An Investigation to find out the most effective biological washing powder on starch.

Authors Avatar

An Investigation to find out the most effective biological washing powder on starch.

        What I think will happen.

I think that the washing powder containing the most amounts of enzymes will be the most effective having the largest zone of clearing.  Radion claims that their biological washing powder has the most amounts of enzymes.

        Why I think this will happen.

I think this will happen because according to the lock and key method the higher the concentration of enzymes the faster the reaction will take place.  The rate is directly proportional to the concentration, so the higher the concentration the bigger the zone of clearing.

 

        The factors that effect my investigation and how I intend to control them.

Amount of washing powder,        (measured volume)        

Volume of water,        (standard volume)

Concentration of ‘dirt’        (Pure chemicals at 0 concentration)

What the makeup of the ‘dirt is,        (same as above)                       

Temperature,        (incubated at 40oc)

How long the ’dirt’ has been engraved,        (-----)

How long it is ‘washed’ for,        (they will be incubated for 48 hours)

How it is ‘washed’.        (-----)

        What I will measure.

Join now!

I will measure the size of the zone of clearing i.e. the area in which the enzymes have digested.  It will be measured using a ruler in millimeters for the most accuracy.

        My plan.

        Place 6 corked bored holes in each of the 5 agar plates. (Do not fully take the lid off the agar plate because bacteria may grow on the plate) (Make sure the cork borer is sterile for the same reason.)

        In the first hole of each agar plates, place a solution of 1g (washing powder) to 25cm3 (water) of Aerial.

        Then in the second, place ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

Avatar

This is a good attempt at an report on an investigation. 1. The report is well structured, although some of the subheadings are not needed. 2. The method, apparatus and results sections are all good. 3. The conclusion should be restructured. 4. The evaluation is brief and contains very vague statements. 5. The diagrams that have been included are relevant. *** (3 stars)