- Messages
- 224
- Reaction score
- 116
- Points
- 53
About that graph with PH, leaves and bark, What exactly were we supposed to make? Ph against Leaves?
-
We need your support!
We are currently struggling to cover the operational costs of Xtremepapers, as a result we might have to shut this website down. Please donate if we have helped you and help make a difference in other students' lives!
Click here to Donate Now (View Announcement)
Biology 33, how was it?
- Thread starter LimeReem
- Start date
- Messages
- 176
- Reaction score
- 46
- Points
- 28
On the x axis, pH... And on the y axis, Activity of enzyme...
and we were suppose to make two line graphs, and label each one clearly, eg. leaves or bark.
Did anyone else do this?
- Messages
- 224
- Reaction score
- 116
- Points
- 53
Damn. I just made leaves against ph
- Messages
- 176
- Reaction score
- 46
- Points
- 28
Lets just hope for a low curve....
What about the calibration question? what did u get?
- Messages
- 224
- Reaction score
- 116
- Points
- 53
Im hoping it below 30.
The callibration thing honestly i dont remember at all. We kinda did it in the last minutes.
- Messages
- 224
- Reaction score
- 116
- Points
- 53
it's**
yup, exactly =)
- Messages
- 176
- Reaction score
- 46
- Points
- 28
what did u get for the calibration?
its usually below 30, im guessing for this exam it'll be from 26-28 for an A
for the total length of X-Z i got 141 micrometers
i dnt remeber the calibration
- Messages
- 176
- Reaction score
- 46
- Points
- 28
wow... i dont remember my total length, but it was a small two digit number! maybe around 10 micrometers...
i think everyone screwed up that question... we all got different answers. but anyway the rest of the exam was ok so it doesnt rlly mater i guess
did u draw a vascular bundle in ur plan diagram ???
- Messages
- 176
- Reaction score
- 46
- Points
- 28
yah i drew the vascular bundle, it wasnt clear in the microscope though...
My class got similar answers to mine, for the calibration.
1) You're supposed to draw a graph of activity (y-axis) vs. pH(x-axis). You're also supposed to draw two lines and you must have a way of identifying which line represents which sample (and of course, you must show a key or label). What I did was plot the leaf points with crosses and the bark points with a point in a circle (with a key on the right).
2) Every unit on the eyepiece graticule was 2.5 micrometers. I can't remember the lengths of X, Y, nor Z. Sorry!
2) Every unit on the eyepiece graticule was 2.5 micrometers. I can't remember the lengths of X, Y, nor Z. Sorry!
- Messages
- 176
- Reaction score
- 46
- Points
- 28
On the x axis, we had to plot the pH not the leaves...
and i got 2.4 micrometers for the calibration.
yeah it wasnt clear on my slide either,, but my friend said it was really clear on hers.. and i drew it tooyah i drew the vascular bundle, it wasnt clear in the microscope though...
My class got similar answers to mine, for the calibration.
what did u get for the calibration??
yeah the calibration was smth like that...
Calibration:
Every unit on the stage micrometer was 0.01 mm
The stage micrometer was 4 units long on the eyepiece graticule
So you're supposed to divide 0.1 mm by 4 to get 0.0025 mm
Also, you're supposed to convert it to a more suitable unit by multiplying 0.0025 mm by 1000 to get 2.5 micrometres.
Every unit on the stage micrometer was 0.01 mm
The stage micrometer was 4 units long on the eyepiece graticule
So you're supposed to divide 0.1 mm by 4 to get 0.0025 mm
Also, you're supposed to convert it to a more suitable unit by multiplying 0.0025 mm by 1000 to get 2.5 micrometres.
- Messages
- 176
- Reaction score
- 46
- Points
- 28
You could have written millions of differences:
1) Fig 2.4 has a larger/wider pith
2) Fig 2.4 has a smaller cortex
3) Fig 2.4 has more collenchyma than parenchyma cells (and K1 had less collenchyma than parenchyma)
4) Vascular bundle was spread as a ring in K1, but in fig 2.4, it was in bundles and bundles were spread as rings.
5) Outer layer/bark/epithelial cells are clearly visible in fig 2.4 but not in K1
There are several others.
1) Fig 2.4 has a larger/wider pith
2) Fig 2.4 has a smaller cortex
3) Fig 2.4 has more collenchyma than parenchyma cells (and K1 had less collenchyma than parenchyma)
4) Vascular bundle was spread as a ring in K1, but in fig 2.4, it was in bundles and bundles were spread as rings.
5) Outer layer/bark/epithelial cells are clearly visible in fig 2.4 but not in K1
There are several others.