# data[].attributes.headline
Germated vs Non Germanted mung bean seeds

# data[].attributes.subject
Germated vs Non Germanted mung bean seeds

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.alternative_text
Germated vs Non Germanted mung bean seeds

# data[].attributes.body
Testable Question: Does the amount of water affect the number of seeds germinated in 72 hours

H0-Amount of water will not affect termination

H1-Amount of water will affect germination

Procedure: Get 5 Petri dishes (one will be used as control), then trace and cut paper towels to fit inside the Petri dishes, next pour 5,10,15,20 ml of water into the Petri dishes, then put the mung bean seeds in the Petri dishes (make sure they are pretty evenly spread out), then put all the Petri dishes in the same sunlight temperature (preferably all right next to each other), then wait 72hrs for results.

Groups: 1:2:3:4:5. Class Average

5ml:Null:0:2:3:0 1.67

10ml: 9:5: 8:7:8 7.4

15ml: 8:10:8:9:10 9

20ml: 5: 7 :9: 7 :9 7.4

CER:

Water does affect the amount of Mung Bean Seeds germinating in 72 hours. With 5ml of water, 1.67(ave) seeds germinated, but with 10ml of water, 7.4(ave) seeds germinated. Additionally, with a bar graph with all of our data between 5 and 10ml of water, the error bars didn't overlap. The amount of seeds germinating between 5ml and 10ml changing is significant on its own but then the error bars not overlapping indefinitely proves its effect and how it is not a fluke but 100% true.

# data[].attributes.body
Does moisture affect the number of isopods in the choice chamber?

# data[].attributes.body
Null: Moisture will not affect the number of isopods in the choice chamber

H1: Moisture will affect the number of isopods in the choice chamber

# data[].attributes.body
1. Place filter on both sides of a choice chamber

2. Add 2ml of water on one of the sides

3. Add 5 bugs on each side of the chamber (keep them separated).

4. Record the number of bugs on each side every minute

# data[].attributes.body
Moisture will not affect the number of bugs in the choice chamber. The error bars on the graphs overlap showing no statistical difference. The error bars overlapping show how the results could be different and change, and since there is not enough on one side to show a significant effect, it shows how it could just be a fluke.

# data[].attributes.body
Does vinegar affect the number of bugs in the choice chamber?

# data[].attributes.body
Null: Vinegar will not affect the number of bugs in the choice chamber.

H1: Vinegar will affect the number of bugs in the choice chamber

# data[].attributes.body
1. Place filter paper on both sides of the test chamber

2. Add a moderate amount of water on one side and vinegar on the other

3. Add 5 bugs on each side of the choice chamber (keep them separated)

4. Record the number of bugs on each side every minute

# data[].attributes.body
Vinegar will affect the number of bugs in the choice chamber. The error bars on the graph don't overlap showing a significant statistical difference. Since the error bars don't overlap it proves that there is no mistake and that 100% correct. The data table shows how, at most, the vinegar had a 5-5 split, but for the rest of them, the wet side had more. Since, at most, they tie in results, and that only happened once, it's indisputable evidence that vinegar does affect the bugs.

# data[].attributes.body
Does the type of water affect the growth of Duckweed because of the different nutrient levels in the water?

# data[].attributes.body
Null: The type of water will not affect the growth of duckweed because of the different nutrient levels in the water

H1: The type of water will affect the growth of duckweed because of the different nutrient levels in the water

# data[].attributes.body
The type of water will affect duckweed growth because of the different nutrient levels in the water. The data table and line graph show that the duckweed count was the same. From day 0-2, starting with 10, on day 0 and growing to eleven, on day 2, but on day 5, community water had 13, tap water 8, and filtered water 6. The community water continued to grow, ending up at 18 Duckweeds at the end of the lab. However, the rest of the water continued to deteriorate, ending up with 4 Duckweeds from the tap water and 2 duckweeds from the filtered water. All of this evidence shows how the type of water will affect duckweed growth because of the different nutrient levels in the water each water nutrient level lines with the final results which explains what happened the community(pond) water was not filtered through any unnatural means leading it to already have some little organisms in the water and high nutrient level leading the Duckweed to grow with ease. While tap water is filtered, it is not that filtered, leading to some nutrients and other stuff still being in the water. This is why it did better than the filtered water at first but kept declining. Lastly, the filtered water leads there to little to no nutrients in it, explaining why it performed the worst in the lab.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Get 3 containers

2. Fill each container with a different type of water in each (pond, tap, filtered)

3. Then place 10 Duckweeds in each container

4. Record results

# data[].attributes.body
Does proximity to water affect biodiversity because of the nearby vegetation?

# data[].attributes.body
Null: Proximity to water will not increase biodiversity because of the nearby vegetation?

H1: Proximity to water will increase biodiversity because of the nearby vegetation

# data[].attributes.body
Proximity to water will increase biodiversity because of the nearby vegetation. The graph shows how the hill area has the lowest Simpson's biodiversity index level, being 0.72, its richness being 6, and abundance being 13. The graph shows how the marsh area has the second highest Simpson's biodiversity index level, being 0.76, its richness being 6, and abundance being 19. The graph shows how the bridge area has the highest Simpson's biodiversity index level, being 0.84, its richness being 10, and its abundance being 26. The lowest count area the hill also was the furthest from the water and it had a lot sparser vegetation which would support the claim and line up with the evidence, secondly, the marsh area was significantly closer to the water and had a lot more vegetation which once again would line up with the evidence, lastly the bridge area which is on and right above the water had plenty of vegetation which would line up with the evidence however I think another cause for its significant increase in biodiversity is due to how some species of insects lay eggs on the water which would still line up with everything. Therefore proximity to water will increase biodiversity because of the nearby vegetation

# data[].attributes.body
1. Get 9 glue traps

2. Place 3 glue traps on and near a bridge above the water (at least 10ft away from each other)

3. Place 3 glue traps in a marsh area(at least 10ft away)

4. Place 3 glue traps on a hill area (at least 10ft away)

5. Wait 24hrs and record the data

# data[].attributes.body
Does Light affect Co2 levels in a container of spinach leaves?

# data[].attributes.body
Null: Light doesn't affect CO2 levels in a container full of spinach

H1: Light does affect CO2 levels in a container full of spinach

# data[].attributes.body
1. Get a glass container

2. Put the CO2 Reader into the glass container

3. Put the container by a windowsill and record the data

4. Repeat the process except cover the container in tinfoil

5. repeat both processes, but this time put 15 spinach leaves in the containers

# data[].attributes.body
Light does affect CO2 levels in a container full of spinach because of photosynthesis. For the light graph, the light control bar showed a very tiny change in CO2 levels due to the CO2 sensor's own small variability this was also shown in the dark graphs' control bar. In the dark graph with leaves, the CO2 levels increased to 343.5 ppm. In the light graph with leaves the CO2 levels decreased to 20 ppm of CO2. This shows how the spinach leaves in the dark increased CO2 levels because they couldn't do the process of photosynthesis leading to the CO2 greatly increasing because it could only respirate and when it was in the light the leaves could do photosynthesis and take in CO2.

# data[].attributes.body
Does germination affect the respiration in mung beans?

# data[].attributes.body
Null: Germination does not affect the respiration in mung beans.

H1: Germination does affect the respiration in mung beans

# data[].attributes.body
1. Get a glass container

2. Put 15 germinated mung beans

3. Put the CO2 Reader into the glass container

4. Record the ppm of CO2

5. Repeat the process except put 15 ungerminated mung beans in the container

# data[].attributes.body
Germination does affect the respiration in mung beans. The germinated mung beans had an increase in CO2 levels at a rate of 0.405, and the dormant mung beans had an increase in CO2 levels at a rate of 0.01252. This is due to the germinated being more active, therefore respirating more, and without sunlight, the photosynthesis process doesn't occur, which absorbs CO2, but instead, these seeds take in O2 and exude CO2. The dormant beans aren't active, so they just take in enough O2, which would mean lower CO2 output.

# data[].attributes.body
Does the concentration of sugar affect % mass change in potatoes?

# data[].attributes.body
Null: Concentration of sugar will not affect the % mass change in potatoes

H1: Concentration of sugar will affect the % mass change in potatoes

# data[].attributes.body
1. Get 5 paper cups and label them 0 to 0.6 in increments of 0.2

2. Cut 15 potato cores from a potato

3. Put a cup on a scale and zero it out

4. Put 3 potato cores in each cup and measure their weight in grams

5. Put the different solutes in the corresponding cups

6. Put the cups by a window cill and wait 24hrs to get results of % mass change

# data[].attributes.body
Sucrose concentration does affect mass change in potatoes due to osmosis. When the solute is at 0.0 potato mass increases by an average of 18.1%, when the solute is at 0.2 potato mass increases by an average of 6.6%, when the solute is at 0.4 potato mass decreases by an average of 10.6%, when the solute is at 0.6 potato mass decreased by an average of 29.0%, when the solute is at 0.8 potato mass decreased by an average of 36.7%. This shows at every solute contraction point the potato mass was affected. This is all due to osmosis. Osmosis is when water goes to areas to distribute itself equally where it can exchange itself equally going from high concentration to low. So when the solute has 0.0 concentration, the H2O from the solute will enter and inflate the potato because it is trying to spread and exchange itself equally (aka equilibrium), and when the solutes increase to 0.2 it more closely imitates the potato's own internal concentration, and that's why it only went up a little bit. But when it went to 0.4 concentration, it went over the potato's own solute concentration level, which led the potato's internal H2O to spread out of the potato to the solute to even itself out, and which led the potato to lose water weight driving it, and it continued to that as the concentration got higher.