In which I do an enzyme lab

     An enzyme is a protein that produces a chemical change to cause a reaction. This is the whole idea that digestion is based around. Food with enzymes OR substrates go in and match (or don't i.e. Lactose intolerance) like puzzel pieces that fits into a substrate or enzyme to tear it apart and cause a reaction. This might better be explained in a science picture.

Simple but it gets the point across.

     I was able to test enzymes and reactions in three different ways: differing amounts of enzyme added to 6 mL of 3% H202 and water, the effects of different temperatures on the same solution but with the same amount of enzyme, and the effects of differing pH levels on the same solution with the same enzyme levels. So basically I took some enzymes and a substrate and changed around the scenario a few times before stopping it up with a science tool that electronically measures and graphs the pressure in kiloPascals. Ultimate Goal...... Blow the top off of one mega pressurized test tube.

       I began this experiment with 4 vials containing 3mL Water and 3mL hydrogen peroxide (as the substrates). Taking a pipet filled with yeast (as the enzyme), I added 20 drops into the first vial. Capping it with the pressure sensor, the computer measured the rising pressure within the vial over 3 minutes. I repeated this step but added 40 then 60 then eventually 80 to the next three vials. At 120 kiloPascals, many other amateur scientists experienced a pressure explosion at this point with even less yeast droplets... So I think, "darn... better try a little more yeast next time... maybe the next experiment will prove useful."

                                                             Disappointment level- Low; "Oh darn"

     This experiment has been nicely summarized in the graph below.

  

     The next experiment involved the same set up, but instead of changing the drop amount, we kept them all at 40 drops of yeast. I first divided the vials into different temperatures; room temperature, 40°C, 70°C, and freezing. After each vial acquired the corresponding temperature, I stuck those bad boys in the test tube rack and begun the pressure measurement process.  I had assumed the hottest test tubes would we the most reactive, but I soon found that this was wrong! That doesn't make any sense (yes it does, because heat kills enzymes ((denature)), but it was unexpected). 

     STILL NO EXPLODING! I thought that at least one of these temperatures would react explodingly with the 40 drops of enzyme!!!!

Disappointment level- Increasing "But you were the chosen one."

     So obviously kicking it up a notch should do the trick right? I think so too. This final experiment involves 3 different liquids of pH 4, pH 7, and pH 10 accordingly. In order to measure pH values on enzyme reaction, I had to keep the enzyme drops of yeast all the same, yet I reallyyyyy wanted that explosion.  Regretfully, I resumed the experiment with 40 drops of yeast to each solution. The results are seen below.

   After the most hardy of pH enzyme tests, I was failed again: NO EXPLOSION! 

Level of Disappointment- Very; extreme anger.

     The results of this major disappointment were just enough to make me go crazy. So I added an insane amount of yeast to the best reacting pH solution and let it roll. Finally, there was sweet sweet explody bliss. we had finally achieved it!

In Which I Break down the Cell

     Being the major building block to our lives, we really oughtta know what a cell really is. This Prezi will explain the two major cell types and their varying functions in a nifty tree-shaped presentation!
http://prezi.com/ap9rrbhyssru/composition-of-the-cell-v20/ 

Old Spice Swag Guy thanks you for your time.

In Which I Test Diffusion and Osmosis in a Lab

      Osmosis is more than a character in a poorly written, partially animated film with a Bill Murray cameo. In actuality, osmosis is the process of molecules being able to pass through a semi-permeable membrane according to their size. 

Osmosis Jones is to Bill Murray as Alice in Wonderland is to Johnny Depp.

     To illustrate, imagine the entrance to a bouncy house; sometimes these things are pretty tiny (because you know.... they're not meant for you).  Imagine a massive inflatable wall of these entrances stacked beside and above each other. This disappointment wall represents the semi-permeable membrane. Presumably you are a normal sized adult (maybe even freakishly tall), there is no way you are going to fit through any of those stupid openings. If a four-year-old were to trot up alongside to one of those openings, you can bet your Science degree that he is going to zip through that bouncy door like he's the CEO of bouncy doors. This is the whole point of the dialysis bag, to let solvents pass from a less concentrated solution to a more concentrated one.

cat=cell, guitar=membrane, gif= incredible.

     To begin my experiment, I filled a cup with water. Next, I filled a specially made dialysis bag with a starch concentrate, which was a cloudy white color, and tied it off. After this, I added a few drops of iodine to the water, causing it to turn into an apple juice color. I then dipped a  glucose testing stick (AKA pee test stick) into the apple juice water. The color of the square stayed a light green (for now mwhahahahah).The bag was allowed to sit in the h2o water solution overnight so that it could fully do it's job, though after about 45 minutes, I could see the apple juice color had become slightly lighter.

Looks like apple juice, tastes like death...

          The next day, we found that both the inside of the bag and the contents of the cup were completely clear, aside from a solid white glob that had some purple black that had settled at the bottom of the dialysis bag. Using a new pee stick, I found that the light green turned to a slightly darker green... A turtle green.... Showing a difference in the contents of the solution. The iodine was small enough to pass into the bag and mix with starch over time and eventually settle at the bottom; because the starch was an adult who couldn't fit through the bouncy house door, it had no choice but to stay and mingle with apple juice.

Eagle view of the new clarity of the solution for maximum glob visual

     From this lab we were able to determine the diffusion of two subjects, and further understand how the dialysis process works. Here is a table to recap this lab.

In Which I Take a Quiz on Membrane Structures

     In this post I will be sharing the questions and answers to quizzes that are contained in this google doc. These quizzes will be based off the information and lectures found in these two links. http://telstar.ote.cmu.edu/biology/MembranePage/index2.html
http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/macampbell/111/memb-swf/membranes.swf

In Which I Link Macromolecules in a Web

This post is designated to a web that will be added to as we progress through the year. This web maps different macromolecule catagories with their properties and various inserts. Follow this link to view the web on bubbl.us.
Web Link :o

Thus concludes another Biology post. Just kidding we LOVE it.

In Which We Identify Carbohydrates in a Lab

     Using test tubes and mixing chemicals is stereotypical science class, it's what young students look forward to most. Unfortunately there is no fizzing and exploding in these glass vials. This lab was simply mixing carbohydrates (mono, di and poly- saccharides) with Iodine and Benedict's (not Benedict Cumberbatch the Sherlock actor. Shame on you.) solution. Mixing them up and sometimes heating them causes them to react and change. Shall we begin the science?

Let the science commence!

     Benedict's solution is blue and requires heating to view a reaction while Iodine is brownish-orange and only needs mixed. Taking 3 test tubes, I added a few drops of Benedict's solution to Mono-, Di-, and Poly-.  This magic is shown in the picture below!

Not very exciting... Yes I meant to put the 'E' in 'Di'

P.S. Mono- not pictured because of an unnamed failure.

     After adding the droplets of Benedict's I transported them to a super Sciencey heated water machine. I let the three test tubes sit in the water for 3 minutes. When I retrieved them I found an intense surprise.

I set them up in this fabulous test tube rack for your viewing pleasure.

As you can see the benedict process made this monosaccharide a super amazing orange color

     From this experiment we can see that neither a disaccharide or a polysaccharide will react with Benedicts solution, so a monosaccharide will react with the Benedict's solution. The next reactant we tried with the saccharides was iodine, which was applied with pipet to the subjects. 

That's not soy sauce....... it's science sauce.

     From the iodine solution, the only saccharide that showed a major reaction was the polysaccharide. From this experiment, we were able to see that a mono- and di- saccharide will not react with iodine. To give this experiment set a quick glance, a table will now be provided.

     For the next part of the lab, I tested various household items with the Benedict's and iodine solution to see what form of saccharide they contained. I chose Karo syrup (corn muck), Spray starch (what you use to make stiff clothes), and a concoction we'll call Cheerio Juice (the water that contained cheerios for a very long time.) The last is just a way to test the saccharide in the sugar of the beloved breakfast cereal, which requires a liquid form. This set differs from the last as we began with the iodine solution instead.

These are the subjects Cheerio Juice; Karo Syrup; and Spray Starch respectively.

Come on Karo Syrup... Why do you have to be so difficult.

     Adding Iodine to the subjects showed more than just Karo Syrup's refusal to cooperate. From this experiment we found that cheerios and spray starch contain polysaccharides, because neither a monosaccharide nor a disaccharide will react to  the iodine test. 

Accidentally chose the best subjects to test...... Ever!

    Benedict's solution obviously proved to be way cooler with our subjects. After being heated for three minutes we were able to see that spray starch is the only subject that does not contain a monosaccharide. Here is a table to summarize what happened in the last few panels.

By "yes" I meant there was indeed a reaction and vice versa.

   With this information, you can test your own set of weird subjects (including Tiger Toenails) and see whether it contains a monosaccharide or a polysaccharide!

     

In Which I Quest the Web to Identify Carbohydrates

The document to my quest can be Here.  This web quest identifies meaningful carbohydrates such as monosaccharides, polysaccharides and disaccharides. It's a good time.

Loki knows how good a time it is.

In Which I Quest the Web on the Subject of Collagen

A web worksheet on the importance of collagen in the body. The link is this-a-way ->

Whoops, actually I meant down there... follow the crazy eyes.

yesssssssssssss hereeeeee

In Which I Quest the Web on Macromolecules

     This link will take you to a google doc that explains macromolecules and carbohydrates in sugars.
This here be the link

Successful science post!

In Which I Test Antacids and pH Levels

     Heart burn is a common effect in the body. The pain of heartburn is caused by high acidity content in the stomach. Acidity is measured with a pH unit on a scale of 0 to 14. The scale measures how acidic or basic a substance is. Let's have a illustrative representation of that shall we?

Obviously the pH scale is super dope.

     Acid has a very high hydrogen ion concentration while alkaline has a very low hydrogen ion concentration. If you were to put pH paper to your stomach acid, you would get one of these colors, which would direct you to how acidic or alkaline it would be. So when you're feeling the effects of that spicy enchilada what do you do? You reach for your favorite handy antacid!

    During this procedure, I sort of ended up with a hybrid question; "How much more effective is each level of tums, and where does one lone off brand antacid stand?" Since I wasn't able to use real stomache acid, I substituted it with vinegar, which registers around 3 on the pH scale. From the cart of supplies I gathered some pH paper, 4 beakers, 4 stir sticks, and a mortar and pestle set. The test subjects I chose were Tums Ultra 1000, Tums Regular Strength, Tums Extra Strength 750, and Equate Antacid.

Oh yes... Look at that artistic angle! Shaken' it up!

     I crushed 2 Tums Ultra 1000 tablets with my fancy grinder and added them to 20 ml of vinegar. After an immediate stir, I let it sit for exactly one minute. After the alotted time passed, I tested the mixture with a small strip of pH paper. The Result was a 6 on the pH scale.

    I repeated this step with Tums Regular Strength, which also received a 6 on the pH scale, Tums Extra Strength 750, which fell short with a 5, and Equate Antacid, which scored another disappointing 5. The object was to get as far from a 3 on the scale in order to prove the antacid's effectiveness.

The information can be viewed in this amazing graph.

     I assumed Tums Extra Strength 750 would have a more profound impact than Tums Regular Strength... it seemed fairly obvious, but Tums proved me wrong... Shame on Tums for not understanding how logic works. The tablets were all very closely matched, but if you're feeling the extra burn, reach for the Regular Strength or Ultra 1000. So in answer to my original question, they're all basically the same.

     On a side note, the equate brand worked the same as Tums Extra Strength 750, but it came out like a thick foam... It's kind of extremely unsettling. So although it does the trick and you save a dollar, I don't think I'd be comfortable having this happening in my organs-

                

                     On the left is normal, on the right we have sea foam.         See? Unsettling. Alarming. Ew.

In Which We Learn the Properties of Water

     Water is a basic need for every living thing (err mah gerd, i herd ner erdea!) Aside from being a very small fraction of today's favorite beverage, water has more to it than I thought; Something I thought I knew so well shows up with his whole life story at my doorstep and I think "Dude, I had no idea you were this complicated." But I digress- during this Lab, I attempted to test and understand 4 key components to the properties of water: 'cohesion', 'surface tension',  'adhesion', and 'hydrogen bonding'. Surprisingly, I found myself revisiting some middle school tactics in my spiritual journey to understand our friend, water.

That's some crazy water you guys.

     Real quick, I'd like to explain the anatomy of a water molecule. You of course know that it's proper name  is H2O. 'H' is the representation of Hydrogen, while 'O' represents Oxygen (not the Oprah Winfrey logo). Put together it looks much like a Mickey Mouse head (thank you Walt Disney!), with the H's being the two ears, and the O being the face. 

Aww Yiss, water molecule!

      I began the lab using penny and a pipette (great name for a band), to experiment the effects of cohesion. We all did this in middle school to see how water 'sticks together', which is basically the definition of cohesion. So, you can see that the water collected in a massive bubble, balanced carefully on the surface of the penny. I found that you can fit any number of drops on it, but commonly, I got around 60 droplets. The reason water clings to itself, even when you think it should spill right off, is because each water molecule can link to four others... yet those four others can link to yet again four more. Cohesion: It's an infinity loop.

Look at that talented photoshopping.

     My next stop in my spiritual journey was the town of Surface Tension-e`. But seriously, surface tension is a liquids' ability to resist an external force. This can be easily explained by asking you to apply a drop of water to a waxy science paper ( which decreases the waters adhesion powers, which I'll get to soon), and instructing you to cut the drop in half with a toothpick. Of course it only molds around and absorbs the toothpick, which is the effect of cohesion. So what I'm trying to say is that water has no armor to resist any outside forces, water is forced to take on the full blow of the toothpick and let it sink into it's body... Surface Tension, everyone.

A horrific moment of battle for Water.

     As promised I will now address Sir Adhesion. Adhesion is water's ability to stick to other things... Not itself. This could be sticking to your windshield, your umbrella or the petals on a flower (another of water's attempts at being artistic). 

 Just a picture of water trying to be all artistic by clinging dramatically to this guy's hipster glasses.

     Now I was told that Hydrogen Bond could very well be the 42 of the science universe, but I don't know how well I trust this source. In hindsight I probably should've put this paragraph somewhere closer to cohesion. I say this because cohesion is possible through hydrogen bonding. A hydrogen bond is formed when the mouse ears become attached to the head of a different water molecule, turning it into a strange Siamese Side Show act. This is more scientifically explained in this picture.

Sciency Wiency, yeah.

     In closing you might wonder how all of this information could matter to the universe. Well we all know how important trees are to the universe, and how trees need water to live. Thanks to hydrogen bonding, water can endlessly stick to itself in a chain, allowing it to pull strands of itself through the ground, roots, trunks and leaves of trees. Awesome, right? Thanks for reading this exciting episode of Splash Gordon! Does he defeat the evil Evaporator?  Find out next week, here on this blog!

Sources:

ga.water.usgs.gov

johnkyrk.com

http://www.appstate.edu/~goodmanjm/rcoe/asuscienceed/background/waterdrops/waterdrops.html 

In Which We Relate The Scientific Method to Corn!

     Upon hearing the words 'scientific method' in school, I would finally feel confident and comfortable with an assignment. It was so easy to just punch in information to a box in a certain order. It was totally awesome.

     But then it all changed when this blog was assigned.

     The classic method did get one thing right- the epicenter of scientific theorizing is testing ideas with evidence.

     True evaluation of a scientific problem/question will never have a definite answer, it will always be open to further interpretation and change. Multiple testing could provide mew insight or raise new questions, not to mention webbing put into many other slightly unrelated theories and questions. Aside from the web that truly represents scientific study, why should it be a one man army attacking the endless possibilities? A full theory should be shared with fellow scientists as well. It's said that two heads are better than one, why not fifteen? Having other viewpoints allows a different way of thinking  or providing information you may have missed or possibly misinterpreted. Topics and processes thought experimentation often circle you back to the main problem you were first presented with.



     So with a small portion of understanding aside, why don't I explain how I got to test put my new understanding of the scientific method through virtual corn.



     In my virtual corn palace, I basically experimented with the effects of infestation on types of corn and its final kernel output.  The infestation is the independent variable because it is the thing that changes the outcome of each experiment (such as high infestation yeilds few kernels in Corn Type A, low infestation yeilds same amount through Corn Type B, which must be some pretty weak corn...) All other variables such as lighting, water, temperature and soil is assumed same, therefore constant, and truthfully just means those are things I can ignore because they (for this particular experiment) have no effect... so forget about those things. Now for a simplified layout, since my plans of having tables absolutely will not work with this program!

•  The Corn crop BT123 with low infestation:
• 1.  164.0 kernels
• 2.  162.6 kernels
• 3.  168.3 kernels
• The Corn crop Golden Crop Non-BT with low infestation:
• 1.  177.9 kernels
• 2.  171.2 kernels
• 3.  170.6 kernels

From this particular set I believe that BT123 is slightly weaker and is effected only slightly more by a low infestation of ECB.

•  The Corn crop Golden Crop Non-BT with high infestation:
• 1.  135.4 kernels
• 2.  139.6 kernels
• 3.  138.3 kernels 
• The Corn crop BT456 with high infestation:
• 1.  157.3 kernels
• 2.  157.0 kernels
• 3.  159.0 kernels

So, again the Golden crop comes out superior, yet this experiment can be redone a thousand different ways just by changing the infestation amount from none to high with several different crops at different rates (i.e. Golden crop at high infestation vs. BT456 with no infestation). And then later you can change the constant variable to test the effect on corn when the soil, water, or light is altered. Isn't corn fun?





Sources:

• http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/howscienceworks_01
• http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/genbio/virtual_labs/BL_01/BL_01.html
• http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/jullian-smith?before=1338529559