Science Lab Report

Below Documents are INSTRUCTIONS and SAMPLE LAB REPORT.

FOLLOW all instructions and prepare a lab report. If you don’t understand anything Kindly ask me.

BIOLOGY 1406 LAB REPORT

ELEMENTS: The scientific method will be discussed over several lab sessions. The parts of a scientific paper relate to the steps of the scientific method. SCIENTIFIC METHOD SCIENTIFIC PAPER COMPONENTS (Summary of Findings and Significance) Abstract, Introduction, Hypothesis, Materials & Methods, Discussion & Conclusion (Literature Research) References (used throughout the paper, but particularly in Introduction and Discussion & Conclusion)

Lab reports are to be written using the Scientific Method. The Scientific Method is an organized method of problem solving. The parts are as follows (with examples given for the Diffusion/Osmosis lab):

I. Abstract: This is a single paragraph summarizing the reason for the experiment, the findings and their significance. The abstract is completed AFTER all other sections have been written.

II. Introduction (with citations, see below): This is where a scientist puts his/her experiment in the larger context of the course/particular topic of study. Why is the experiment being done? What question does it address? Why should the reader care about the experiment and its outcome? Overall, the introduction should work as a funnel – starting with the broader context of the topic (e.g. diffusion and osmosis and their importance in biology, what selectively permeable membranes are and why they are important), then narrowing down to the open question that the experiment will address (e.g. how will simple diffusion work on different sizes of molecules across a selectively permeable membrane). This sets the reader up for the next section of the report – the Hypothesis.

III. Hypothesis: The hypothesis is a one to two sentence statement of the question being addressed by the experiment. Be sure that it is not overly broad (e.g. ‘Diffusion will occur across the dialysis tubing’') or overly narrow (e.g. 'Neither starch nor glucose will diffuse across the semipermeable membrane because they will bind one another to form a complex that is too large to pass through the membrane pores.’ – we have no way to test for starch and glucose binding to one another as this experiment is designed.)

IV. Materials & Methods: This is a concise, but thorough description of your experimental methods and the materials used IN YOUR OWN WORDS. Copying and pasting the methods from your lab manual or the handout is plagiarism and will result in a grade of zero. The easiest way around this is to start by closing your lab manual and simply writing out what you remember doing. Then go back to fill in details like concentrations, times, volumes and temperatures.

For example:

First Pass (from memory): “Dialysis tubing was cut and soaked in water. The tubing was tied off at one end with string, creating a bag. The bag was filled with sugar and…”

Second Pass (with book, handout and any notes you took during the experiment): “30cm of dialysis tubing was cut and soaked in deionized water for about 10 minutes. The tubing was tied off at one end with string, creating a bag. Using a 10mL graduated cylinder, the bag was filled with 10mL 30% glucose and …”

V. Results: Display data collected in a table and/or graph, as appropriate. Write out what was observed in the table/graph in paragraph format also.

Example (not from the Diffusion/Osmosis lab):

Table 1. The dissolving rate of powders A, B and C in room temperature tap water. Powder Rate of Dissolution (Time in Sec) A 105 seconds B 120 seconds C 30 seconds

For analysis of the above data, a bar graph can be used showing rates of dissolution in seconds for each powder. The text should state the same (e.g. ‘Powders A and B dissolved at a similar rate – 105 and 120 seconds, respectively, whereas powder C dissolved at 30 seconds.”) This is not where conclusions should be drawn, though (e.g. Do not include something like, “It therefore appears that powder C has a higher affinity for water than powders A and B.”) This is interpretation of the data, which should be reserved for the Discussion & Conclusion.

VI. Discussion & Conclusion: This is more than a restatement of your results. This is where you talk about what your results mean, if your hypothesis was valid, what your results mean in a larger context and what should be done to improve the experiment further/what can be ascertained from further experimentation.

From the example given for Results above, you could write:

“As predicted in the hypothesis, powder C dissolved in room temperature water at much faster rate than powders A or B (summary of results relating back to hypothesis). Looking at the structure of powder C (Campbell et al, 2002) (citation, relating findings back to prior knowledge), it appears that the molecule contains more charged atoms that powders A and B, possibly explaining is increased solubility in polar water (interpretation of the data). In future experimentation, all three powders should be tested for solubility in a less polar solvent to determine if this is a valid explanation for our findings (future experimentation). Overall, these results demonstrate differing solubilities of different substances in water, an important concept in cellular chemistry and the operation of the polar-non polar-polar nature of the phospholipid bilayer of cellular membranes (relating your findings back into the broader concepts in biology).”

VII. References: Wherever ideas or facts are not your own, you must cite where the information came from. In scientific writing, references are given in short-hand within the body of the text, and in detail in the last section.

For example:

In the body of the text: Powder C has charged atoms (Campbell et al, 2002), while powders A and B do not (Gretzky, 1992).

References section:

Book Example – Campbell, Neil A. & Jane B. Reece. 2002. Biology. Benjamin Cummings. San Francisco. (Book Example)

Journal Article Example – Getzky, W. 1992. Relative polarities of molecules of biological importance. New England Journal of Science 3:19-121. (3 is the volume number and 19-121 are the page numbers).

*Scientific Writing Conventions

Try to follow these conventions as best as possible. Don’t overly worry about them in your first pass, though by the time you finish your full lab report, you will be a pro!

Scientific writing conventions for content:

 Paragraphs have topic sentences, and paragraph content logically supports the topic

.  Writing is clear and concise.

 Scientific terminology is appropriately used.

 Language is professional, detached and free of jargon.

 Contractions are not used.

 Abbreviations are only used after they are defined, except for units of measurement (e.g. 'L' for 'liter').

 Past tense is used throughout, except when addressing future directions for experimentation in the discussion.

 Third person point of view is used throughout.

Scientific writing conventions for appearance:

 Writing is organized into appropriate sections (Abstract, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Citations).

 Figures and Tables have accurate, descriptive titles.

 Formatting (line spacing, indents, alignment, etc.) and font choice are applied consistently throughout.

 Citations are used in the body of the text and follow the format outlined in the example report.

SAMPLE LAB REPORT

(DO NOT COPY ANY CONTENT FROM THIS. THIS IS JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA. LAB REPORT SHOULD BE ORIGINAL AND IN YOUR OWN WORDS)

THE EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE CHANGES ON MUPPETS B. Honeydew

1. ABSTRACT

Muppets are a relatively recently discovered animal, and while there is significant anthropological data collected relating to these creatures in the popular media, few systematic studies of their physiology have been performed. The aim of the current study is to determine if muppets are endothermic, a key feature of mammalian physiology. 10 muppets were placed in various temperatures and examined for their ability to maintain body temperature. While all but a single individual maintained a constant body temperature after exposure to various external temperatures, muppet body temperature was much lower and much more consistent than is seen with typical mammals. The one muppet that exhibited extreme variations in temperature with the environment also exhibited morphological differences from the other muppets that were not fully examined in this study. Further investigation is required to determine if muppets exhibit other characteristics of mammalian physiology or perhaps represent another class or multiple classes of animal altogether.

2. INTRODUCTION

Muppets were first discovered in 1977 by J. Henson (Henson, 1977). Henson indicates that they are furry, animated beings of varying sizes and appearances. However, little is known of muppet biology or taxonomy. Because they are reported to have fur, some have speculated that they might belong to the class Mammalia (Bear, 2000). If muppets are mammals, then they should also be endothermic. Measuring core body temperature as environmental temperatures are altered should indicate whether muppets are endothermic or poikilothermic. Establishing how muppets maintain body temperature will help to classify them taxonomically. This experiment will test whether muppet body temperatures are altered.

3. HYPOTHESIS

Muppet body temperature will not change as environmental temperatures change.

4. METHODS AND MATERIALS

Ten muppets of similar size and age were selected randomly from the entire muppet population. Each of the ten muppets was placed in the following temperature environments: ice water, a refrigerator, room temperature, and a warm water bath set as 60, 70 80 and 90 degrees Celsius. The muppets were placed in each environment temperature for 15 minutes per hour. After 15 minutes passed oral and rectal temperatures were taken of each subject. For 45 minutes per hour, they were allowed time to return to 6 normal body temperature. Each muppet was placed in each temperature three times during the experiment. Temperatures were maintained at constant settings and were not allowed to vary more than one degree without correction. Data was collected over a 6 day period. Each muppet was tested at each temperature on Days 1, 3 and 5. Each muppet was monitored at room temperature on Days 2, 4 and 6 by taking oral and rectal temperatures every hour.

(TABLE 1. Age and Size of Experimental Subjects MUPPET AGE (in years) SIZE (in kg) 1 25 2.2 2 26 2.3 3 25 2.4 4 24 2.3 5 26 2.3 6 24 2.4 7 25 2.2 8 26 2.4 9 25 2.2 10 25 2.3)

5. RESULTS

The mean age of the muppets in the experiment was 25.1 years, the median age was 25 years, and the mode was 25 years. The mean size of the experimental muppets measured by mass was 2.3 kg, the median mass was 2.3 kg and the mode was 2.3 kg.

Table 2 shows muppet body temperatures after 15 minutes of exposure to a specific temperature. Results from the three experimental repetitions were identical. Oral and rectal temperatures were identical in each case. Only one of the ten muppets displayed any variation in temperature during exposure to different environmental temperatures.

TABLE 2. Average Muppet Body Temperature at Various Environmental Temperatures. Temperatures expressed in degrees Celsius. MUPPET 5C 26C 50C 60C 70C 80C 90C 1 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 2 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 3 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 4 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 5 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 6 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 77 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 8 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 9 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 10 5 26 50 60 70 80 90

FIGURE 1. The relationship between body temperature and environmental temperature changes. Muppet 10 Body Temperature ◦C Muppets 1 - 9 Experimentation Temperatures ◦C Table 3 indicates muppet body temperatures on days between experimental treatments. For each day the room temperature was measured at a constant 26 Celsius. Body temperature for all muppets was found to be constant 26 Celsius on all three days.

TABLE 3. Muppet Body Temperature on Non Experimental Days at 26C. Temperatures expressed in degrees Celsius. Muppet Day 2 Day 4 Day 6 1 26 26 26 2 26 26 26 3 26 26 26 4 26 26 26 5 26 26 26 6 26 26 26 7 26 26 26 8 26 26 26 9 26 26 26 10 26 26 26

6. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION.

The results were surprising in several ways. While nine out of the ten muppets showed no variation in body temperature when exposed to different environmental temperatures, they also failed to show even minor changes in body temperatures as would be expected from other endotherms (Kermit, 1997). A body temperature change of 1 or even 2 degrees is not unexpected when endotherms are exposed to extreme cold 8 or heat (Honeydew, 1996). The experimental subjects also displayed much lower body temperatures (26 Celsius) than all other endotherms, which range from 32.8C to 38.9C (Kermit, 1997). It cannot yet be clearly stated that these individuals are endothermic. Further analysis and experimentation is planned to examine anatomical behavioral and physiological parameters.

The experimental evidence does not support the hypothesis except in one case; that of Muppet 10 whose body temperature changed as environmental temperatures changed. This muppet’s body temperature was identical to the environmental temperature at every measured point. This particular muppet varied from the others in color and in some body morphology. It was green and had webbed feet, similar to those seen in amphibians. It is not yet understood why this muppet differed from the others, but further observation and experimentation is planned to determine if other differences exist between muppets.

One aberrant but constant factor was noted during the experiment. Each muppet was attached to a being known as a muppeteer. The relationship between these beings is not yet understood and it is possible that the muppeteer’s presence may have impacted the results of the experiment. Further investigation is required to determine if the muppeteer can be separated from the muppet for experimental purposes. It is possible that some symbiotic relationship exists between the two beings, but it is not yet known if this is a mutually dependent relationship or a parasitic relationship.

REFERENCES

Bear, F.T. 2000. Are muppets Mammals? THE JOUNL OF PUPPETOLOGY 14:272-276. Henson, J. 1977. Discovery of a new life form: muppets. FIRST DISCOVERIES EVER 1: 1 -5. Honeydew, B. 1996. The Physiology of Endotherms. New York: Muppet Press. Kermit, T.F. 1997. The difficulties of being poikilothermmic. INTERNATIONAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE GREEN SOCIETY 33: 7 – 23.