Time spent on project
|
How time was spent
|
|
Alberto Castillo
|
10 hours
|
The first 2 hours were spent with the entire group over the summer to
brainstorm project ideas, 6 hours were spent doing the actual experiment and
2 additional hours were used to analyze the data and create a graph
|
Brenda Austria
|
12 hours
|
The first 2 hours were spent with the entire group over the summer to
brainstorm project ideas, 2 more hours were spent individually researching
the actual project design and concepts, 6 hours were spent doing the actual
experiment and 2 additional hours were
used to outline the control variables and fine tune the presentation
|
Claire Mulkey
|
12 hours
|
The first 2 hours were spent with the entire group over the summer to
brainstorm project ideas, 2 more hours were spent on individual research
about light color and CO2 consumption, 6 hours were spent doing the actual
experiment and an additional 2 hours were spent making the presentation
|
Tucker Hembree
|
12 hours
|
The first 2 hours were spent with the entire group over the summer to
brainstorm project ideas, 2 more hours were spent on individual research
about oxidation during cellular respiration, 1 hour was spent buying supplies,
6 hours were spent doing the actual experiment and an additional hour were
spent analyzing data and drawing conclusions for the presentation
|
Abstract: In normal sunlight, plants absorb light and carbon dioxide through their leaves and convert it to sugars and oxygen. This combined with the topic at hand (color), sparked the investigation as to what would happen if this ordinarily white colored sunlight was a different wavelength. We decided to research and test with different colored light filters and a carbon dioxide probe, the rate of carbon dioxide consumption. Our results were inconclusive however, as we did not account for the carbon dioxide that would result from decomposition of the flowers in an airtight container.
Presentation Link: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/18I9RvK5t7_WvbJr1U3Gwo3YDyNpqIK1dG8YNJ6wonIA/edit#slide=id.p
What must you do to eliminate light, other than that from the lightsource, from influencing the experimental setup?
ReplyDeleteWe could have placed the container where the plants were in into a larger box. Or just preform the experiment in some sort of dark space to eliminate light that was not coming from the direct light source. We did take into consideration this other source of light. We Concluded that since we were indoors the light surrounding the container would be consistent throughout testing and to make sure no other environmental factor of light affected our testing we closed the blinds and placed the containers under the table.
DeleteWhat if you checked the plant more frequently and/or less frequent than in your experiment? Would that have been beneficial?
ReplyDeleteChecking the carbon dioxide levels in the plant's environment more frequently might have allowed us to record the rate of decomposition as the plant should have hypothetically exponentially let off more and more carbon dioxide as it started to decompose in its airtight environment, however it might also lead to a larger source of error as measuring carbon dioxide levels more frequently would mean removing the airtight seal and thus tainting the experiment with oxygen from the classroom.
DeleteWhat are the benefits and possible problems associated with flashlights, as opposed to heat lamps?
ReplyDeleteThe possible benefits of using flashlights rather than heat lamps are that heat lamps could have changed the temperature inside the enclosed containers significantly and possibly could have worsened the problem of decomposition we encountered. Heat lamps would have also produce a lot of infra-red which has mostly harmful affects on plants and would have changed the color of the light going through the filter. The benefits we had from using the flashlights were that they did not heat to much when handled nor when lit, they were convenient to handle/transport and provided a good source of white light. The biggest disadvantage of using flashlights was finding long lasting battery flashlights that stayed at the same energy and that were affordable.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHow did you go about choosing zinnia flowers?
ReplyDeleteWe chose zinnia flowers because they were easily accessible and affordable for the purposes of the experiment. Also, they are a close cousin of the daisy plant, which we originally planned to use because of its small size and many leaves, giving it the ability to consume lots of carbon dioxide.
DeleteWhy is it important that blue is the most useful color of light?
ReplyDeleteIn order to combat the threat of Global Warming, we must develop techniques to control the production of greenhouse gases. By knowing the most 'powerful' color of light, scientists and farmers will be able to grow crops in the most efficient, oxygen-producing way, utilizing blue light, primarily.
DeleteHow did you go about differentiating between a mature bloom and an immature bloom?
ReplyDeleteOverall, the difference between a mature and immature bloom was more subjective than anything else that we recorded. While methods may have varied slightly, I personally differentiated based upon both the size of the blooms, and the 'open'-ness of the petals. Fully open petals always indicated a mature bloom, while fully closed always indicated an immature bloom. Any bloom which had a fully observable center (ie the petals have bent away from the center) was also considered to be mature. All others were considered immature blooms.
DeleteWhy does the carbon dioxide affect the decomposition? If you didn't have the problem with carbon dioxide, do you think your experiment would have yielded conclusive results?
ReplyDeleteIn a closed space (such as the containers we used) oxygen will be used up and carbon dioxide will build up and suffocation will ultimately occur without fresh air, ultimately leading to decomposition of plants in such a space. Our results would have almost certainly been more accurate and more conclusive.
DeleteIf you were to do this experiment again, how would you account for the decomposition you mentioned?
ReplyDeleteIf we were to perform this experiment again, we would have figured out a way to make the boxes more breathable to the flowers so the carbon dioxide levels wouldn't increase so much and cause decomposition. We also would have used flashlights that emitted less heat.
DeleteAlso, how did you figure that extra CO2 was being produced due to decomposition?
ReplyDeleteTechnically, if the process of cellular respiration had been performed correctly, the carbon dioxide levels in the plant's environment should have decreased as the plant's leaves consumed the carbon dioxide. The very fact that the levels of carbon dioxide increased during the experiment, points out that something went wrong, either with the airtight container (essentially suffocating the flowers) or the small amount of heat given off by the flashlights (essentially cooking the flowers).
DeleteHow could you account for heat produced by the lamp in the future?
ReplyDeleteWell, we used flashlights which should have produced much less heat than lamps. The flashlights that we did use only produced a very small amount of heat that probably did not penetrate the plastic box lid. In a future reproduction of this experiment, we could find flashlights that produce even less heat.
DeleteCan you also elaborate on what constitutes decomposition?
ReplyDeleteAirtight spaces, in which plants can not receive enough oxygen, can constitute decomposition. Thermolysis, or thermal decomposition,is a chemical decomposition caused by heat. The decomposition temperature of a substance is the temperature at which the substance chemically decomposes. The heat emitted by the flashlights may have caused decomposition.
Delete