User talk:Ellery C. Spahr/Notebook/Biology 210 at AU: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''' | '''3/18/2015''' | ||
You | You did a good job with the methods and explaining your experimental timeline including mishaps. What was the concentration of NaF that you used? I would have liked to see more quantitative data for the length. If you recorded the actual lengths of at least 3 control and 3 experimental fish, you could have done a t-test to see if they were statistically different, and you could have made a graph. Also, how many fish were alive on day 11? LS | ||
'''3/7/2015''' | |||
You should have had two different bacteria sequenced - I had 2 tubes from your group. Were the sequences the same? Also, you should include a reference for the colony and cell morphology for the species that was identified. Did it come from a tet or non-tet plate? LS | |||
'''2/22/2015''' | |||
Vert lab - Excellent - you did a good job describing how the organisms in your transect interact. | |||
Invert lab - Great job! Try to include your own pictures or drawings rather than those of the lab manual. This is supposed to be your data! LS | |||
'''2/17/2015''' | |||
Overall your plant entry was very good. I would like some effort at plant identification though - your lab manual asked for genus, and you should be able to narrow down the cattail and the two plants that had visible flowering structures. Also, even if you didn't have fungus in your section, you needed to answer the questions about fungus! LS | |||
'''2/6/2015''' | |||
Excellent! Your tables are very pretty, and the method descriptions are great. Your logic that the tet colonies were fewer on the non-tet plates because they had to compete was good. However, you would still not expect to find Archaea on the tet plates because they would't be in your transect to start with. LS | |||
'''1/30/2015''' | '''1/30/2015''' | ||
Overall this is an excellent entry. You added 100 μL rather than 100 mLs to your Hay Infusion. (To get the μ, I copied it from a wikipedia page and pasted it into this box. If that doesn't work, better to write the word out). To do superscript, click on the edit tab for this page and you can see the code that I used. | Overall this is an excellent entry. You added 100 μL rather than 100 mLs to your Hay Infusion. (To get the μ, I copied it from a wikipedia page and pasted it into this box. If that doesn't work, better to write the word out). To do superscript, click on the edit tab for this page and you can see the code that I used. | ||
10<sup>-2</sup> | 10<sup>-2</sup> | ||
Next time, if you don't have good pictures of your organisms, draw them rather than using the image from the dichotomous key. LS | |||
'''1/26/2015''' | |||
You gave a good thorough description of your transect. Please add a little to the methods section about how you made the Hay Infusion. Also I cannot see the map. Please rearrange the order of your posts so that the most recent is on top. LS | |||
Latest revision as of 10:20, 20 March 2015
3/18/2015 You did a good job with the methods and explaining your experimental timeline including mishaps. What was the concentration of NaF that you used? I would have liked to see more quantitative data for the length. If you recorded the actual lengths of at least 3 control and 3 experimental fish, you could have done a t-test to see if they were statistically different, and you could have made a graph. Also, how many fish were alive on day 11? LS
3/7/2015 You should have had two different bacteria sequenced - I had 2 tubes from your group. Were the sequences the same? Also, you should include a reference for the colony and cell morphology for the species that was identified. Did it come from a tet or non-tet plate? LS
2/22/2015
Vert lab - Excellent - you did a good job describing how the organisms in your transect interact.
Invert lab - Great job! Try to include your own pictures or drawings rather than those of the lab manual. This is supposed to be your data! LS
2/17/2015 Overall your plant entry was very good. I would like some effort at plant identification though - your lab manual asked for genus, and you should be able to narrow down the cattail and the two plants that had visible flowering structures. Also, even if you didn't have fungus in your section, you needed to answer the questions about fungus! LS
2/6/2015 Excellent! Your tables are very pretty, and the method descriptions are great. Your logic that the tet colonies were fewer on the non-tet plates because they had to compete was good. However, you would still not expect to find Archaea on the tet plates because they would't be in your transect to start with. LS
1/30/2015 Overall this is an excellent entry. You added 100 μL rather than 100 mLs to your Hay Infusion. (To get the μ, I copied it from a wikipedia page and pasted it into this box. If that doesn't work, better to write the word out). To do superscript, click on the edit tab for this page and you can see the code that I used. 10-2 Next time, if you don't have good pictures of your organisms, draw them rather than using the image from the dichotomous key. LS
1/26/2015 You gave a good thorough description of your transect. Please add a little to the methods section about how you made the Hay Infusion. Also I cannot see the map. Please rearrange the order of your posts so that the most recent is on top. LS
