Results And Discussion Of The Class Results

711 Words3 Pages
Results and Discussion The class results that were obtained are located in Table 1 below. The data from my group has been highlighted. Additionally, the data that will be used for calculations has been bolded. Only data from groups 2 through 5 was utilized to determine statistics, because group 1 and group 6 did not report plaque counts between 30 and 300. Their results were likely due to technical errors, such as loose fitting micropipette tips or expelling liquid above the broth rather than inside of the broth. Doing so can result in accumulation of the liquid on the outside of the tip rather than into the liquid. The average PFU/mL for groups 2 through 5 is 5.4×〖10〗^7. This was calculated by taking the sum of the PFU/mL from groups 2 through 5 and dividing it by the number of data values, thus using the formula (1.90×〖10〗^7 + 1.03×〖10〗^8 + 4.20×〖10〗^7 + 5.90×〖10〗^7)/4=5.40×〖10〗^7. The average tells us the expected actual PFU/mL of the solution. To calculate the percentage of bacteriophage remaining, divide the new titer (5.40×〖10〗^7) by the old titer (2.00×〖10〗^10) and multiply this value by 100. Based on this calculation, the percentage of phage remaining in the solution is 0.27%. To calculate the percentage of phage lost over the past 1.5 years, subtract the percentage remaining from 100. This reveals that 99.73% of the bacteriophage were lost through the aging process. This data reveals a significant loss in bacteriophage over time. The sample standard deviation of the data can be calculated using the formula , in which s represents the sample standard deviation, represents the sum of the numbers, represents the sample mean, X represents the mean, and n represents the number of data points use... ... middle of paper ... ...separate micropipette laboratory could be conducted prior to this experiment. This would give students the opportunity to practice with the pipettes before utilizing them to cultivate and enumerate the bacteriophage. Additionally, the calibration of the micropipettes was not checked prior to the experiment. Checking the calibration could have yielded more precise measurements and more accurate data. Finally, an increased number of repetitions would have yielded more accurate and more precise information as well. Making these changes to the experiment would be highly beneficial in determining the actual titer of the solution. However, despite these faults, the experiment demonstrated the relationship between hosts and viruses, the importance of serial dilutions and soft agar overlays, and the loss of a titer over time. Overall, this was a successful experiment.
Open Document