APPROVAL SHEET

Complete report of general biology with title “Experiment of Lazzaro

Spallanzani”, created by :
Name : Ummi Qalsum
Reg. Number : 091204174
Class : B (ICP)
Departement : Physics
Group : V (Five)
After checked by assistant and Assistant Coordinator, so this is report accepted.

Makassar, November 2009

Assistant Coordinator Assistant

(Djumarirmanto, S.Pd) (Nirma Arsyad)

Nim.061404064

Known By
Lecturer of Responsibility

(Ir. Muh. Wiharto, M.Si)

NIP.132 006 81
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

A. Background
Earlier times people think that life originated from inanimate objects.
but it is not logically possible that a living thing comes from an inanimate
object. There are many events that people used to make living standards that
comes from an inanimate object.
For example when people saw the mouse out of the gutter so they will
think that the mice born from the gutter itself.
After a study of living things about his origins so some researchers and
scientists believe that life does not come from inanimate things, but from their
own living.
There are a lot of research about the origin of living things, some use
of meat placed on the jars, using the broth at erlenmeyer flask, there is also the
test tube.
To be able to know in detail how scientists and researchers to the
conclusion about the origin of living things then we will know very well how
the steps so that the creation of this theory.
One of the experiments we'll do is an experiment conducted by
Lazzaro Spallanzani, the laying of the stock in a test tube with different
treatment. This study is very useful for the development of the theory of the
origin of living things that really that the human mind evolved.
B. Experiment’s Purpose
This experiment aims to provide opportunities for students to follow
the way of thinking and the steps that have made scientists / researchers in
solving biological problems, especially answering the question "Where is the
origin of life?".
C. Experiment’s Benefit
Students will feel and know how the mind and the steps that have
made scientists / researchers in solving biological problems, and able to
answer the question "Where is the origin of life?".
 CHAPTER II
PREVIEW OF LITERATURE

Lazzaro Spallanzani (10 January 1729 - 12 February 1799) was an Italian

biologist and physiologist who made important contributions to the experimental
study of bodily functions, animal reproduction, and essentially discovered
echolocation. His research of biogenesis paved the way for the investigations of Louis
Pasteur. Spallanzani was a Catholic who researched the theory about the spontaneous
generation of cellular life in 1768. His experiment proved that microbes move
through the air and that they could be killed through boiling. This work paved the
way for later research by Louis Pasteur (Anonim; 2009).

In 17th century Antony Van Leewenhook succesed to make a microscope.

With it, he could see small things. The discovery of leewenhook restimulated other
scientist to test the truth of experiment spontaneus generation (Wesley, 2003).

Biogenesis is the process of lifeforms producing other lifeforms, e.g. a spider

lays eggs, which develop into spiders. It may also refer to biochemical processes of
production in living organisms (Anonim; 2009).

Generatio spontanea

The ancient Greeks believed that living things could spontaneously come into
being from nonliving matter, and that the goddess Gaia could make life arise
spontaneously from stones — a process known as Generatio spontanea. Aristotle
disagreed, but he still believed that creatures could arise from dissimilar organisms or
from soil (Anonim; 2009).

Francesco Redi, an Italian physician, proved as early as 1668 that higher

forms of life did not originate spontaneously, but proponents of abiogenesis claimed
that this did not apply to microbes and continued to hold that these could arise
spontaneously. Attempts to disprove the spontaneous generation of life from non-life
continued in the early 1800s with observations and experiments by Franz Schulze and
Theodor Schwann. In 1745 John Needham added chicken broth to a flask and boiled
it. He then let it cool and waited. Microbes grew and he proposed it as an example of
spontaneous generation. In 1768 Lazzaro Spallanzani repeated Needham's
experiment, but removed all the air from the flask. No growth occurred. In 1864,
Louis Pasteur finally announced the results of his scientific experiments. In a series of
experiments similar to those performed earlier by Needham and Spallanzani, Pasteur
demonstrated that life today does not arise in areas that have not been contaminated
by existing life. Pasteur's empirical results were summarized in the phrase, Omne
vivum ex ovo, Latin for all life [is] from eggs (Anonim; 2009).

The theory of spontaneous generation was finally laid to rest in1859 by the
young French Chemist, Louis Pasteur. He boiled meat broth in aflask, heated the neck
of a flask in a flam until it became pliable, and bend in to the shape. Air could enter
the flask, but airbone microorganisms could not (Coven, 2000)

Law of Biogenesis

Redi's and Pasteur's theory that modern organisms do not spontaneously arise in
nature from non-life is referred to as the law of biogenesis. Thomas Huxley made the
declaration that biogenesis was indeed a law of nature in his 1870 address to the
British Association for the Advancement of Science, where he summarized the long
scientific debate of Abiogenesis vs. Biogenesis (Anonim; 2009).

After rejecting the abiogenesis theory or generatio spontanea by louis pasteur,

so biogenesis theory grew with statements “Omne vivum ex ovo, omne ovum ex
vivo”. It means life from egg, and egg from life too. Or “Omne vivum ex vivo” it
means life from the first life (Bambang, 2006).
 CHAPTER III
OBSERVATION METHOD

A. Place and Date

This experiment’s is done at:
Day and Date : Wednesday, October 28th 2009
Time : at 13.10-15.00 pm
Place : Laboratory of Biology
Faculty Mathematis and Science
Makassar State University
(at the 2nd east floor part)
B. Tools and Materials
1. Tools
1) 4 pieces tube
2) 1 piece test tube racks
3) 2 pieces cork
4) 1 spiritus lamps
5) 1 piece wood clamps
2. Materials
1) 40 ml broth
2) 1 piece wax
C. Work Procedure
1) All of the test tube, filled with broth each 10 ml
2) Boil the broth of 1st tube, with a spiritus lamps
and closed with cork
3) Boil the broth of 2nd tube, with a spiritus lamps
and leave open
4) Covered the broth of 3rd tube, with broth water
cork
5) The broth of 4th tube, was left open
6) Put all the test tube in the tube rack and observe
every day, for 5 days
 CHAPTER IV
OBSERVATION RESULT

A. Observation Result
Table Observations
Hari ke-
Tube
1 2 3 4 5
Colour Clear Clear Clear Clear Clear
1st Smell - - - - √
Tube Sediment - - √ √ -
Foam - √ √ √ √
Colour Clear Turbid Turbid Turbid Turbid ++
2nd Smell - √ √ √+ √ ++
Tube Sediment - - √ √ -
Foam √ - √ √ -
Colour Clear Turbid Turbid + Turbid ++ Turbid ++
3rd Smell - - - - √
Tube Sediment - - √ - -
Foam √ - √ - √
Colour Clear Turbid Turbid + Turbid + Turbid ++
4th Smell - - √ √ ++ √ +++
Tube Sediment - - √ √ √
Foam √ - √ - -
1) 1st tube, boil broth with a spiritus lamps and
closed with cork
2) 2nd tube, boil broth with a spiritus lamps and
leave open
3) 3rd tube, covered with broth water cork
4) 4th tubes, broth was left open
Notes: Plus (+) sign indicates that more othe reaction yesterday
B. Discussion
1st Tube
This tube was contained 10 ml of broth. It was boiled and sealed. The
first day until the last day of observation, the colour of the broth was
clear/pure. For the smell, because this tube closed so it smelled at the last day.
The sediment of the first tube, first day and the second day was nothing. The
third day and the fourth day there was a sediment but the fifth day no
sediment again. For the foam of the broth the first day was not and the second
until the fifth day there was foam.
2nd Tube
This tube was contained 10 ml of broth too. It was boiled and leave
open. The first day of observation, the colour of the broth was clear/pure but
the second until the fifth day the colour of the broth be disturb. For the smell
of this tube at the first day no smelled but the second until the fifth day, there
was smelled. Its sediment, the first day was nothing and the second day until
the fourth day there was a sediment but the fifth day no sediment again. For
the foam of the broth the first day there was foam and the second until the
fifth day there was not foam.
3rd Tube
This tube was contained 10 ml of broth too. It was not boiled and
sealed/closed. The first day of observation, the colour of the broth was
clear/pure but the second until the fifth day the colour of the broth be disturb.
For the smell, because this tube closed so it smelled at the last day. Its
sediment, the first day until the second day was nothing and the third until the
fourth day there was a sediment but the fifth day no sediment again. For the
foam of the broth the first day there was foam and the second day there was
not foam, the third day there was foam again, the fourth day there was not
foam again, and the fifth day there was foam.
4th Tube
This tube was contained 10 ml of broth too. It was not boiled and
leave open. The first day of observation, the colour of the broth was clear/pure
but the second until the fifth day the colour of the broth be disturb. For the
smell of this tube at the first and the second day there was no smelled but the
third until the fifth day, there was so smelled. Its sediment, the first day and
the second day was nothing and the third day until the fifth day there was a
sediment. For the foam of the broth in this tube the first day there was foam,
and the second day there was no foam, the third day there was foam, and the
fourth day until the fifth day there was not foam.
That means there were not microbes that live in 1st tube because the
broth was boiled so microorganisms was died, then this tube was sealed so no
microorganisms that could entered this tube.
 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSSION AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclussion
From the observations can be concluded that:
1. at the 1st tube there is no microba so so that no living creature can
emerge new because the bacteria were dead at the time of boiling
broth and the tube was closed and there are bacteria in the air can not
enter.
2. at 2nd tube was not closed but was heated, even though microbes in the
broth was dead but the bacteria could enter the air tube.
3. at 3rd tube was closed but not heated, although the bacteria in the air
could not enter into the tube but the microbes in the broth was not
dead.
4. at 4th tube was not closed also not heated, so that bacteria could enter
the air tube and the microbes in the broth was not dead.
Because 1st tube there were not microbes that live in that the broth was boiled
so microorganisms was died, then this tube was sealed so no microorganisms
that could entered this tube and that means life was not originated from
inanimate objects. And the answering of the question “Where is the origin of
life?”, of course from living things.
B. Suggestion
For students to observations done very carefully so that the writing of
the observations can be discussed with both
For Assistant, please to watch out and notice how the observations of
students, then so that not one of observation and discussion will be right.
 BIBLIOGHRAPY

Anonim. 2009. Lazzaro_Spallanzani. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Lazzaro_Spallanzani

Anonim. 2009. Biogenesis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biogenesis

Anonim. 2009. Abiogenesis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
Coven, Gleen. 2000. Biological Theoris. Boston: World Discovery
Wesley, volk. 1993. Mikrobiologi Dasar. Jakarta : Erlangga
Tim Pengajar. 2009. Penuntun Praktikum Biologi Dasar. Jurusan Biologi FMIPA
UNM