https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5 en-us 2017-10-17 14:19:14 UTC 2017-10-19 03:08:03 UTC hello@padlet.com abuckley9 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/197807300 2017-10-17 14:21:02 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/197807300 abuckley9 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/197808400 2017-10-17 14:22:34 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/197808400 abuckley9 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/197810767 2017-10-17 14:25:48 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/197810767 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198246895 1) The data shows an obvious decrease in beta-amylase activity when the potatoes are exposed to the fungus.
2) The fungus may change certain variables in the enzyme such as the active site which would cause the enzyme to react more slowly or not at all. 
3) The next direction of investigation should ask if the excess water from the flood was linked to the surplus in fungus spores. the experiment would consist beta-amylase affected by the fungus. This would be compared to a control to see what was changed in the enzyme, be it the active site or the shape. maybe idk fam ]]> 2017-10-18 14:16:19 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198246895 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198252509 1) I agree. The fungus blocked the sweetness in the potatoes, because the graph showed it affected the growth and taste. 
2) It might affect the active site where the enzyme is working. 
3) My next research question would be how is the fungus affecting the enzyme function. I would do a lab about it to figure out what it is doing at the active site, like changing the shape of the enzyme. ]]> 2017-10-18 14:24:14 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198252509 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198257292 1) I agree with the botanists' hypothesis. The graph clearly shows that the fungus restricted the function of the beta-amylase enzyme, and prevented the starches from becoming sugars.
2) The fungus could be affecting the enzyme's active site through competitive or allosteric inhibition. Competitive inhibition would chemically block the receptor site while allosteric inhibition would change the shape of the enzyme, affecting the substrate's ability to "fit" to the enzyme. 
3) Evidence regarding conditions under which the fungus blocks the enzyme would need to be collected. Further research would investigate how the fungus blocks/changes the enzyme and how to prevent it. By testing the effects of different concentrations of fungus on the enzyme and assessing its function under different effects, one would be able to conclude how the fungus affects the enzyme.  A control would be needed in order to compare the experimental results to the changed enzyme. By observing how the changed enzyme reacts in absence of the fungus could also derive information regarding how the fungus changes the enzyme.]]> 2017-10-18 14:30:42 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198257292 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198257529 1) Agree. The fungus affected the rate of the break down of starch to produce sugar, thus changing the flavor.
2) The enzyme could have blocked the active site (competitive inhibition) or changed the shape (allosteric inhibition).
3) Data you'd need to collect would have to be related to how the fungus blocked the enzyme and how it affected the taste. ]]> 2017-10-18 14:31:01 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198257529 atomlinson2019 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198258574 1. I agree with the botanists' hypothesis. The graphs show that after the flood, there was a significant increase in fungal spore density in all three sites. The second graph also clearly shows that fungus decreases the rate of beta amylase activity which could allow for the potatoes to be less sweet. 
2. The fungus may be inhibiting the enzymes ability to interact with the substrate and break down starches into sugars.  
3. Set up for experiments with different concentrations of fungus on each potato to study to reaction rates of the beta amylase enzyme. The control would be a potato that had no fungus on it. ]]> 2017-10-18 14:32:38 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198258574 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198259054 I agree, because with the fungus the beta-amylase production was significantly lower, meaning somethin gin the fungus was affecting the enzyme that breaks the starches into sugars.]]> 2017-10-18 14:33:34 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198259054 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198259427 I agree with the botanists' hypotheses because the data shows that the fungus inhibits the beta-amylase reaction with the starch. This coincides with a significant increase in fungus spore density due to rainfall shown in the first bar graph.

I think the fungus is an enzyme inhibitor and is binding to the beta-amylase enzyme thus decreasing its activity. The fungus is a competitive inhibitor that binds to the enzymes active site, limiting the amount of starch beta-amylase reactions.

For my research, I would test he rate of beta-amylase reaction with the fungus' substrate. this would give me insight into hi=ow much the fungus is inhibiting the enzyme and to see if it is in fact a competitive inhibitor.


]]> 2017-10-18 14:34:12 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198259427 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198259664 1. agree- the graph shows increased fungal spore density at all locations after the flood.
2. The fungus could change the shape of the active site or block the enzyme.
3. I would follow up by comparing an affected active site with that of a control and see if the active site has been altered chemically.]]> 2017-10-18 14:34:36 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198259664 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198259962 The fungus might be damaging the part of the plant that produces the enzyme, or it might be affecting the temperatur eor ]]> 2017-10-18 14:35:03 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198259962 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198260732 I would have to collect the temperature and Ph of the potato flesh. My next research question would be if fungicides would reverse the potato to the sweet flavor. I would have to apply fungicides to some potatoes and see the effect.]]> 2017-10-18 14:36:31 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198260732 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198260818 I agree with the banners hypotheses because it]]> 2017-10-18 14:36:37 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198260818 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198261208 I agree with the botanists hypotheses because the second graph shows how the potatoes with the fungus negatively affected the rate of beta-amylase. The potatoes with fungus at a concentration of 60 ug/ml the starch the rate of beta-amylase was only 16 nmol/min. Compared to no fungus was 12nmol/min.]]> 2017-10-18 14:37:06 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198261208 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198261384 1) I agree with the botanists' hypothesis. The first graph shows how the fungal spore density had increased after the flood at all three sites. The second graph shows how the fungus decreases the rate of activity of the beta-amylase enzyme, which causes the potatoes to be less sweet. 
2) The fungus is interfering with the enzyme's ability to interact with the substrate, causing the starches to remain, instead of being turned into sugars. The fungus could be acting as an inhibitor, either binding in the active site in place of the substrate, or changing the shape of the enzyme. 
3) How does the presence of different amounts of fungus in the environment affect the activity of the beta-amylase enzyme? This could be investigated using an experiment with 4 different environments, each with a different amount of the fungus present. The control could be an environment with no fungus at all. One could also look at how the fungus inhibits the enzyme, and whether the enzyme changes shape, or simply binds to the fungus instead of the substrate. ]]> 2017-10-18 14:37:21 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198261384 ehopkins2018 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198261512 1.)I agree with the botanists' hypothesis regarding the potato fungus. This is because the graph shows that the initial rate of beta-amylase activity was lower when it was with fungus. The rate was higher without the fungus. 
2.) The fungus is stopping the substrate from entering the active site which is causing it to be inhibiting the function of the enzyme. The fungus is blocking it by creating its own substrates that can enter into the active site. 
3.) I would create a substance that has the beta-amylase enzyme in it. Putting the fungus in the substance we can observe how the substance/enzyme react. ]]> 2017-10-18 14:37:34 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198261512 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198264260 The fungus could be blocking the active site of the enzyme because it creates its own substrates that fits into the beta-amylase active site.]]> 2017-10-18 14:41:56 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198264260 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198265212 Create a substance that has the beta-amylase enzyme in it, then put the fungus into the beta-amylase substance and observe how the substance/enzyme react]]> 2017-10-18 14:43:23 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198265212 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198266469 1. I agree with the botanists' hypothesis because the enzyme rate of activity decreased with the presence of the fungus, and following the typhoon the fungal spore density increased drastically. 
2. I think that the fungus may be a competitive inhibitor (blocking the substrate from the active site), a non competitive inhibitor (binds to the enzyme changing the shape of the active site) or negatively affects the site that produces either the enzyme or the substrate. 
3. I would need evidence proving that when the fungus is removed from the potato, the enzyme activity returns to its normal state. To do this I would remove the fungus and measure the change (if any) in the rate of reaction and compare it to the sweet potatoes without the fungus. My next research question would be in what way is the fungus inhibiting the enzyme, and if there is no change in the rate of reaction once the fungus is removed, if it is an irreversible inhibition. In order to investigate how the fungus could be inhibiting the enzyme's function I would study where the fungus is present and what role that part of the potato plays in the creation of the enzyme or the substrate. ]]> 2017-10-18 14:45:19 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198266469 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198273295 I agree with the botanists' hypothesis because the fungus caused the rate of the beta-amylase activity to lower as shown by the graph.

The fungus is decreasing the productivity of the enzyme by preventing the substrate from reaching the active site.

For my research, I would test the rate at which the beta-amylase reacts originally to tell how the fungus has inhibited the enzyme behavior.]]> 2017-10-18 14:53:32 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198273295 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198290807 I agree with the botanist, because there are significant changes in reaction rate when comparing the potatoes with and without the fungus. At 60 μg/ml, without fungus has a rate of reaction at over 20, but with fungus drops to only about 16.

The fungus acts as an inhibitor, blocking the substrate from attaching to the enzyme, therefore preventing the reaction from taking place. This is why the enzyme is turning less starches to sugar, therefore making the potato not as sweet as one without the fungus.

To prove this, the amount of product produced by each potato must be measured to determine the rate of reaction. One potato will not have fungus, and acts as the control, while the other has the fungus. ]]> 2017-10-18 15:17:31 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198290807 dlloyd2019 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198291181 1. Yes, I agree with the botanists' hypothesis regarding the potato fungus. When the fungus is present, the amount of beta-anylase activity decreases by about 5 nM / minute.
2. The fungus might have been inhibiting the enzyme, whether competitively or not. Things in the fungus might have binded to the enzyme, either changing the shape of the active site or clogging the active site.
3. In order to prove that inhibition is acting on the enzymes, data would need to be collected from the potatoes in the presence of the fungus and not in the presence. If the fungus is affecting the pH or another aspect of the soil, plants w/o but near the fungus would also be affected. If only the potato with the fungus and no others is affected, there is a high chance that inhibition is working on the enzymes.]]> 2017-10-18 15:17:57 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198291181 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198292178 1: ]]> 2017-10-18 15:19:14 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198292178 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198292209 1: I agree with the Botanists because there is a higher initial rate of beta- amylase activity in the potato's with out the fungus. The potato with fungus have a much lower concentration.
2: The Fungus must be affecting the enzyme and activation site. The fungus is an Inhibitor that  is blocking the enzyme from fitting into the activation site causing a lower concentration. 
3: Evidence must be collected by analyzing the product resulting from a potato with fungus and with out the determine the rate of reaction.  ]]> 2017-10-18 15:19:18 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198292209 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198292814 1. I agree with the botanists. There is a clear relationship between fungi and the lack of breaking down starches. With this in mind, it would make sense that after a dramatic increase in fungal concentration that the potatoes would change in flavor.

2. The fungus may be inhibiting the function of the enzyme by acting as an inhibitor. Inhibitors bond to the enzyme and block the active site, thus blocking the substrate from bonding to the enzyme and breaking down. 

3. You would need to measure the amount of product resulting from a potato with the fungus, and one without. This would should the fungus's effect on the rate of reaction. ]]> 2017-10-18 15:20:16 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198292814 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198293025 1. Yes, I do agree with the botanists. I agree with them because beta-amylase is the enzyme that makes these potatoes sweet. By adding a fungi that can inhibit the function of beta-amylase the starches would not be able to change to sugars, making the potatoes less sweet and more starchy. 
2. The fungus could be inhibiting the enzyme. This means that it is competing for the active site and is winning. This doesn't allow the substrate to bond with the active site, resulting in less starch being converted to sugars and changing the taste of the potatoes. 
3. You would be able to measure the amount of product resulting from a potato with the fungus ]]> 2017-10-18 15:20:31 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198293025 jlindstrom2018 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198295417 1) Yes, I agree that the presence of the fungus inhibits the function of the sugar-producing beta-amylase enzyme. In the graph, the potatoes produced sugar at a lower rate with the presence of the fungus.
2)The fungus can be affecting the productivity of the enzymes as an inhibitor. The fungus could change the shape of the enzyme active site, or bond/block the enzyme active site.
3) You could use a microscope to examine the enzyme on plants with fungus and without fungus to locate the inhibitor on the enzyme.]]> 2017-10-18 15:24:06 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198295417 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198296019 1. I agree because any enzyme works best with a high concentration and a fast reaction and according to the graph the potatoes without the fungus had a faster rate in combination with a high concentration. While the potatoes with fungus had a low teaction rate 
2. The fungus blocks the plants from gaining proper sunlight, which prevents the plant from producing sugar because sunlight is necessary for photosynthesis to take place.
3. I would need to know if the amount of sunlight provided to each plant affects how much sugar they produce. I would comapre how much sugar is produced from a fungus covered potato to a regular potato, with the amount of sunlight provided to each plant being the constant]]> 2017-10-18 15:24:54 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198296019 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198296587 1.) I agree with the botanist's hypothesis because both graphs show that after the floods, the fungi density increased and that with fungi, the enzyme reaction is slower.
2.) The fungi could be allosteric, meaning it reduces enzyme activity by changing the shape of the enzyme so the substrate cannot fit into the active site.
3.) In order to investigate what is inhibiting the enzyme's function, put an enzyme that is unaffected by the fungus under a microscope to observe the active site. Then, put the enzymes affected by the fungus under the microscope, observe the active site, and compare.]]> 2017-10-18 15:25:44 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198296587 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198296769 1. I agree with the botanists' hypothesis because the first graphs shows there was a a greater density of the fungal spores at all three sites, after 4 months. Also the second graph shows how when the fungus decreases the beta-amylase activity.
2. The fungus may be affecting the amount of energy that is able to enter the tubers. The fungus is found on the plant part, which can prevent sunlight from entering the plant, and needs a lot of energy in order for the plant to convert the starch into sugar and the fungus would slow this process.
3. I would need to see if a plant is able to produce a lot of sugars if in a dark room, and got no sunlight. I would then compare that to the amount of sugars that are produced when the fungus is on the plant in the sun, and when the plant is in the sunlight alone. I would use these results to see if the fungus prevents the sunlight inhibiting the speed in which the starch is converted to sugars.]]> 2017-10-18 15:26:01 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198296769 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198297050 1. Yes, I agree with the botanist hypothesis regarding the potato fungus. In fact, one of the graphs compares the initial rate of beta-amylase activity with and without the fungus and the reaction rate without the fungus was higher than with the fungus. 
2. The fungus is inhibiting the function of the enzyme by interfering with the chemical reaction between beta-amylase and the starches produced. The fungus could have inhibited the reactions in two different ways, by blocking the active site not allowing starches to bind to the active site. It also could have in some way changed the shape of the ]]> 2017-10-18 15:26:23 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198297050 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198298260 1) I agree with botanists' hypothesis because the graphs show that there is a large presences of the fungus and the fungus does effect the initial rate of beta-amylase activity.
2) The fungus slows the potato plants ability to make energy by blocking the light on the green parts of the plant and taking energy through the skin of the tubers. The lack of energy prevent the plant from being able to preform the reaction of breaking down the starches into sugar.
3) I would need to see if a lack of energy caused by another source would have the effect on the enzymes ability to start the reaction. What effect on the potato plants potato does a lack of energy have? I would need to see how the plant reacts in a sunless environment, in a sunny environment, and a plant in the sun with the fungus.  ]]> 2017-10-18 15:28:10 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198298260 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198300170 1. I agree with the botanists' hypothesis, because according to the bar graph, the concentration of fungus increased after the typhoon. Then, according to the line graph, the fungus inhibits the rate of reaction.
2. What I think is that the fungus is secreting a compound in the soil or inside the potato which may be changing the pH in the soil or inside the potato. 
3. We will need to collect evidence about the fungus itself, including where it grows, what it consumes, and what compounds it can potentially create. My next research question would be "How does the fungus affect enzyme activity?". To research this, I would (1), grow the fungus on the potato. (2), test the pH of the potato, the temperature, and other factors that may affect the enzyme

]]> 2017-10-18 15:31:02 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198300170 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198300388 1. I do agree with the botanists' hypothesis because the enzyme's rate of reaction in the presence of fungus was significantly lower than the rate of reaction without the fungus. Also, it shows that the fungus was present after the flood, so it must be the fungus that is effecting the plants.
2. I think that the fungus may be inhibiting the function of the enzyme because it could be effecting the pH of the soil/plant, or it could be changing the temperature of the enzyme, causing the reaction rate to slow down.
3. In order to prove my prediction, I would need to see the pH before and after the flood, and the temperature before and after the flood to see what kind of changes occurred in those specific conditions. My next research question would be: How can you change the fungus or get rid of it in order to fix the enzyme and get it back to normal?]]> 2017-10-18 15:31:20 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198300388 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198302340 1) Yes I agree with the botanists hypothesis. Beta Amylase can have its activity inhibited by certain types of fungi, with clear evidence of a significant increase in fungi density and the 5nmol differential with fugni present on the low side in reaction rates, I think that the hypothesis from the botanists is both correct and justified 
2) I think that the fungi is changing the chemical enviornment of the potato to inhibit the function, by chaning production facts such such as pH level, temperature, and amount of enzyme and substrate. 
3)I would set up different experiments and test each of the factors. I would set up fungi vs no fungi groups, and test each factor to see it was affected by the presence of fungi and inhibited their function. ]]> 2017-10-18 15:34:22 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198302340 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198302397 1. I agree with the botanists' hypothesis regarding the potato fungus. The flood waters became a breeding ground for the fungus. This fungus causes a decrease in the rate of beta-amylase. When the enzyme is not functioning at a high rate the potatoes have less sugars and are not as sweet.
2. The fungus that is growing on the roads of the potatoes must be releasing a chemical that alters the rate of  the enzyme. The released chemicals could be changing the pH or temperature of the potato which affects the enzyme. 
3. Evidence that we would need in order to prove our prediction would would be finding out if the pH and temperature of the potato changes when fungus grows on the roots. Also, we would research the fungus and find out if it releases certain chemicals that could affect temperature and pH. The research question could be: Does the pH and temperature of the potato change when fungus grows on the roots? The steps for this investigation would be:
- take the pH and temp. of potatoes with no fungus on the roots
2. take the pH and temp. of potatoes with fungus on the roots
3. compare the data]]> 2017-10-18 15:34:29 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198302397 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198303348 1. Yes, I do agree with the botanist hypothesis regarding the potato fungus. The second graph provided shows that the reaction rate is higher without the enzyme when comparing it to the reaction rate with the fungus present. 
2. The fungus is somehow inhibiting the enzymatic reaction between the beta-amylase and the produced starches. This can be done in one of two ways, by either blocking the active site or by changing the active sites shape/configuration causing the chemical reaction to either not happen at all or happen at a much slower rate. The fungus also could have affected the potatoes access to sunlight causing it to produce starches either not all or at a slower rate. 
3. More information in regards to how the fungus interacts and affects the substrate and enzyme need to be collected. Also, what conditions cause this fungus to grow in the first place should be experimented upon. So two possible research questions could be, what conditions cause the fungus to grow and thrive? and How does the fungus either affect the substrate or enzyme?]]> 2017-10-18 15:36:07 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198303348 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198306604 2017-10-18 15:40:58 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198306604 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198306720 1. Yes, I do agree with the botanists' hypothesis regarding the potato fungus . This is because the flood waters acted as a breeding ground for the fungus, and therefore that fungus showed based on the data that there was a decrease in the rate of the beta-amylase. When the enzyme is functioning at a high rate the potato's therefore have less sugars and are not as sweet. 
2. The fungus could be growing on the roots of the potato's, or somewhere on the potato that must be releasing a chemical that alters the rate of the enzyme. The released chemical therefore, could be changing the temperature or the Ph. which then effects the enzyme. 
3. Evidence the we would need in order to prove our predictions would be the Ph. and temperature that the fungus thrives at and just more background about the fungus in general. A question could be: "How does the enzyme affect pH?" 
Steps could be... Conducting a way to grow the fungus on the potato and then test it for ph. ]]> 2017-10-18 15:41:10 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198306720 https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198515479 1. I agree with the botanists' hypothesis regarding the potato fungus because as shown in the graph the rate of beta-amylase was much higher when there was no fungus present proving that the fungus is preventing the change in flavor as it slows the rate of beta amylase. 
2. The fungus could be inhibiting the function of the enzyme by effecting the environment which as we know from our lab, different variables effect how enzymes work. 
3. To prove this prediction I would need to figure out for example the temperature prior to the presence of the fungus, the pH level, etc to compare it with the conditions with the fungus and see how these variables may be effecting the enzyme's rate of reaction. ]]> 2017-10-19 03:00:09 UTC https://padlet.com/abuckley9/a399wnmsoug5/wish/198515479