Free Cockroach Lab Report Report Sample

Lab Report

Background
Growth of bacteria is a wide topic that has vastly been discussed. In essence, such growth can be classified under cell division or asexual reproduction through binary fission. Although this is the case, there are a number of factors that affect the growth of bacteria. Theoretically speaking, bacteria have the ability to grow in any temperature (Koch, 1995. P 65) . Despite this, there is an optimum point under which bacteria experience the fastest growth. Nutrients also play a major role in aiding bacteria growth. This is because of the fact that bacteria tend to feed on nutrients. Oxygen, water and a nutrient’s acidity also play a significant role in determining the growth of bacteria. Because of the diversity in the factors that influence bacterial growth, it is essential to carry out experiments to determine the extent to which such factors affect such growth. Despite these factors being clear, there is a big debate as to whether a barrier is effective at preventing or reducing the growth of bacteria (Werkman, 1991. P87). This debate can be settled by carrying out various experiments to see the extent to which bacterial growth is affected by the barrier, or whether such an opinion has no experimental background.

Hypothesis

Growth of bacteria can be affected significantly by using a mosquito net as a barrier. The two experiments are geared towards understanding the extent to which this argument is true or false. Theoretically, the argument is that a cockroach will release gases that will, in one way or the other, affect the growth of the bacteria. With the two experiments, it is possible to come up with what the correct position is. Without such experiments, it would be difficult to come up with conclusive results.

Materials

Methods
The two experiments are geared towards understanding the various factors that affect the growth of bacteria. At the beginning of the experiment, we cut the mosquito net to produce two pieces, each for every box. The two boxes would serve as the control experiment and the main experiment. To each of the two plastic boxes, we inserted bacteria dishes. The boxes were of the same size, color, shape and intensity. This was essential in order to be sure that external factors that were not being tested do not play any role in affecting the outcomes of the experiments. To one of the plastic boxes, we put a cockroach in. To ensure that this cockroach did not directly interfere with the bacterial dish, we used a little hard paper to build a bridge. This meant the cockroach could not physically tamper with other factors that ought to remain constant. The second plastic box only has the bacteria dish, without the cockroach or the hard papers. After setting up these materials in the manner that is described, a stipulated period of time is allowed to ensure that the results are captured effectively. This timeframe should range between five to seven days. After the expiry of the seven days, the results should be analyzed to determine whether there are any differences between the two set ups. It is important to make such analysis after seven days so as to ensure other factors that are not being tested do not have an impact on the overall outcome of the experiment, distorting the results and giving misleading information.
As already argued above, this process entails having an original experiment and a control experiment. The control experiment is necessary in monitoring how the variables would respond if they were subjected to different conditions or factors. In this exercise, the control experiment entailed using a cockroach in one of the plastic boxes. This is essential in an attempt to compare the results of these experiments.
This experiment has both dependent and independent variables. The dependent variable (measurable and affected in the experiment) is the bacteria dish that will be subject to analysis after one week to determine the extent to which it has been affected by the various conditions it is subjected to. The independent variable (not changed depending on other variables) in this case is the duration after which the experiments will be analyzed. The time frame for this experiment is exclusively one week, after which an analysis will be carried out to determine the changes that take place. Such independent variables are essential to keep in that they determine the results that are expected. Failure to keenly observe them may lead to the necessary information being distorted, contrary to the spirit of the experiment.

Results

After a week, the results were compared to analyze whether there were significant differences as to how the bacteria had changed. In the experiment without the cockroach, there was a big mould in the plastic box. This implied that the bacteria had grown to a large size. Such a growth, however, was also experienced in the plastic box without the cockroach in a similar manner. There were no obvious differences between these two experiments as they had yielded results that were similar. Despite each box having different components, the differences were so minimal that it would be of no use to conclude that such were as a result of the mosquito net and the cockroach that was used. With this in mind, the general assumption would be that the mosquito net and the cockroach did not play any role in shaping the results of the growth of the bacteria. The general perception or notion before the experiment was that the bacteria in the plastic box containing a cockroach would grow more than the bacteria in the plastic box without a cockroach. However, this was proved not to be true as both had a similar extent of growth. Because of this, the experiment leads to the argument that bacterial growth is not affected by the presence of any organisms in any way.

Conclusions

The results of the experiment fundamentally negated the hypothesis of this research. According to the hypothesis, growth of bacteria can be affected significantly by using a mosquito net as a barrier and a cockroach. As such, the expectations were that the growth experienced in the different boxes would differ in a great way. This is, however, not the case as the two show similarities in growth. This conclusion fits into the big picture in that the results are essential in analyzing the factors that determine the growth of bacteria. Errors might have played a part though. Such errors could include differences in the size of the boxes.

References

Koch, A. L. (1995). Bacterial growth and form. New York: Chapman & Hall.
Werkman, C. H., & Wilson, P. W. (1991). Bacterial physiology. New York: Academic Press.