Papain Limitations

The independent variable in the experiment was the mass (or amount) of the cheese and bacon balls.

This experiment separates meat into an acetone-soluble part and an acetone-insoluble part. The calculations are based on the principal components of meat being fat (acetone soluble) and protein (acetone insoluble or fat-free meat in report sheet). More realistically, the principal components of meat are fat, protein, and water. Water is acetone soluble. Based on this information, the calculations correctly calculate what quantity, % fat or % fat-free meat? Is the incorrectly calculated quantity over or underestimated?

The purpose of this experiment was to test multiple brands of popcorn under the same setting in order to conclude which one statistically popped the most kernels. I tested the butter flavor of Orville Redenbacher, Wal-mart’s Great Value brand, and Pop Weavers. The different bags of popcorn were popped in the same microwave for the same amount of time, 3 minutes and 15 seconds. Then, the popped corn was counted, as well as the un-popped kernels, in order to determine a ratio, and then I recorded the results in the data table. I repeated these steps two more times for a total of 3 trails for each brand. Then I compared the ratios of all the bags to determine which brand yielded the most popped corn. The statistical technique used to evaluate the data was to find a ratio between the number of kernels in the bottom of the bowl and the number of popped kernels. To find this, I divided the number of the actual popped corns by the total number of kernels left in the bottom of the bowl. The ratios and percent were then compared. Once all my results were in the data table, I averaged the 3 trials for each brand of popcorn.

My problem question was, “What happened to the mass and the volume when I dropped an egg in vinegar, corn syrup and water for 24 hours?” To answer this question, you would have to follow the procedures. You need to carefully handle the egg. If you drop it, the the data will be incorrect. Drop the egg in different types of liquids (water, vinegar, and corn syrup) and let them sit there for 24 hours. The next day, record the mass and volume of the egg and different qualitative observations. At the end of this lab, I knew that the procedure did answer my problem because by putting the egg in different liquids, I knew that the results would be different. The answer to the problem question is the mass and the volume changed based on the different

For the Mole lab, my team claimed there was 1,992 beans in the large display jar. The estimate was close but still off by 59 beans. The actual amount of beans in the jar was 2,051. To figure out our estimate we used a beaker of beans to experiment with. We first found the tare weight of the beaker, which was 49.912, and the weight of the beaker with the beans, 95.301. Our next step was the weight ten beans of different sizes and find the average of the beans. We found the average weight of the beans to be .47g. After doing this we then subtracted the weight of beaker with the beans from the tare weight to find the weight of the beans. We found the weight of the beans to be 45.389g. After finding the weight of the beans we dived that by he average weight of our ten beans and got 97 beans in our beaker. When we counted our beans in our beaker, we found it to be 105. We then repeated this test but using the tare

Human error is easily obtained when working on an experiment with so many different solutions, time measurements, and accuracies of measurements. An easy mistake could have been made while waiting 15-20 minutes for the Carb Cutter to digest. With the time crunch in the Biology Lab, the Carb Cutter may not have been completely digested before rushing to begin the experiment. The results from the experiment showed an increase in absorbance with the Carb Cutter pill, which is not accurate because there is no way that more starch was made in the solution. Given more time for the procedure, this lab experiment may have received more accurate results.

Doctors Craig Haney, Curtis Banks and headed by Doctor Phillip Zimbardo. This article provides in detail the initial purpose for this study, its participants, the nature of the study, the events that transpired during the experiment and of its results. With this article we are provided with a clear picture of the events that had transpired during the experiment and provides some insight into why the events may have occurred.

Descriptive statistics are shown in Table 1 and 2. Ham was the largest primal cut for both breeds, and loin was the smallest. Loin and ham was also the primal cuts with largest differences between breeds where Duroc had the largest ham, and Landrace the largest loin. Duroc had also a slightly smaller belly and larger shoulder compared to Landrace. Landrace showed the largest variance in primal cut proportions. Duroc had a lower CLMP compared to Landrace, and this was reflected in the LMP within each primal cut where the largest differences were seen for LMP within loin and ham. Duroc had larger variation in lean content (%) in loin, shoulder and belly compared to Landrace. Further, Duroc had a lower measure for loin depth and a higher measure

There were three hypotheses of the experiment. The first was, “we expect that demographic factors will predict the importance of taste, nutrition, cost, convenience, and weight control to individual persons”. This means that they (the scientist involved) believed that the personal characteristics (age, gender, income, and race) will affect the flavor of food, benefits

Procedure 1) Gather Materials • 6 eggs • 6 jars 16 ounces • 8 ounces of pickle juice • 8 ounces of orange juice • 8 ounces of lemon juice • 8 ounces of tomato juice • 8 ounces of soda (coke) • 8 ounces of water • 6 pairs of gloves • Scale in grams 2) Start Labeling • Set up Observations Page on laptop/ tablet • Label control variable and manipulated variable • Label each jar 3) Observe Experiment • Record all observations • On another sheet write down all the weight (gram) 4) Finish • Conclude results • Put together graphs Analysis

The investigation is shown to be valid as it incorporates the use of proper equipment and the investigation correctly tests the hypothesis. The use of proper equipment determines the validity of the investigation, due to the fact that the correct equipment ensures the appropriate units of measurements, for example the use of a ruler as the appropriate instrument to measure the length of the dependent variable. The experiment was also valid as the investigation had measured what it had intended to measure which was testing whether the Home-brand paper towels are more absorbent than the Kleenex Viva paper towels, the procedure presented actually did test the hypothesis by comparing the absorbance of the paper towels.

The Scientific question was does eating affect running time. The Hypothesis was “ If you eat something your running time will be longer.” Our Hypothesis was accepted. The Control variables were same track, food and weather. The Independent variable was was whether the Participants got food or not. The Dependent variable was the amount of time it took the participant to run the lap.

They used the same type of food to keep the experiment fair, and they also tested out two different brands of muzzle. One brand, the Easy Breathe Grazing Muzzle (EBGM), allows the horse to eat via quite a sizeable hole, while the second brand, the Tough 1 Nylon Grazing Muzzle, has a smaller hole. The research team ran their experiment on eight different horses. They also went to great care to ensure that their results were reliable, for example they had to use the exact same weight of pellets for each session and note down any

The purpose of this lab was to determine the unknown mass of a block of wood. The goal was well accomplished successfully. The actual mass of the wood was 78.71g measured by balance and the mass from the calculation was 76.3g. The percent error was 3.06%. It was very close. The hypothesis was correct. As can be seen in the analysis the mass of block of wood has less mass than the known mass which was 200g. That supported the hypothesis.

How was the difference between filet and whole body tissue samples accounted for in the