The National Student Research Center
E-Journal of Student Research: Science
Volume 6, Number 2, November, 1997
The National Student Research Center
is dedicated to promoting student research and the use of the
scientific method in all subject areas across the curriculum,
especially science and math.
For more information contact:
- John I. Swang, Ph.D.
- Founder/Director
- National Student Research Center
- 2024 Livingston Street
- Mandeville, Louisiana 70448
- U.S.A.
- E-Mail: nsrcmms@communique.net
- http://youth.net/nsrc/nsrc.html
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- pH Levels In Local Water
- Are Orgones Real?
- Does The Presence Of Water
Affect The Magnetic Force?
- Which Material Creates The
Most Friction?
- How Fecal Coliform Affects
Stephenson Brook Outfall
- The Amount of Total Coliform
in the Waters of Stephenson Brook Storm Drain
- How Phosphates Affect Stephenson
Brook
- Dissolved Oxygen, Air, and
Water Temperature Levels at Stephenson Brook
- Can A Magnet Erase A Cassette
Tape, Floppy Disk, And A Compact Disk?
- How Can I Keep My Cat Off My
Bed?
TITLE: pH Levels In Local Water
STUDENT RESEARCHERS: Joshua Foster and Jack Bell
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do a research project on the pH levels of water
in our community. Our hypothesis states that rainwater will have
a pH of 7.0.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we chose our topic. Then we wrote our statement of
purpose. Next, we did a review of literature about acids, bases,
pH, water, and acid rain. Then we developed our hypothesis.
Next, we wrote a methodology to test our hypothesis. Then we
gathered our materials and began our research. First, we sampled
some water from each source (tap water, pond water, rainwater,
well water, lake water, ditch water, and bottled water). Next,
we tested its pH by putting seven drops of testing solution in
each sample. We tested each sample three times. Finally, we
recorded our data on a data collection sheet.
We analyzed our data in charts and graphs. We wrote a summary
and conclusion, accepted/rejected our hypothesis, and applied our
findings to the world outside the classroom.
Our control variables included the amount of water used in each
sample and the pH tester. Our manipulated variable was the
source of water. Our responding variable was the pH of the water
samples.
The materials we used for this scientific research project were a
pH tester, small cups, clipboard, data collection sheet, pencil,
and parent w/car.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
Our data show that, in the three trials, bottled drinking water
had a pH of 6.3, 6.3, and 6.3. The average pH of drinking water
was 6.3
Our data show that, in the three trials, rainwater had a pH of
7.5, 7.5, and 7.5. The average pH of rainwater was 7.5.
Our data show that, in the three trials, tap water had a pH of
8.5, 8.5, and 8.5. The average pH of rainwater was 8.5.
Our data show that, in the three trials, well water had a pH of
7.5, 7.5, and 7.5. The average pH of well water was 7.5.
Our data show that, in the three trials, pond water had a pH of
7.5, 7.5, and 7.5. The average pH of pond water was 7.7.
Our data show that, in the three trials, lake water had a pH of
7.5, 7.5, and 7.5. The average pH of pond water was 7.5.
Our data show that, in the three trials, ditch water had a pH of
7.0, 7.0, and 7.0. The average pH of ditch water was 7.0.
Trial
|Source | 1 | 2 | 3 | Avg. |
pH
|tap water | 8.5 | 8.5 | 8.5 | 8.5 |
|pond water | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 |
|rainwater | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 |
|well water | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 |
|bottled water | 6.3 | 6.3 | 6.3 | 6.3 |
|lake water | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.5 |
|ditch water | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 |
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
The most acidic water was the bottled water. Our tap water
samples had the highest pH. Ditch water was neutral.
Our data show that rainwater had a pH of 7.5. Therefore, we
reject our hypothesis, which states that rainwater will have a pH
of 7.0.
V. APPLICATION:
We could apply our findings to the world outside the classroom by
showing people where to get the safest and best water. We can
also tell people that our area is not polluted with acid rain.
TITLE: Are Orgones Real?
STUDENT RESEARCHERS: Chris Chugden and James Rees
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do a scientific research project on orgonomy.
We want to know if orgones, as hypothesized by Whilhelm Reich,
really exist. Our hypothesis states that orgone energy will
prevent mold growth on bread.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we found a topic. Next, we developed a statement of
purpose. Then we wrote a review of literature about Wilhelm
Reich, Orgone Energy, orgone accumulators, pseudoscience, and
bread mold. Next, we developed a hypothesis.
Then we developed a methodology to test our hypothesis. Next, we
gathered our materials and conducted our experiment. We
constructed an orgone accumulator out of aluminum, paper, and a
shoe box. We alternately layered six pieces of paper and six
sheets of aluminum foil on all of the sides, top, and bottom of
the shoe box. Then we got another shoe box to use as a control
in the experiment.
Then we moistened two slices of bread, rubbed them on the
ground, and put each of them in a sealed Ziploc plastic bag. We
put one piece of bread in the orgone accumulator and one piece in
the control shoe box. We waited a period of seven days to get
our results. Each day we observed the bread for mold growth. We
measured the growth of the mold by how many spores the bread had
on it and how large the colonies of spores grew.
We recorded our data on a data collection sheet. From this we
made charts and graphs showing our results. Then we wrote a
summary and conclusion. In our conclusion, we rejected or
accepted our hypothesis. Finally, we applied our findings to
the world outside the classroom.
The variables that were controlled were the kind and size of the
bread slices, the sealed Ziploc plastic bag, the amount of water
on the bread, the contaminated bread slices, and the time periods
for observation. The manipulated variable was the orgone
accumulator. The responding variable was the absence or presence
of mold on the bread.
Our list of materials included six sheets of aluminum foil, six
sheets of paper, two shoe boxes, two slices of bread (no
preservatives), and two Ziploc plastic bags.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
On day 1, the slice of bread in orgone accumulator I had 0 spores
on it. This continued until day 4 when the slice of bread grew
one mold colony 2 mm in diameter. On day five, the bread had two
3 mm. On day six, there were no changes observed. On day 7, the
final day, the bread in the orgone accumulator had twenty-four
spore colonies that varied from 1 mm to 3 mm in diameter. The
average size of the spore colonies was 2.75 mm.
From day 1 to day 3, no mold grew on the bread in the control
shoe box I. On day 4, three spores 3 mm in diameter had grown on
the control bread slice. On day 5, four spores grew that were 6
mm in diameter. On day 6, there were no changes on the bread.
On the final day, day 7, the bread had grown a total of twenty
spores that varied from 1 to 6 mm. The average size of the spore
colonies were 5.25 mm.
From day 1 to day 4, no mold had grown on the bread in orgone
accumulator II, but on day 5, one colony, 5 mm in diameter, had
grown. On day 6, two colonies 5 mm in diameter had grown. On
day 7, three colonies of spores had grown which were 5 mm in
diameter.
From day 1 to day 3, no mold had grown on the bread in control
II. On day 4, four spore colonies had grown on the bread. They
were 10 mm in diameter. On day 5, the same results occurred. On
day 6, six spore colonies, 20 mm in diameter, grew. On the final
day, day 7, the bread had grown a total of eight spore colonies,
20 mm in diameter.
The Number Of Colonies Of Spores Grown On Bread
|Day 1 |Day 2 |Day 3 |Day 4 |Day 5 |Day 6 |Day 7 |
| | | | | | | |
Orgone |0 |0 |0 |1 |3 |4 |27 |
Accumulators| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Controls |0 |0 |0 |7 |8 |10 |28 |
The Average Diameter Of The Colonies Of Spores On Bread
|Day 1 |Day 2 |Day 3 |Day 4 |Day 5 |Day 6 |Day 7 |
| | | | | | | |
Orgone |0 |0 |0 |1 mm |4 mm |4 mm |4 mm |
Accumulators| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Controls |0 |0 |0 |7 mm |8 mm |13 mm |13 mm |
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
The bread in both orgone accumulators had a total of 27 spore
colonies. Both controls had a total of 28 spore colonies. The
average size of the spore colonies in the orgone accumulators was
4 mm. The average size of the spore colonies in the controls was
13 mm.
The bread in the Orgone Accumulators had less mold growth than
the control bread. Therefore, we accept our hypothesis which
stated that orgone energy will prevent mold growth on bread.
If the accumulators were producing orgones, then it would seem
that they some ability to reduce bread mold growth. Further
research in this area needs to be done. This study should be
replicated many times and the findings compiled of the studies
compiled.
V. APPLICATION:
Now we know that orgone energy has an effect upon bread mold
growth. We could suggest that people place their bread in a
bread box designed to be an Orgone Accumulator.
TITLE: Does The Presence Of Water Affect The Magnetic Force?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: Jane Bordelon and Lalita Mondkar
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do a scientific research project to determine
whether the presence of water affects the magnetic force. Our
hypothesis states that a magnet surrounded by water will pick up
fewer paper clips than one not surrounded by water.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we decided on a topic. Next, we wrote our statement of
purpose. Then we wrote our review of literature about magnetism,
electromagnets, force, mineral water, and water. Next, we
developed our hypothesis.
Our methodology was then written to test our hypothesis. First,
in our methodology, we gathered our materials. Then we used the
following procedure to perform the experiment: 1) We put 20 paper
clips into the pitcher covering the bottom in an even layer. 2)
We rested the magnet on top of the paper clips. 3) We pulled up
the magnet and counted the number of paper clips that stuck to
the magnet. 4) We repeated this procedure six times. 5) We
recorded our data on a data collection sheet.
Then we repeated steps 1-5 after we filled the pitcher with 4.55
liters of water. We repeated this entire procedure six times.
After we recorded our data in a systematic way on our data
collection sheet, we conducted our analysis of data. Next, we
wrote our summary and conclusion where we accepted or rejected
our hypothesis. Finally, we applied our findings to the world
outside the classroom.
Our controlled variables are 1) same magnet, 2) same amount of
water, 3) same kind and size of paper clips, and 4) same sized
pitcher. Our manipulated variable was whether or not there was
water in the pitcher. Our responding variable was the number of
paper clips attracted to the magnet.
Our materials were a 4.55 liter pitcher with measuring marks,
4.55 liters of water, a ruler, a data collection sheet, a magnet,
and 20 paper clips.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
The magnet that was not surrounded by water picked up 14 paper
clips on the first trial, 9 paper clips on the second, and 18 on
the third. On the fourth trial, the magnet attracted 11 paper
clips, on the fifth, 10, and 14 paper clips on the sixth trial.
This gave us an average of 12.6 paper clips attracted to the
magnet that was not surrounded by water.
The magnet that was surrounded by 4.55 liters of water picked up
17 paper clips on the first trial, 9 paper clips on the second,
and 6 paper clips on the third. On the fourth trial, the magnet
attracted 9 paper clips, on the fifth, 10, and on the sixth, the
magnet attracted 13 paper clips. This gave us an average of 10.6
paper clips attracted to the magnet that was surrounded by 4.55
liters of water.
Number of Paper Clips Attracted to the Magnet
Trials | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |Average|
| | | | | | | |
Magnet | | | | | | | |
Without | 14 | 9 | 18 | 11 | 10 | 14 | 12.6 |
Water | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Magnet | | | | | | | |
With |17 | 9 | 6 | 9 | 10 | 13 | 10.6 |
Water | | | | | | | |
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
On average, the magnet not surrounded by water picked up more
paper clips than the one surrounded by 4.55 liters of water.
Water does have an effect on the strength of magnetism.
Therefore, we accept our hypothesis which states that a magnet
surrounded by water will pick up fewer paper clips than one not
surrounded by water.
V. APPLICATION:
If you want to recover metal objects from underwater, you will
need a larger and stronger magnet than if you want to recover
metal objects on land.
TITLE: Which Material Creates The Most Friction?
STUDENT RESEARCHER: James Rees and John Casey
SCHOOL: Mandeville Middle School
Mandeville, Louisiana
GRADE: 6
TEACHER: John I. Swang, Ph.D.
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
We would like to do a scientific research project on the effect
of surface friction on the momentum of a rolling object. The
surface material that produces the most friction will slow an
object down the most and reduce its momentum. Our hypothesis
states that carpet will produce more friction than crumpled
aluminum foil, smooth aluminum foil, Saran Wrap, sandpaper, and
thick paper towels.
II. METHODOLOGY:
First, we choose a topic. Then we wrote our statement of
purpose. After that we conducted our review of literature about
friction, momentum, Newton's Laws, velocity, force, mass, motion,
weight, and inertia. Then we developed a hypothesis.
Next, we developed a methodology to test our hypothesis. Then we
stacked five books on top of each other. The stack of books was
10 cm. high. We placed one end of a wooden board that was 45 cm.
long and was 30 cm. wide on the books to make a ramp. The angle
of the ramp was 20 degrees. We placed the first of six surfaces
on the board. We put a marble with the weight of 1 1/2 oz. and
the circumference of 3.14 cm at the top of the board and let it
go. We measured how far it rolled from the bottom of the ramp.
We repeated this procedure three times for each surface.
We then recorded our data on a data collection sheet. Next, we
analyzed our data with simple statistics, charts, and graphs.
Then we wrote our summary and conclusion, and accepted or
rejected our hypothesis. Finally, we applied our findings to the
world outside the classroom.
Our controlled variables were the same size, height, length, and
angle of the ramp each time it was used, same bottom surface, and
same marble. Our manipulated variable was the different surfaces
placed over the ramp. Our responding variable was the length
that the marble rolled after leaving the ramp.
Our materials included: a) wooden board, B) textbooks, C) marble,
D) Carpet, E) crumpled aluminum foil, F) smooth aluminum foil, G)
Saran Wrap, H) sandpaper, I) thick paper towels.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
With smooth aluminum foil on the ramp, the marble rolled 150 cm.
on the first trial, 78 cm. on the second trial, and 115 cm. on
the third trial. The average was 147.6 cm.
With crumpled aluminum foil on the ramp, the marble rolled 36 cm.
on the first trial, 60 cm. fore the second trial, and 5 cm. the
third trial. The average was 33.6 cm.
With carpet on the ramp, the marble rolled 86 cm. on the first
trial, 98 cm. the second trial, and 100 cm. the third trial. The
average was 94.6 cm.
With paper towels on the ramp, the marble rolled 87 cm. on the
first trial, 105 cm. the second trial, and 104 cm. the third
trial. The average was 98.6 cm.
With sandpaper on the ramp, the marble rolled 205 cm. on the
first trial, 164 cm. on the second trial, and 152 cm. on the
third trial. The average was 173.6 cm.
With Saran Wrap on the ramp, the marble rolled 145 cm. on the
first trial, 129 cm. on the second trial, and 124 cm. on the
third trial. The average was 132.9 cm.
How Far A Marble Rolled Down A Ramp
With Different Surfaces On It
Surfaces Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average
Smooth | 150 cm | 78 cm | 115 cm | 147.6 cm |
aluminum foil | | | | |
| | | | |
crumpled | 36 cm | 60 cm | 5 cm | 33.6 cm |
aluminum foil | | | | |
| | | | |
carpet | 86 cm | 98 cm | 100 cm | 94.6 cm |
| | | | |
paper | 87 cm | 105 cm | 104 cm | 98.6 cm |
towels | | | | |
| | | | |
Saran | 145 cm | 129 cm | 124 cm | 132.6 cm |
Wrap | | | | |
| | | | | |
sandpaper | 205 cm | 164 cm | 152 cm | 173,6 cm |
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Our research shows that crumpled aluminum foil produced more
friction than smooth aluminum foil, carpet, sandpaper, paper
towels, and Saran Wrap. Crumpled aluminum foil produces
friction because it has a rough surface. The marble rolled off
the ramp more slowly, had the least amount of momentum, and
travel the shortest average distance off the ramp. That proves
that rough surfaces produce more friction than smooth surfaces.
Therefore, we reject our hypothesis which stated that carpet will
produce more friction than crumpled aluminum foil, smooth
aluminum foil, Saran Wrap, paper towels, and sandpaper.
V. APPLICATION:
You could use his information when making shoe soles. You could
put rough surfaces on the bottom of the shoes so that the shoe
will not slip when it hits the ground. People could make
different surfaces for tires that are rough so that the tires
would not slip or slid while driving.
TITLE: How Fecal Coliform Affects Stephenson Brook Outfall
STUDENT RESEARCHERS: Sara Lysaght, Jodi Brown, Mike Farrell
SCHOOL ADDRESS: Isaac E. Young Middle School
270 Central Ave.
New Rochelle, NY 10805
GRADE: 8
TEACHERS: Patrick M. Liu
I. Statement of Purpose & Hypothesis:
Fecal coliform levels were tested at Stephenson Brook. The
hypothesis stated that fecal coliform levels would be high when
it rains and low when it didn't. Stephenson Brook is a storm
drain sewer. Fecal coliform is a bacteria. It is found in the
feces of all warm blooded animals. Fecal coliform can enter the
water by runoff or discharge. Fecal coliform by itself is not
pathogenic. A person swimming in such water has a greater chance
of getting sick from swallowing disease causing organisms or
through cuts on the skin, the nose, the mouth, or the ears.
II. Methodology:
The materials for the testing procedure were: Millipore
filtration system, broth, matches, alcohol, pipette, forceps,
petri dish, syringe, absorbent pad, counter, sample water,
distilled water, plastic baggie, and water bath. The procedure
for testing can be found in the Field Manual For Water Quality by
Stapp and Mitchell (1995).
III. Analysis of Data:
The water from Stephenson Brook was tested on 3/20/97, 3/21/97,
3/23/97, 3/24/97, and 3/25/97. Fecal coliform levels varied from
650 to 3860 colonies per 100 ml. On the first day, there were
650 colonies per 100 ml. On day two, there were 380. On day
three, there were 1020. On day four, there were 2860. And on
day five, there were 3860.
IV. Summary and Conclusion:
Fecal coliform levels vary depending on weather conditions. On
the days when it rained or snowed, the levels were 1020 colonies
per 100 ml or greater. When it rains the feces have a better
chance of getting into the water than on day when it doesn't.
These fecal coliform levels were mostly up in the thousands and
can be harmful if combined with other pathogenic organisms.
V. Application:
Fecal coliform is a problem all around the world. One way to
help solve this problem is to clean up after pets go outside to
the bathroom. If the pet feces is not picked up, then when it
rains or snows the feces and coliform will be washed into the
water as part of the runoff from the land.
TITLE: The Amount of Total Coliform in the Waters of Stephenson
Brook Storm Drain
STUDENT RESEARCHERS: Eva Madeira and Jennifer Girone
SCHOOL ADDRESS: Isaac E. Young Middle School
270 Centre Avenue
New Rochelle, N.Y. 10805
GRADE: 8
TEACHER: Patrick M. Liu
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS:
Research was done on the amount of total coliform in the waters
of Stephenson Brook storm drain. Stephenson Brook, in its early
years, was known as Crystal Lake because of the great purity of
its waters. Stephenson Brook is now a storm sewer that dumps out
into Echo Bay. Total coliform are a group of gram-negative,
aerobic to facultative anaerobic, non-spore forming, rod-shaped
bacteria that ferment lactose at 35 degrees C producing gas and
acid within 48 hours. They develop a red colony with a green
metallic sheen within 24 hours, also at 35 degrees C. Coliform
gets into Stephenson Brook by run-off and warm-blooded animals'
feces such as fecal coliform. When it rains, the garbage that
carries total coliform runs off into the storm sewers. The study
of total coliform is important because it can be disease causing.
The sample water was taken at the outfall of the brook from
Monday through Friday from March 21,1997 to April 10,1997.
II. METHODOLOGY:
The materials used were an absorbent pad, alcohol bottle, alcohol
lamp, ampules, counter, distilled water, filtration system,
forceps, matches, petri dish, 5ml. pipet, 2ml. pipet, sterile
pad, and a syringe.
The procedure was to first remove the filtration system out of
the boiling water and assemble. The broth was poured from the
ampule, and put into a petri dish. After the system was
assembled, the forceps were sterilized to remove the sterile
filter from its package. When those steps were done, the filter
was placed in the filtration system and gathered sample water
with the 5ml. pipet. After swirling the water into the system,
the syringe was used to remove air from the system so it would
get the water through the filter. After the syringe was used to
remove the air, 5ml of distilled water was also placed into the
system. After, the forceps were used to remove the filter which
was placed in the petri dish. Then the petri dish was placed
into the water bath at 44.5 degrees C and removed after 24 hours.
Then the petri dish was opened and placed under the microscope,
and the total number of colonies were counted with the counter
for more accurate data and multiplied by 20 to record as
colonies/100ml.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
Total coliform was tested on four days. The average of total
coliform in the waters of Stephenson Brook storm drain was 1812.5
colonies/lOOml. Research showed that the amount of total coliform
kept rising.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
The amount of total coliform in the waters of Stephenson Brook
storm drain kept rising during the period of testing. The
average of colonies tested in four days was 1812.5
colonies/lOOml. One factor for the rise of total coliform in the
water could have been the runoff of feces when it rains. In
conclusion, there could've been numerous things that affected the
increase of total coliform in the water.
V. APPLICATION:
Communities can keep their waters clean of total conform by
picking up after their pets. They can also curb use of
fertilizers with feces. When it ruins the feces and the excess
fertilizers that carry total coliform runoff into sewers. Total
coliform can cause diseases such as Typhoid Fever, Hepatitis,
Gastroenteritis, Dysentery, and ear infections when it's in our
waters.
TITLE: How Phosphates Affect Stephenson Brook
STUDENT RESEARCHERS: Heidi Marroquin, Drew Morris, Jonathan
Drewes, Ashleigh Gibbons
SCHOOL ADDRESS: Isaac E. Young Middle School
270 Centre Ave.
New Rochelle, New York 10805
GRADE: 8
TEACHER: Patrick M. Liu
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OR HYPOTHESIS
Phosphates are compounds of a phosphoric acid. Phosphates are
used in fertilizers to increase plant growth. Stephenson Brook
is a storm drain sewer that empties into Echo Bay. Phosphates
get into Stephenson Brook by runoff of fertilizers from lawns.
The phosphate levels at Stephenson Brook should be low due to
significant decrease in usage of fertilizer in the time of
testing (early spring) as opposed to the summer. When phosphate
levels are high they can be dangerous because they increase algae
growth dramatically. When algae in the water dies bacteria
decomposes it. This bacteria takes oxygen from the water to
live. This oxygen is needed for aquatic life to survive.
II. METHODOLOGY:
The materials came from the La Motte phosphate test kit. The
materials were a test tube, an axial reader, a one gram spoon,
medicine dropper, and phosphate reducing reagent. The procedure
was followed once everyday as found in the La Motte test kit.
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA:
Eleven phosphate samples were taken from March 20, 1997 to April
10, 1997. Phosphate levels throughout all of the testing were 0
ppm. These results showed that in relation to phosphate levels,
Stephenson Brook's water is acceptable.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the phosphate levels of 0 ppm met the water
quality standards of 0 by the Department of Environmental
Conservation. The hypothesis that there would be low phosphate
levels at Stephenson Brook was proven by the data recorded. One
indefinite reason why there were 0 phosphates in the water was
that plants in Echo Bay took in the phosphates, so they couldn't
be measured in the water. The results might have varied if the
tests were taken in the summer time instead of the early spring
due to the significant increase in usage of fertilizers in the
summer as opposed to the early spring. Also the increase in
phosphate containing cleaning agents used to wash cars in the
summer might have altered the data.
V. APPLICATIONS:
Phosphates by themselves cannot harm people. Phosphates are only
a problem if they get in the water because they grow large
amounts of plants. When all of these plants die the bacteria
needed to decompose them takes oxygen from the water. This
oxygen is needed for the aquatic life to survive. To solve the
phosphates problem, golf courses should only use fertilizer when
absolutely necessary. This would also apply for household lawns
in order to limit fertilizer runoff.
Title: Dissolved Oxygen, Air, and Water Temperature Levels at
Stephenson Brook
Student Researchers: Nicky Ramunto, Lisa Spraitz, David Ruiz,
Shekira Rhett
School Address: Isaac E. Young Middle School
270 Centre Avenue
New Rochelle, N.Y. 10805
Grade: 8
Teacher: Patrick M. Liu
I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS
Dissolved oxygen levels were taken at Stephenson Brook Storm
Drain in New Rochelle N.Y.. Stephenson Brook is the outfall. It
is important because there would be nowhere for the water to go
when it rains. The tests were measured in ppm (parts per
million). Dissolved oxygen shows the amount of oxygen being used
in the water by under water organisms like bacteria. Some
factors that could affect the levels are temperature change,
depth of water, and sometimes atmospheric pressure. The
hypothesis made was that if fertilizers would get in the water it
would make aquatic plants grow which would then decompose and the
bacteria would use up all the dissolved oxygen to decompose them.
II. METHODOLOGY
The materials used were from the La Motte dissolved oxygen test
kit. They were: starch indicator solution, manganous sulfate
solution, alkaline potassium, sodium thiosultate, sulfamic acid
powder, 1 titration tube, 1 sample bottle, 1mg spoon, and 1
titrator. The procedure for measuring D.O. was: the titration
tube was filled to the 2Oml line with a fixed sample, then the
titrator was filled with sodium thiosulfate solution which was
added into the titrator tube until color changed to a faint
yellow. Next, with the pipet, 8 drops of starch solution was
added to the titrator sample, a blue color appeared. Then more
thiosulfate was added until the blue color disappeared. It was
read in ppm (parts per million).
III. ANALYSIS OF DATA
Test results for dissolved oxygen, air, and water levels were
taken at Stephenson Brook and were measured in ppm (parts per
million). The tests were done from March 20 - April 9, 1997.
The averages for the tests were 11.1 ppm for dissolved oxygen.
Air temperature was 9.8 C. Water temperature was 8.3 C.
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Test results were done in Stephenson Brook storm drain in New
Rochelle. Different pollutants can affect dissolved oxygen
levels such as fertilizers, sewage and runoff. Fertilizers for
example, can lower dissolved oxygen levels because if they get
into the water they could help underwater plants grow which would
then decompose. The bacteria would use up oxygen to decompose
them. According to the Water Quality Regulations Book of New
York D.E.C, dissolved oxygen levels should not be less than 3.0
ppm at any time because if the level was lower there would be low
dissolved oxygen which would kill fish. Therefore the tests
results proved that D.O. levels were healthy since all were above
3.0 ppm.
V. APPLICATION:
To help the dissolved oxygen problem people should use less
fertilizer on our lawns. This could help decrease the number of
algae which is a factor that can decrease D.O. levels.
Title: Can A Magnet Erase A Cassette Tape, Floppy Disk, And A
Compact Disk?
Student Researcher: Eric Korgel
School Address: Cedar Hollow School
4900 S. Engleman Rd.
Grand Island, NE 68803
Grade: Seventh
Teacher: Barbara Moran
I. Purpose and Hypothesis
I wanted to do this experiment to find out if a magnet could erase
a compact disk, cassette tape, and my floppy disks in case a
magnet would ever cross upon them. My hypothesis states that the
magnet could erase my compact disks, floppy disks, and my cassette
tapes.
II. Methodology
To preform my experiment I used a cow magnet, an old cassette
tape, an old compact disk, and an old floppy disk. For my
procedure I first layed out all of my materials. Second, I took
my cow magnet and put it right onto the compact disk for 2
minutes. Then I did the same procedure for the floppy disk and
the cassette tape. Next, I tried to see if my materials were
erased or not. My findings amazed me. Finally, I recorded all of
my data on my data collection sheet.
III. Analysis of Data
After I looked over all of my data, I found that the compact disk
still played considerably well. But on the other hand, the
cassette tape and the floppy disk both were erased. Surprisingly
the compact disk worked and the cassette tape and floppy disk were
erased.
IV. Summary and Conclusion
I rejected my hypothesis that stated that the magnet would erase
all 3 things. After I did the experiment, I found that the
compact disk was not erase. And the cassette tape and floppy disk
were both erased.
V. Application
My findings could be useful in the "real world" in case anybody
wanted to know if a cassette tape, compact disk, or a floppy disk
could be erased if put close to a magnet or a strong magnetic
force. This information could save someone a lot of time,
trouble, and money.
Title: How Can I Keep My Cat Off My Bed?
Student Researcher: Chelsi Klentz
School Address: Cedar Hollow School
4900 South Engleman Rd.
Grand Island, NE 68801
Grade: Seventh
Teacher: Barbara Moran
I. Statement of Purpose and Hypothesis
I wanted to find a way to keep my cat off of my bed. My
hypothesis stated that if I would put enough objects on my bed, my
cat wouldn't have a place to sit down.
II. Methodology
As I was performed my experiment, I was careful to count the
number of objects that I put on my twin sized bed. I put on: 10
books, 11 fingernail polishes, 22 stuffed animals, 5 hangars, 1
curling iron, 3 hair brushes, 1 binder, 3 hair clamps, 6 pairs of
shoes, 1 baseball bat, 2 basketballs, and 2 cosmetic cases. I had
to put so many objects on my bed because all areas had to be
covered so that the cat wouldn't have a place to sit. I stayed
with him for a half an hour (30 minutes) and monitored my cat's
behavior.
III. Analysis of Data
When the half hour was over and I had recorded my data I found
that my cat was smarter than I thought. During the first five
minutes he was perplexed. He just looked at the bed and even got
on top of it and gingerly stepped around the objects. Then he
pushed and nudged some objects over and layed down to take a nap.
He slept for the rest of the half hour.
IV. Summary and Conclusion
I rejected my hypothesis which stated that if I put enough objects
on my bed to cover it my cat would stay off. My cat just pushed
the objects over and layed down.
V. Application
I can now tell my friends that putting objects on the bed won't
keep their cats off. I could stop them from wasting their time in
this way.
© 1997 John I. Swang, Ph.D.