PHOTOSYNTESIS SUMMATIVE PROJECT: PROBLEM: How does doubling the amount of carbon dioxide from .

5g of bisodium carbonate dissolved in 100mL of water to 1g. dissolved in 100mL of water affect the rate of photosynthesis in elodea? HYPOTHESIS: If the amount of Sodium Bicarbonate (baking soda) is doubled in the 100ml of water, then the rate if photosynthesis will increase.

THEORY: Photosynthesis is when a plant absorbs the energy from the sun and CO2 in its stomata and turns that into food (energy) and oxygen. Photosynthesis needs to include water, sunlight, and CO2 to happen. It takes place in the leaves and the chloroplasts of the plants. If sodium bicarbonate is added to the water, then the rate of photosynthesis will increase. That is because the amounts of reactants are increasing. When sodium bicarbonate is mixed with water, it creates more carbon dioxide. I can relate this the most recent lab with the elodea because when the amount of light increased, photosynthesis increased as well. In this case, it is carbon dioxide that is being increased, and CO2 and Light are both reactants. Therefore, I think photosynthesis will increase. However, I think it will only increase slightly. In 2012, the average increase for every class was a 21% increase from .5g to 1g, so this proves that when baking soda does increase the rate of photosynthesis.

PROCEDURE FOR CARBON DIOXIDE (BAKING SODA) 1. Measure and cut at an angle elodea 7 to 9 cm. 2. Remove a few leaves from end of stem and slightly crush end of stem. 3. Measure mass in grams and record. 4. Put elodea stem side up in a test tube. 5. Fill test tube with water and baking soda solution (1 gram to 100 mL of water). 6. Put tube in rack and adjust lamp with WHITE light 5 cm from top of test tube. 7. Turn on lamp and wait 1 minute. 8. After 1 minute, begin counting small, medium and large bubbles for 3 minutes. Record data. 9. Repeat with .5 grams and 100mL of water. 10. Repeat for Trial 2 DATA/OBSERVATIONS:

Trial 1 ___grams
Small x 1 CO2 1 gram

Oxygen Produced in 3 minutes at 5 and 10 cm

Medium x 2 34 medium bubbles Large x 3 12 large bubbles Total 88 bubbles total

42 small bubbles

.5 gram

31 small bubbles

28 medium bubbles

18 large bubbles

190 bubbles total

Notes:

Trial 2 _____grams
Small x 1 CO2 1 gram .5 gram

Oxygen Produced in 3 minutes at 5 and 10 cm

Medium x 2 50 large bubbles 38 medium bubbles Large x 3 45 large bubbles 30 small bubbles Total 190 total bubbles 139 total bubbles

95 small bubbles 71 smalls

Averages
CO2 First trial Second trial .5 Average: 25.6 Average: 46.3 1 Average: 29.3 Average: 63.3 6

NOTES:

Baking Soda
.5g CLASS PERIOD AVERAGES 1 2 3 4 6 7 TOTAL/5 1g % Oxygen Decrease/Increase

108 69 33.7 23.7 26.3 3.8 192.4/6

139 47 26.5 14.3 36.3 72.8 243.2/6

22% increase 32% decrease 40% decrease 28% increase 95% increase

AVERAGE

44.1

56

Baking soda & the Rate of Photosynthesis

160 c 140 o A 120 2 m 100 o p 80 u r 60 n o 40 t d 20 u o 0 c f e d 139 108 .5 grams 1 gram

44.1

56

Period 1 avg.

7th grade avg.

Conclusion: In this lab, my group tested whether doubling the amount of baking soda in 100ml of water would increase the rate of photosynthesis. I hypothesized that the rate of photosynthesis would increase, if the amount of baking soda was was doubled by .5g. I predicted that the rate of photosynthesis would increase by at least 35%. My hypothesis was correct, however my prediction of the percent increase was incorrect. However, my hypothesis is correct. Analysis: I noticed that in the group with baking soda, there was a big discrepancy in the data, with a range of 105. Our groups number, 105, and period 7s number, 3.8 affected the average, so to find a more reasonable average, taking out those two numbers would be necessary. With that said, the average would be 38 oxygen bubbles. Out of all the groups tested, only 50% of the 6 groups had an increase of the rate of photosynthesis, and 2/3 of those groups had an outlier. There are many inconsistencies in the data, and some of these procedures have flaws, which can be easily fixed. I think that our group, and another groups data was inconsistent because, in our groups case, we forgot to only count bubbles emerging from the stem, and we counted bubbles that we just saw in general. I assume that a good amount of bubbles contributing

to our large numbers might of emerged from the leaves. Our groups two counters were very exact in counting, and they had very keen eyes throughout the trials, however, they counted every bubble. In the baking soda group, there was a 95% increase. I think this because the counters didnt count as well when they counted an average 3.8 oxygen bubbles, and then, when they counted an average 72.8 oxygen bubbles, they had a fresh pair of eyes and they looked more carefully. Another possibility is that for period 7s (95% increase) group might have had different counters for .5g and 1g. With all due respect to the group of period 7, I do not believe that changing counters is a good idea. That is because some counters keep a more precise watch on bubbles, and some might not see what others are, which is fine, as long as the data isnt inconsistent. If I were to conduct the same experiment again, I would make the procedure more clear and detailed so avoiding these inconstancies would simpler. In the procedure, I would make sure to make a reminder to only count bubbles emerging from the stem. I would also write to have set positions for each person. Therefore, everybody would have a position and a job, and no one would have nothing to do. This also means that someone should be ASSIGNED to a job. For example, the timer should stay a timer for both trials, the counter should be counter for both trials. That is because people have different methods and habits for different things. If people switch off, than an inconstancy is more common because the number could possibly have a higher range.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Coolidge-Stolz M.D., Elizabeth, et al. Focus On Life Science. Boston, Mass: Prentice Hall, 2008. Washington State Department of Ecology. American Waterweed- A Common Native Plant. February 24, 2003. November 2013. <http://www.ecy.wa.gov/Programs/wq/plants/native/elodea.html> Young, Paul. The Botany Coloring Book. Cambridge, New York: Harper and Row, 1982.