• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Amylase Lab

Extracts from this document...


Hypothesis: After swabbing the starch auger with the source, a positive reaction will occur if amylase is present in the source. Hypothesis of Reaction of Sources Substance Number Substance Shape Reaction Hypothesis 1 Carrot Carrot Negative ( - ) 2 Saliva Smiley face Positive ( + ) 3 Radish Ball Negative ( - ) 4 Snow Pea Sun Negative ( - ) Independent Variables: amylase source Dependant Variable: quantity of starch digested by source DC Reaction of Sources Substance Number Substance Reaction Shape Reaction Blue Color Intensity 1 Carrot No shape visible Negative ( - ) 5 2 Saliva Clear smiley face Positive ( + ) 0 3 Radish Faint ball Positive ( + ) 3 4 Snow Pea No shape visible Negative ( - ) 5 Key: Blue Color Intensity of Shape 0 - no blue is present 1 - faint blue 2 - light blue 3 - medium blue 4 - blue 5 - dark blue Conclusion The hypothesis that was stated in the beginning was proven by the reaction of the sources to the starch auger. ...read more.


The main problem with the experiment was the crushing of the substance that was swabbed. The availability of the mortar and pistol was meek and so sufficient time for grinding the sources was not available to the experimenter. The substance was ground up for different periods of time and so the availability of the source within the water added to the mortar could have been smaller. This could have greatly affected the experiment because when the substance was swabbed onto the auger using a Q-Tip and collecting the source from a solution of water and source, there could have been different levels of source and water being swabbed onto the amylase. The concentration of the source, therefore, could have been greater or less, and so this could have caused a greater, smaller, faster, or slower reaction of the amylase in the substance on the starch in the auger. Another problem that was evident in the experiment was that the iodine that was used was not diluted enough to allow the digested starch show through the dark blue iodine. ...read more.


If there was a change in color of the auger of the snow pea or the carrot, then the change was not seen. The investigation could have been improved much greater if there was more time to let the source that was swabbed to stay on the auger before adding the iodine. This would have given more time for the amylase in the sources to break down the starch and a clearer result would have been found. The above first error could have been fixed by gathering more materials for the grinding of the sources, having more time to complete the experiment, and splitting the class into days to do the experiment so that materials were more readily available. The second problem could have been fixed by diluting the iodine solution so that the digesting of the starch could have been more visible. The third error could have been solved by taking a picture of the auger as soon as the iodine was added to the auger. This would have captured the initial reaction of the starch reaction to the iodine. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate Biology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate Biology essays

  1. An experiment to investigate the action of saliva on starch:

    Place about 5cm3 of the remaining dilute saliva in a test-tube and boil it gently for about 10seconds.Leave it to cool. 12) Repeat steps 4 to 7, but this time mix boiled saliva with starch suspension in a clean syringe.


    2.16 3.01 14 1.35 1.76 2.14 2.98 15 1.34 1.75 2.13 2.95 16 1.34 1.75 2.12 2.92 17 1.33 1.74 2.11 2.90 18 1.33 1.73 2.10 2.88 19 1.33 1.73 2.09 2.86 20 1.33 1.72 2.09 2.85 21 1.32 1.72 2.08 2.83 22 1.32 1.72 2.07 2.82 24 1.32 1.71

  1. Lung Capacity Fitness Level

    spirometer and it can be said that the air is 'collected' by the spirometer so therefore the value will be a positive number. Vital lung capacity = | negative value | + positive value Diagram 1.2: Pasco Spirometer and mouthpiece [5] As human beings are needed for this experiment, there

  2. Biology Industrial Melanism of Peppered Moth Lab

    Number of Melanic Moths and Light-Coloured Moths left on Dark- Coloured "Tree Bark" Trial Number Number of Melanic Moths Number of Light-Coloured Moths 1 19 11 2 22 8 3 25 5 4 28 2 5 26 4 Table 15.

  1. Drosophila Lab: Eye Color

    Place this under a dissecting microscope to view the flies. 3. Distinguish male flies from female flies by looking for the following characteristics: a. Males are usually smaller than females. b. Males have dark, blunt abdomens, and females have lighter, pointed abdomens.

  2. Biology independent investigation, Ecology

    fluoride in the water Independent variable Along with a control of pure distilled water differing concentrations of sodium fluoride will be used. The concentrations will be prepared through a dilution series. 0,01mg (1PPM) per 100mls is the Australian maximum standard.

  1. Hill Reaction Lab

    The temperature kept constant by measuring so. Again this is a factor that is likely to cause negative impact on the raw data and disturb the experiment's results. Method Material Used: * Potometer (With its own 10cm ruler with 0.5 mm uncertainty.)

  2. gmf. positive and negative drawbacks.

    This is mostly because of the lack of information, and maybe some imbedded interests that do not want to see such significant progress in agriculture and food production. On the other side of the equation, the argument states very firmly our lack of knowledge about the long term consequences of

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work