Research Question: How does varying distance of light away from papaya leaf discs at Com, 1 CM, CACM, and CACM affect time taken in seconds for all five discs to rise and float on the surface of the water? Hypothesis: “As the distance of light away from papaya leaf discs increases, the average time taken for the discs to resurface and float o the surface of the water increases. ” Data Collection & Processing Raw Data Table: Time taken (minutes) for the five discs to resurface and float on the surface of the water.
Processed Data Table: Average time taken (seconds) for the five discs to resurface and total on the surface tot the water. Processed Data Table: Average time taken (seconds) for the disc to resurface and float on the surface of the water. Observations: Firstly, there were small oxygen bubbles observed on the surface of the discs that accumulated over time. When the discs finally had enough oxygen bubbles built, the discs started floating up to the surface of the water. Secondly, it was also noticed that the closer the discs were to the lamp, the faster it took for the five discs to surface.
Standard deviation Standard deviation is a method of measuring and identifying how accurate and reliable the data is. A small standard deviation shows that the data is clustered round the central mean thus implying that the data collected is accurate. However, a large standard deviation implies that there is a greater spread of data around the central mean. For example, the standard deviation derived from the distance of CACM away from the lamp is 37. 89. This is a small number as the range of data is clustered around the true value hence showing reliability and precision in the results collected.
Conclusion From the graph as shown above, the average time taken for the papaya leaf discs to float up has a relationship with the distance of the papaya leaf discs from the lamp. In conclusion, as the distance from lamp increases, the average time taken for the papaya leaf discs to resurface and float on the surface of the water increased. This conclusion supports my hypothesis of this investigation as the graph shows a trend line that has a positive gradient. For example, at the closest distance of CACM away from the lamp, the average time taken in seconds for the papaya leaf discs to resurface is 159. 0 seconds. Looking over at the furthest distance of CACM away from the lamp, the average time taken in seconds for the papaya lead discs to resurface is 1706. 80 seconds. Therefore, these values show evidence that there was an evident effect on the rate of photosynthesis as the closer the lamp was to the papaya leaf discs, the rate of photosynthesis increases thus the number of oxygen bubbles that accumulated on the surface of the discs increased thus the average time taken in seconds for the papaya leaf discs to float decreased.
The papaya leaves were plucked a few hours prior to the experiment thus it was disconnected from the papaya tree that could affect the rate of photosynthesis therefore resulting in unreliable data. Similarly, some of the papaya leaves were awaken from different sections of the papaya tree and had leaves that came in various sizes. Hence, chlorophyll concentrations may vary and hence affecting the results in the rate tot photosynthesis.
Furthermore, since we only used papaya leaves, this is generalizing the rate of photosynthesis as the rate of photosynthesis I only true for papaya leaves and not necessarily all plants. The theory behind why the rate of photosynthesis in the papaya leaf discs decreases as the distance from the lamp increases is because by having the papaya discs further away from the lamp, the light intensity (controlled variable) is less direct and Rorer.
As shown in the table below, there is an anomaly in trial one at distance of CACM away from lamp where the average time taken for the papaya leaf discs to rise took 3 minutes and 17 seconds. This figure largely deviates from the other timings of the other four trials. This could affect the true mean value of the average time taken in seconds for the papaya discs to rise as it may have potentially pulled down the average time taken. The error bars shown on the graph are relatively small. This indicates the extent of accuracy and reliability of results.
Since the error bars for each distance do not over lap each other, it indicates that there is a clear difference between one result from another. For example, the standard deviation derived from the distance of Com away room the lamp is 37 89 This is a small number as the range tot data is clustered around the true value hence showing reliability and precision in the results collected. Limitations Source of errors Impact of error on results Specific suggested improvements to eliminate error Independent variable range was insufficient.
The result may not be reliable and accurate. Increasing the number of independent variables to seven: The lamp rays were not parallel to the papaya leaf discs. Since the lamp was at a raised platform, it was not level with the papaya leaf discs. As distance changes, the papaya leaf discs received different amount of light intensity. This could affect the rate of photosynthesis thus making the results unreliable.
Elevate the papaya leaf discs onto a higher platform in order for it to be parallel with the light rays coming out from the lamp. The number of trials was insufficient. Decreases the reliability as an anomaly can have a large impact on the average result. Increasing the number of trials from five to eight would provide and ensure reliable results. Chlorophyll concentration may differ in different sections or type of papaya leaf. Affects the reliability of the results. Identify the papaya laves that have similar color, size, and thickness.