BI 102 Lab 2 Writing Assignment
How did oxygen generation by Elodea vary in dark and light conditions?
This assignment requires you to evaluate a hypothesis and communicate the results of your
experiment O2 generation by Elodea under different conditions. The questions below are meant to
guide you to reporting the key findings of your experiment and help you think through how to
explain the findings and draw conclusions from them in a scientific manner. Because you’ve
already had an opportunity to practice these skills once, this assignment is worth 16 points.
ASSIGNMENT: Please respond to the following questions to complete your laboratory write up. For this
assignment you will only focus on O2 generation experiment. Make sure that your write up is accurate, and
clearly written so that it is easily readable.
A grading rubric is provided on the second page of this assignment. To earn full points on your write up,
you must provide answers that align to the “meets” column of your grading rubric as well as meeting all
“Quality of Writing and Mechanics” elements described in the rubric. There are also some tips on pages 3-4
of this assignment to help you succeed.
FORMAT:
• Type your responses, using 1.5 or double spacing.
• Include the section headings (Hypothesis, Results, Analysis) and question number (example: 1, 2, 3,
etc) in your answers but do not rewrite the question.
• Graphs may be made with a computer program (example: Microsoft excel, Mac numbers, etc) or may
be neatly produced with a ruler on graphing paper.
• Print out the cover sheet on page 2 of this assignment, read and sign the academic honesty statement,
and submit it with your write up. Your instructor WILL NOT accept a write up without the signed cover
sheet.
DUE DATE: Your write up is due at the beginning of class next week. Late assignments will have 1 point
deducted per day up to 5 days, at which point the assignment will be assigned 0 points.
Hypothesis and Prediction – Part 1 of Rubric
1. What did you think was going to happen in this experiment and why? You may find it helpful to state your
answers to these questions as an “if-then” hypothesis-prediction. Be sure you have included a biological
rationale that explains WHY you made this hypothesis/prediction. Think about what is required for and
what is produced by the process of photosynthesis.
Results – Part 2 of Rubric
2. How much O2 was generated by Elodea in dark and in light conditions? Answer this question by creating
a bar graph that shows the results of your experiment. If you need assistance building a graph, there is a
Guide to Graphing resource available on your Moodle lab course site.
Analysis- Part 3 of Rubric
3. Explain why you think that the results shown in your graph support or refute your hypothesis (remember
we never “prove” anything in science). Consider all your data and the overall data pattern as you answer
this question. Don’t ignore unusual data that may not seem to fit into a specific patterns (“outliers”).
Explain what you think might be behind these unusual data points.
4. What is the biological significance of your results? What biological concepts explain completely why these
events happened in the experiment? How do these results help you understand the process of
photosynthesis? Think about giving a specific example.
References- Mechanics Checklist
5. Provide at least one full citation (make sure you include an in-text citation that pinpoints where you used
this resource) for a resource you made use of in performing the experiment, understanding the concepts
and writing this assignment. (Perhaps your lab manual? Your textbook? A website?) If you used more
than one resource, you need to cite each one! If you need help with citations, a Guide to Citing References
is available on your Moodle lab course site.
Please print out and submit this cover sheet with your lab writeup!
Lab Writeup Assignment (1) Assessment Rubric- 16 points total Name: ________________________________________
Element Misses (1 point) Approaches (3 points) Meets (5 points)
Hypothesis
Clarity/Specificity
Testability
Rationale
___Hypothesis is unclear and hardto-understand
___Hypothesis is not testable
___No biological rationale for
hypothesis or rationale is fully
inaccurate
___Hypothesis included is clearly
stated, but not specific or lacks
specific details
__Hypothesis is testable, but not in a
feasible way in this lab
___Some foundation for hypothesis,
but based in part on biological
inaccuracy
___Hypothesis included is clearly
stated and very specific
___Hypothesis is testable and could
be tested within lab parameters
___Rationale for hypothesis is
grounded in accurate biological
information
Graph
Title
Axes
Variables
Key
Graph clarity
Data accuracy
___Graph lacks a title
___Axes are not labeled
___Variables not addressed in graph
___No key or way to tell data points
apart
___Graph is hard to read and
comparisons cannot be made:
Inappropriate graph type or use of
scale
___Data graphed is inaccurate or
does not relate to experiment
___Graph has a title that is not very
descriptive
___Axes are either unlabeled, or
units are unclear or wrong
___Variables addressed in graph, but
not on correct axes
___Key included, but is hard to
understand
___Graph is somewhat readable,
comparisons can be made with
difficulty: Appropriate graph type, but
not scaled well
___Data graphed is partially
accurate; some data is missing
___Graph has a concise, descriptive
title
___Axes are labeled, including
clarification of units used
___Variables on correct axes
___A clear, easy-to-use key to data
points is included
___Graph is clearly readable and
comparisons between treatments are
easy to make: Graph type and scale
are appropriate to data
___Data graphed is accurate and
includes all relevant data, including
controls (if needed)
Analysis
Hypothesis
Scientific language
Data addressed
Explanation
___Hypothesis is not addressed
___Hypothesis is described using
language like proven, true, or right
___No explanations for data patterns
observed in graph or data does not
support conclusions.
___No biological explanation for data
trends or explanations are completely
inaccurate
___Hypothesis is mentioned, but not
linked well to data
___Hypothesis is not consistently
described as supported or refuted
___Some data considered in
conclusions but other data is ignored.
Any unusual “outliers” are ignored
___Explanations include minimal or
some inaccurate biological concepts
___Hypothesis is evaluated based
upon data
___Hypothesis is consistently
described as supported or refuted
___All data collected is considered
and addressed by conclusions,
including presence of outliers,
___Explanations include relevant and
accurate biological concepts
Quality of Writing and Mechanics: Worth 1 point. Writeup should meet all of the following criteria!
Yes No
☐ ☐ Write up includes your name, the date, and your lab section
☐ ☐ Write up is free from spelling and grammatical errors (make sure you proofread!!)
☐ ☐ Write up is clear and easy-to-understand
☐ ☐ Write up includes full citation for at least one reference with corresponding in-text citation
☐ ☐ All portions of write up are clearly labeled, and question numbers are included
Plagiarism refers to the use of original work, ideas, or text that are not your own. This includes cut-and-paste from websites,
copying directly from texts, and copying the work of others, including fellow students. Telling someone your answers to the
questions (including telling someone how to make their graph, question #2), or asking for the answers to any question, is cheating.
(Asking someone how to make the graph for this assignment is NOT the same as asking for help learning excel or some other
software). All forms of cheating, including plagiarism and copying of work will result in an immediate zero for the exam, quiz, or
assignment. In the case of copying, all parties involved in the unethical behavior will earn zeros. Cheating students will be
referred to the Student Conduct Committee for further action. You also have the right to appeal to the Student Conduct
Committee.
I have read and understand the plagiarism statement. ____________________________________________________
Signature
Guidelines for Good Quality Scientific Reports
Hypothesis and Prediction: The hypothesis is a tentative explanation for the phenomenon. Remember
that:
• A good hypothesis and prediction is testable (and should be testable under the conditions of our lab
environment; For example, if your hypothesis requires shooting a rocket into space, then its not
really testable under our laboratory conditions).
• Your explanation can be ruled out through testing, or falsified.
• A good hypothesis and prediction is detailed and specific in what it is testing.
• A good hypothesis provides a rationale or explanation for why you think your prediction is 
reasonable and this rationale is based on what we know about biology. 
• A good prediction is specific and can be tested with a specific experiment. 
Examples*: 
I think that diet soda will float and regular soda will sink. 
{This hypothesis misses the goal. It is not specific as we don’t know where the sodas are floating and 
sinking, and it does not provide any explanation to explain why the hypothesis makes sense} 
Because diet soda does not contain sugar and regular soda does, the diet soda will float in a bucket of 
water, while regular soda will sink. 
{This hypothesis approaches the goal. It is more specific about the conditions, and it provides a partial 
explanation about why the hypothesis makes sense, but the connection between sugar and sinking is 
unclear} 
If diet soda does not contain sugar, then its density (mass/volume) is lower than that of regular soda 
which does contain sugar, and so diet soda will float in a bucket of water while regular soda sinks. 
{This hypothesis meets the goal. It is specific and the rationale- sugar affects density and density is what 
determines floating or sinking in water- is clearly articulated} 
*Note that these examples are for different experiments and investigations and NOT about your 
photosynthesis lab. They are provided only to help you think about what you need to include in your write 
up. 
Graph: The graph is a visual representation of the data you gathered while testing your hypothesis. 
Remember that: 
• A graph needs a concise title that clearly describes the data that it is showing. 
• Data must be put on the correct axes of the graph. In general, the data you collected (representing 
what you are trying to find out about) goes on the vertical (Y) axis. The supporting data that that 
describes how, when or under what conditions you collected your data goes on the horizontal (X) 
axis. (For this reason time nearly always goes on the X-axis). 
• Axes must be labeled, including the units in which data were recorded 
• Data points should be clearly marked and identified; a key is helpful if more than one group of data 
is included in the graph. 
• The scale of a graph is important. It should be consistent (there should be no change in the units or 
increments on a single axis) and appropriate to the data you collected 
Examples: 
{This graph misses the goal. There is no title, nor is there a key to help distinguish what the data points mean. The 
scale is too large- from 0 to 100 with an increment of 50, when the maximum number in the graph is 23- and makes it 
hard to interpret this graph. The x-axis is labeled, but without units (the months) and the y-axis has units, but the label 
is incomplete- number of what?} 
{This graph meets the goal. There is a descriptive title, and all of the axes are clearly labeled with units. There is a key 
so that we can distinguish what each set of data points represent. The dependent variable (number of individuals) is 
correctly placed on the y-axis with the independent variable of time placed on the x-axis. The scale of 0-30 is 
appropriate to the data, with each line on the x-axis representing an increment of 5.} 
0 
50 
100 
Number 
Stream location 
Arthropod Abundance in Oregon Streams 
0 
5 
10 
15 
20 
25 
Little Luckiamute Nestucca Neskowin Rickreall 
Total number of species 
Stream location 
Arthropod Abundance in Oregon Streams 
Insects 
Crustaceans 
Other Arthropods 
Analysis: You need to evaluate your hypothesis based on the data patterns shown by your graph. 
Remember that: 
• You use data to determine support or refute your hypothesis. It is only possible to support a 
hypothesis, not to “prove” one (that would require testing every possible permutation and 
combination of factors). Your evaluation of your hypothesis should not be contradicted by the 
pattern shown by your data. 
• Refer back to the prediction you made as part of your hypothesis and use your data to justify your 
decision to support or refute your hypothesis. 
• In the “if” part of your hypothesis you should have provided a rationale, or explanation for the 
prediction you made in your hypothesis (“then” part of hypothesis”). Use this to help you explain 
why you think you observed the specific pattern of data revealed in your graph. 
• You should consider all of the data you collected in examining the support (or lack of support for 
your hypothesis). If there are unusual data points or “outliers” that don’t seem to fit the general 
pattern in your graph, explain what you think those mean. 
Examples: 
I was right. Diet Pepsi floated and so did Apricot Nectar. Regular Pepsi sank. Obviously the regular 
Pepsi was heavier. This helps us understand the concept of density, which is a really important one. 
{This analysis misses the goal. The hypothesis isn’t actually mentioned and the data is only briefly described. There is 
no explanation of the importance of the Apricot Nectar results. Finally, there is no connection to how these results 
help understand density or why it is biologically important} 
I hypothesized that diet soda would float, and all three cans of diet Pepsi did float while the regular 
Pepsi sank. This supports my hypothesis. Both types of Pepsi were 8.5 fluid ounces in volume, but the 
regular Pepsi also contained 16 grams of sugar. This means that the regular Pepsi had 16 more grams 
of mass provided by the sugar in the same amount of volume. This would lead to an increase in 
density, which explains why the regular soda cans sank. When we put in a can of Apricot Nectar, 
which had 19 grams of sugar, it floated. This was unexpected, but I think it is explained by the fact 
that an Apricot Nectar can had a volume of 7 fluid ounces, but the dimensions of the can are the 
same as that of a Pepsi can. A same-sized can with less liquid probably has an air space that helped it 
float. The results of this experiment help us understand how the air bladder of a fish, which creates 
an air space inside the fish, helps it float in the water and also how seaweeds and other living things 
with air spaces or other factors that decrease their density keep from sinking to the bottom of the 
water. 
{This analysis meets the goal. It clearly ties the hypothesis to the results and outlines what they mean. It describes 
how the results support the hypothesis, but also explains a possible reason behind the unusual results of the Apricot 
Nectar. Finally, there is a link to how this experiment helps us understand biology}

Assignment 1: Bottling Company Case Study

 

Imagine you are a manager at a major bottling company. Customers have begun to complain that the bottles of the brand of soda produced in your company contain less than the advertised sixteen (16) ounces of product. Your boss wants to solve the problem at hand and has asked you to investigate. You have your employees pull thirty (30) bottles off the line at random from all the shifts at the bottling plant. You ask your employees to measure the amount of soda there is in each bottle. Note: Use the data set provided by your instructor to complete this assignment. 

Bottle Number	Ounces	Bottle Number	Ounces	Bottle Number	Ounces
1	14.23	11	15.77	21	16.23
2	14.32	12	15.80	22	16.25
3	14.98	13	15.82	23	16.31
4	15.00	14	15.87	24	16.32
5	15.11	15	15.98	25	16.34
6	15.21	16	16.00	26	16.46
7	15.42	17	16.02	27	16.47
8	15.47	18	16.05	28	16.51
9	15.65	19	16.21	29	16.91
10	15.74	20	16.21	30	16.96

Write a two to three (2-3) page report in which you:

1.      Calculate the mean, median, and standard deviation for ounces in the bottles.

2.      Construct a 95% Confidence Interval for the ounces in the bottles.

3.      Conduct a hypothesis test to verify if the claim that a bottle contains less than sixteen (16) ounces is supported. Clearly state the logic of your test, the calculations, and the conclusion of your test.

4.      Provide the following discussion based on the conclusion of your test:  

a. If you conclude that there are less than sixteen (16) ounces in a bottle of soda, speculate on three (3) possible causes. Next, suggest the strategies to avoid the deficit in the future.

Or

b. If you conclude that the claim of less soda per bottle is not supported or justified, provide a detailed explanation to your boss about the situation. Include your speculation on the reason(s) behind the claim, and recommend one (1) strategy geared toward mitigating this issue in the future.

 

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

·         Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides.  No citations and references are required, but if you use them, they must follow APA format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.

·         Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

 

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

·         Calculate measurements of central tendency and dispersal.

·         Determine confidence intervals for data.

·         Describe the vocabulary and principles of hypothesis testing.

·         Discuss application of course content to professional contexts.

·         Use technological tools to solve problems in statistics.

·         Write clearly and concisely about statistics using proper writing mechanics.

 

 

 

CASE STUDY: SUH Incorporated Company Overview: SUH Incorporated: SUH is a light (value added) manufacturer in the Emergency Response Management market, and offers a variety of products to support domestic and international disaster relief efforts. Some of their products are: rapidly deployable structures, custom mobile command trailers, gas mask filter canisters, etc. SUH has built its reputation on the personal relationships fostered by its regional sales representatives and has an extensive network of community contacts. The sales representatives are proud of the best-in-breed product offering and are frequently called for live product demonstrations. SUH Company Stats (Last Quarter Results): Gross Annual Revenue: $30 Million/year Outstanding Debt: $20 Million Available Cash: $4 Million Average Sales Margin: 15% SUH made significant profits during a recent hurricane impact on the gulf coast. The executive management and board of directors felt that the time was ideal to acquire two companies that differed noticeably from their current business, CarbonTech and MyRentals. CarbonTech: A small activated carbon and filter manufacturer with NIOSH approval for their filter design. CarbonTech’s IT infrastructure is small (25 computers, 3 servers); the Operations Manager, Joe DeCline, has been servicing all IT needs. He takes great pride in the Epicor Vista® Software that he runs on a Progress® database. This has been a family business for years, and Joe’s father Jay manages the business very closely. Generally, CarbonTech is resistant to change. MyRentals: This medium size event services company provides tent rentals for a variety of events; they have been a “big player,” renting tents, AC Units, portable professional kitchens, etc. to everything from the Super Bowl to personal weddings. No event is too large or too small. The company’s General Manager, Bobby Buddy is the quintessential nice guy. He has a great personal relationship with most of his 200 full time employees, and even some of the 300 seasonal workers. The IT administration has been completely outsourced, and MyRentals is unhappy with the current level of support. The cost to support IT in their 14 satellite offices and use the Microsoft Dynamics GP® ERP system is consuming their very valuable cash. The Technology Environment: As the Director of Information Technology for the combined companies, you find three very different environments. The current CEO of SUH, Rock Martin, is technology averse – historically IT capital equipment purchases have been limited to less than $5,000/year. This is in stark contrast to your direct supervisor the CFO, Neil Robber, who loves to be connected. CarbonTech’s General Manager, Jay DeCline, is willing to invest in technology, but only if his son, Joe approves the purchase. Joe believes that he has already provided CarbonTech with everything they need in the areas of Operations and IT Infrastructure. Joe is fond of saying “If it aint broke don’t fix it.” Bobby Buddy, GM for MyRentals, is inherently trusting of his advisors, and has purchased all recommended services and support from his telecommunications, IT, and ERP support providers. Your IT staff consists of yourself as Director of IT, a senior database developer, and a ½ time PC technician. Each company has its challenges: The parent company, SUH is cash poor and unprofitable. CarbonTech is very profitable, but does not earn enough to support the other companies, and is very resistant to change. MyRentals has placed too much trust in the individual branch managers to run localized operations and is now only breaking even; they desperately need to get control of their financials, but each branch has different procedures for material acquisitions. Their “just get it done” attitude has resulted in poor margins and poor documentation on all purchases. Now with many more assets, personnel, and business challenges, the executive management is turning to you to help alleviate some of their financial stress with sound IT solutions that will demonstrably improve SUH’s ability to operate and the “bottom line.” With so many different stakeholders you know that your analysis and recommendations must be sound! Challenges and Opportunities: SUH has many challenges and opportunities as it works to combine the three companies into one integrated enterprise. The company could benefit from any number of enterprise-wide implementations that would improve its sales support, its manufacturing and supply services, and its corporate financial management, as described below. Sales Support The historical root of SUH’s success has been its regional sales representatives, and there is no reason to expect otherwise in the future. Each sales representative returns to the company’s headquarters periodically for product training and a PC upgrade. You have noticed, even in your short time at SUH, that everyone stores their information in a different format. SUH has been warmly received by all their customers. Despite that fact, however, there is some fear that the market for new purchases in the rapidly deployable shelter product line may be evaporating. The shelter product line has been the leading revenue generator at 60% of all revenue. Lately, SUH’s established customer base is more interested in shelter rental options than purchase options. Suffice it to say that SUH’s sales team is working long hours trying to sell the products they have been trained on (i.e. SUH’s historical product line). SUH wants to continue to manufacture the deployable shelters, but is willing to lease them through the MyRentals subsidiary. SUH would like to reduce the total sales force, make them more efficient in their use of technology, and use the same sales force to sell and lease the shelters, depending on customer requirements. Your task is to propose an efficient IT solution for the mobile sales force to support them as they sell and lease products of both SUH and MyRentals. Manufacturing and Supply Services SUH has been using the filters made by the newly acquired CarbonTech company in its filter canister product and now wants to completely integrate the product line, manufacturing the correct number of filters and having them available at the canister plant just in time to be used in making the canisters. The sales of the canisters is increasing at a pace that SUH will be able to use all the filters made by CarbonTech. In addition, SUH will be the sole provider of deployable shelters to the MyRentals subsidiary. Therefore, the requirements for sales and leases of the shelters will impact the manufacturing process; and the amount of shelters manufactured will determine how many can be sold or leased. Since deployable shelters are a primary product of SUH, and are a significant portion of the leasing business of MyRentals, you have decided to focus on that product line as you propose improvements in the IT support. Your task is to propose a solution to the just-in-time supply of filters to the canister manufacturing process and to ensure the manufacturing line for the deployable shelters is producing the right number of shelters to fulfill the sales and leasing requirements. Corporate Financial and Inventory Management SUH is supporting three different financial systems for their business functions, which have been independent. For a publicly traded company, this presents an accounting nightmare. Each company reports independent financials and each company has different report formats. This makes the integration needed for combined reporting nearly impossible. Every quarter the accounting staff, IT Staff and executive management spend nearly 4 weeks producing end of quarter reports. Consequently, annual inventory is also challenging – once again, three systems, three inventory procedures. The annual inventory covers only the permanent assets of SUH and its subsidiaries, not the products being manufactured, leased, or sold. Financial systems currently in use are: SUH – Infor ERP Visual® CarbonTech – Epicor Vista® MyRentals – Microsoft Dynamics GP® SUH spends approximately $10K/year on private consultants to support a legacy version of “Visual.” SUH is not current on their service contract. Both CarbonTech and MyRentals are current on their licenses and service contracts. Below is a summary of expected annual costs: InforERP Visual: $25K to bring all 25 licenses to the current build, 10K for independent support, $10K for annual renewal of licenses. Epicor Vista: $16K for 10 licenses with support. Microsoft Dynamics GP: $25K for 25 licenses, $10K for support. Your task is to propose a solution for integrating the financial management and inventory systems for SUH and its two subsidiaries to significantly reduce the time and effort required to produce the quarterly reports and to ensure accuracy. Stage 1 – Analysis and Recommendation Using the case provided, propose a technology solution that results from your analysis of the business environment. First, analyze the business environment and select one of the three challenges/opportunities areas where application of technology would align with the strategic outcomes to improve the business. Then, provide three different recommendations that you would have for improvements in that challenge/opportunity area. All three recommendations do not have to employ technology, but at least one must. From your recommendations, select a specific technology solution and describe how that solution would contribute to business goals. Your analysis will be presented in a two- to three-page memo to Rock Martin, the CEO of SUH, Inc., using a Microsoft Word memo template. Write the memo as if you were actually writing to your boss and need to convey the background and information you used to develop your recommendations.

I NEED THE QUESTION ANSWERED NO LATER THAN 6:00 PM (EASTERN TIME).

 

QUESTION:

A bank wonders whether omitting the annual credit card fee for customers who charge at least $3,000 in a year will increase the amount charged on its credit cards.  The bank makes this offer to an SRS of 400 of its credit card customers.  It then compares how much these customers charge this year with the amount that they charge last year.  The mean increase in the sample is $246, and the standard deviation is $112.  Is there significant evidence at the 1% level that the mean amount charged increases under the no-fee offer?  State Ho and Ha and carry out a significant test.  Use significance level 0.01.

 

Thanks.