of mass provided by the sugar in the same amount of volume. This would lead to an increase in density, which explains why the regular soda cans sank. When we put in a can of Apricot Nectar, which had 19 grams of sugar, it floated. This was unexpected, but I think it is explained by the fact that an Apricot Nectar can had a volume of 7 fluid ounces, but the dimensions of the can are the same as that of a Pepsi can. A same-sized can with less liquid probably has an air space that helped it float. The results of this experiment help us understand how the air bladder of a fish, which creates an air space inside the fish, helps it float in the water and also how seaweeds and other living things with air spaces or other factors that decrease their density keep from sinking to the bottom of the water. {This analysis meets the goal. It clearly ties the hypothesis to the results and outlines what they mean. It describes how the results support the hypothesis, but also explains a possible reason behind the unusual results of the Apricot Nectar. Finally, there is a link to how this experiment helps us understand biology}

info@checkyourstudy.com Whatsapp +919911743277
In plants, _____ are the cell junctions that allow the free exchange of small molecules that assist in communication. In animal cells, similar cell junctions are known as _____.

In plants, _____ are the cell junctions that allow the free exchange of small molecules that assist in communication. In animal cells, similar cell junctions are known as _____.

plasmodesmata … gap junctions
It takes about 30 doubling times for a cancer cell to form a tumor that is large enough to be felt through the skin with hands. Calculate how many months it would take for the cells to form a tumor that could be felt if the doubling rate is two months.

It takes about 30 doubling times for a cancer cell to form a tumor that is large enough to be felt through the skin with hands. Calculate how many months it would take for the cells to form a tumor that could be felt if the doubling rate is two months.

No expert has answered this question yet. You can browse … Read More...
1 | P a g e Lecture #2: Abortion (Warren) While studying this topic, we will ask whether it is morally permissible to intentionally terminate a pregnancy and, if so, whether certain restrictions should be placed upon such practices. Even though we will most often be speaking of terminating a fetus, biologists make further classifications: the zygote is the single cell resulting from the fusion of the egg and the sperm; the morula is the cluster of cells that travels through the fallopian tubes; the blastocyte exists once an outer shell of cells has formed around an inner group of cells; the embryo exists once the cells begin to take on specific functions (around the 15th day); the fetus comes into existence in the 8th week when the embryo gains a basic structural resemblance to the adult. Given these distinctions, there are certain kinds of non-fetal abortion—such as usage of RU-486 (the morning-after “abortion pill”)—though most of the writers we will study refer to fetal abortions. So now let us consider the “Classical Argument against Abortion”, which has been very influential: P1) It is wrong to kill innocent persons. P2) A fetus is an innocent person. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. (Note that this argument has received various formulations, including those from Warren and Thomson which differ from the above. For this course, we will refer to the above formulation as the “Classical Argument”.) Before evaluating this argument, we should talk about terminology: A person is a member of the moral community; i.e., someone who has rights and/or duties. ‘Persons’ is the plural of ‘person’. ‘Person’ can be contrasted with ‘human being’; a human being is anyone who is genetically human (i.e., a member of Homo sapiens). ‘People’ (or ‘human beings’) is the plural of ‘human being’. Why does this matter? First, not all persons are human beings. For example, consider an alien from another planet who mentally resembled us. If he were to visit Earth, it would be morally reprehensible to kick him or to set him on fire because of the pain and suffering that these acts would cause. And, similarly, the alien would be morally condemnable if he were to propagate such acts on us; he has a moral duty not to act in those ways (again, assuming a certain mental resemblance to us). So, even though this alien is not a human being, he is nevertheless a person with the associative rights and/or duties. 2 | P a g e And, more controversially, maybe not all human beings are persons. For example, anencephalic infants—i.e., ones born without cerebral cortexes and therefore with severely limited cognitive abilities—certainly do not have duties since they are not capable of rational thought and autonomous action. Some philosophers have even argued that they do not have rights. Now let us return to the Classical Argument. It is valid insofar as, if the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true. But maybe it commits equivocation, which is to say that it uses the same word in multiple senses; equivocation is an informal fallacy (i.e., attaches to arguments that are formally valid but otherwise fallacious). Consider the following: P1) I put my money in the bank. P2) The bank borders the river. C) I put my money somewhere that borders the river. This argument equivocates since ‘bank’ is being used in two different senses: in P1 it is used to represent a financial institution and, in P2, it is used to represent a geological feature. Returning to the classical argument, it could be argued that ‘person’ is being used in two different senses: in P1 it is used in its appropriate moral sense and, in P2, it is inappropriately used instead of ‘human being’. The critic might suggest that a more accurate way to represent the argument would be as follows: P1) It is wrong to kill innocent persons. P2) A fetus is a human being. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. This argument is obviously invalid. So one way to criticize the Classical Argument is to say that it conflates two different concepts—viz., ‘person’ and ‘human being’—and therefore commits equivocation. However, the more straightforward way to attack the Classical Argument is just to deny its second premise and thus contend that the argument is unsound. This is the approach that Mary Anne Warren takes in “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”. Why does Warren think that the second premise is false? Remember that we defined a person as “a member of the moral community.” And we said that an alien, for example, could be afforded moral status even though it is not a human being. Why do we think that this alien should not be tortured or set on fire? Warren thinks that, intuitively, we think that membership in the moral community is based upon possession of the following traits: 3 | P a g e 1. Consciousness of objects and events external and/or internal to the being and especially the capacity to feel pain; 2. Reasoning or rationality (i.e., the developed capacity to solve new and relatively complex problems); 3. Self-motivated activity (i.e., activity which is relatively independent of either genetic or direct external control); 4. Capacity to communicate (not necessarily verbal or linguistic); and 5. Possession of self-concepts and self-awareness. Warren then admits that, though all of the items on this list look promising, we need not require that a person have all of the items on this list. (4) is perhaps the most expendable: imagine someone who is fully paralyzed as well as deaf, these incapacities, which preclude communication, are not sufficient to justify torture. Similarly, we might be able to imagine certain psychological afflictions that negate (5) without compromising personhood. Warren suspects that (1) and (2) are might be sufficient to confer personhood, and thinks that (1)-(3) “quite probably” are sufficient. Note that, if she is right, we would not be able to torture chimps, let us say, but we could set plants on fire (and most likely ants as well). However, given Warren’s aims, she does not need to specify which of these traits are necessary or sufficient for personhood; all that she wants to observe is that the fetus has none of them! Therefore, regardless of which traits we want to require, Warren thinks that the fetus is not a person. Therefore she thinks that the Classical Argument is unsound and should be rejected. Even if we accept Warren’s refutation of the second premise, we might be inclined to say that, while the fetus is not (now) a person, it is a potential person: the fetus will hopefully mature into a being that possesses all five of the traits on Warren’s list. We might then propose the following adjustment to the Classical Argument: P1) It is wrong to kill all innocent persons. P2) A fetus is a potential person. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. However, this argument is invalid. Warren grants that potentiality might serve as a prima facie reason (i.e., a reason that has some moral weight but which might be outweighed by other considerations) not to abort a fetus, but potentiality alone is insufficient to grant the fetus a moral right against being terminated. By analogy, consider the following argument: 4 | P a g e P1) The President has the right to declare war. P2) Mary is a potential President. C) Mary has the right to declare war. This argument is invalid since the premises are both true and the conclusion is false. By parity, the following argument is also invalid: P1) A person has a right to life. P2) A fetus is a potential person. C) A fetus has a right to life. Thus Warren thinks that considerations of potentiality are insufficient to undermine her argument that fetuses—which are potential persons but, she thinks, not persons—do not have a right to life.

1 | P a g e Lecture #2: Abortion (Warren) While studying this topic, we will ask whether it is morally permissible to intentionally terminate a pregnancy and, if so, whether certain restrictions should be placed upon such practices. Even though we will most often be speaking of terminating a fetus, biologists make further classifications: the zygote is the single cell resulting from the fusion of the egg and the sperm; the morula is the cluster of cells that travels through the fallopian tubes; the blastocyte exists once an outer shell of cells has formed around an inner group of cells; the embryo exists once the cells begin to take on specific functions (around the 15th day); the fetus comes into existence in the 8th week when the embryo gains a basic structural resemblance to the adult. Given these distinctions, there are certain kinds of non-fetal abortion—such as usage of RU-486 (the morning-after “abortion pill”)—though most of the writers we will study refer to fetal abortions. So now let us consider the “Classical Argument against Abortion”, which has been very influential: P1) It is wrong to kill innocent persons. P2) A fetus is an innocent person. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. (Note that this argument has received various formulations, including those from Warren and Thomson which differ from the above. For this course, we will refer to the above formulation as the “Classical Argument”.) Before evaluating this argument, we should talk about terminology: A person is a member of the moral community; i.e., someone who has rights and/or duties. ‘Persons’ is the plural of ‘person’. ‘Person’ can be contrasted with ‘human being’; a human being is anyone who is genetically human (i.e., a member of Homo sapiens). ‘People’ (or ‘human beings’) is the plural of ‘human being’. Why does this matter? First, not all persons are human beings. For example, consider an alien from another planet who mentally resembled us. If he were to visit Earth, it would be morally reprehensible to kick him or to set him on fire because of the pain and suffering that these acts would cause. And, similarly, the alien would be morally condemnable if he were to propagate such acts on us; he has a moral duty not to act in those ways (again, assuming a certain mental resemblance to us). So, even though this alien is not a human being, he is nevertheless a person with the associative rights and/or duties. 2 | P a g e And, more controversially, maybe not all human beings are persons. For example, anencephalic infants—i.e., ones born without cerebral cortexes and therefore with severely limited cognitive abilities—certainly do not have duties since they are not capable of rational thought and autonomous action. Some philosophers have even argued that they do not have rights. Now let us return to the Classical Argument. It is valid insofar as, if the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true. But maybe it commits equivocation, which is to say that it uses the same word in multiple senses; equivocation is an informal fallacy (i.e., attaches to arguments that are formally valid but otherwise fallacious). Consider the following: P1) I put my money in the bank. P2) The bank borders the river. C) I put my money somewhere that borders the river. This argument equivocates since ‘bank’ is being used in two different senses: in P1 it is used to represent a financial institution and, in P2, it is used to represent a geological feature. Returning to the classical argument, it could be argued that ‘person’ is being used in two different senses: in P1 it is used in its appropriate moral sense and, in P2, it is inappropriately used instead of ‘human being’. The critic might suggest that a more accurate way to represent the argument would be as follows: P1) It is wrong to kill innocent persons. P2) A fetus is a human being. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. This argument is obviously invalid. So one way to criticize the Classical Argument is to say that it conflates two different concepts—viz., ‘person’ and ‘human being’—and therefore commits equivocation. However, the more straightforward way to attack the Classical Argument is just to deny its second premise and thus contend that the argument is unsound. This is the approach that Mary Anne Warren takes in “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”. Why does Warren think that the second premise is false? Remember that we defined a person as “a member of the moral community.” And we said that an alien, for example, could be afforded moral status even though it is not a human being. Why do we think that this alien should not be tortured or set on fire? Warren thinks that, intuitively, we think that membership in the moral community is based upon possession of the following traits: 3 | P a g e 1. Consciousness of objects and events external and/or internal to the being and especially the capacity to feel pain; 2. Reasoning or rationality (i.e., the developed capacity to solve new and relatively complex problems); 3. Self-motivated activity (i.e., activity which is relatively independent of either genetic or direct external control); 4. Capacity to communicate (not necessarily verbal or linguistic); and 5. Possession of self-concepts and self-awareness. Warren then admits that, though all of the items on this list look promising, we need not require that a person have all of the items on this list. (4) is perhaps the most expendable: imagine someone who is fully paralyzed as well as deaf, these incapacities, which preclude communication, are not sufficient to justify torture. Similarly, we might be able to imagine certain psychological afflictions that negate (5) without compromising personhood. Warren suspects that (1) and (2) are might be sufficient to confer personhood, and thinks that (1)-(3) “quite probably” are sufficient. Note that, if she is right, we would not be able to torture chimps, let us say, but we could set plants on fire (and most likely ants as well). However, given Warren’s aims, she does not need to specify which of these traits are necessary or sufficient for personhood; all that she wants to observe is that the fetus has none of them! Therefore, regardless of which traits we want to require, Warren thinks that the fetus is not a person. Therefore she thinks that the Classical Argument is unsound and should be rejected. Even if we accept Warren’s refutation of the second premise, we might be inclined to say that, while the fetus is not (now) a person, it is a potential person: the fetus will hopefully mature into a being that possesses all five of the traits on Warren’s list. We might then propose the following adjustment to the Classical Argument: P1) It is wrong to kill all innocent persons. P2) A fetus is a potential person. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. However, this argument is invalid. Warren grants that potentiality might serve as a prima facie reason (i.e., a reason that has some moral weight but which might be outweighed by other considerations) not to abort a fetus, but potentiality alone is insufficient to grant the fetus a moral right against being terminated. By analogy, consider the following argument: 4 | P a g e P1) The President has the right to declare war. P2) Mary is a potential President. C) Mary has the right to declare war. This argument is invalid since the premises are both true and the conclusion is false. By parity, the following argument is also invalid: P1) A person has a right to life. P2) A fetus is a potential person. C) A fetus has a right to life. Thus Warren thinks that considerations of potentiality are insufficient to undermine her argument that fetuses—which are potential persons but, she thinks, not persons—do not have a right to life.

The standard cell potential (E°cell) for the voltaic cell based on the reaction below is __________ V. The standard half cell potential for a Cr/Cr3+ half cell is -0.74 V, and for a Fe/Fe2+ half cell is -0.44 V. 2Cr (s) + 3Fe2+ (aq) 3Fe (s) + 2Cr3+ (aq) A) +0.30 B) +1.18 C) -1.18 D) +0.83 E) -0.16

The standard cell potential (E°cell) for the voltaic cell based on the reaction below is __________ V. The standard half cell potential for a Cr/Cr3+ half cell is -0.74 V, and for a Fe/Fe2+ half cell is -0.44 V. 2Cr (s) + 3Fe2+ (aq) 3Fe (s) + 2Cr3+ (aq) A) +0.30 B) +1.18 C) -1.18 D) +0.83 E) -0.16

A) +0.30
Looking through a light microscope at a cell undergoing meiosis, you see that the chromosomes have joined into XX-shaped tetrads. These tetrads are lined up along a plane that runs through the center of the cell. This cell is in _____.interphase meiosis I meiosis II cytokinesis of meiosis II

Looking through a light microscope at a cell undergoing meiosis, you see that the chromosomes have joined into XX-shaped tetrads. These tetrads are lined up along a plane that runs through the center of the cell. This cell is in _____.interphase meiosis I meiosis II cytokinesis of meiosis II

meiosis I
Which of the following movements over a cell membrane require energy, active transport, osmosis, simple diffusion, facilitated diffusion, all require energy

Which of the following movements over a cell membrane require energy, active transport, osmosis, simple diffusion, facilitated diffusion, all require energy

Which of the following movements over a cell membrane require … Read More...