HW-02

Ariana Magana-Ramirez 02/12/2024 BIOL304C Homework 2 Part 1: Table containing the summary statistics (mean, standard deviation, and range) of flow rate (mL/s) for all four capillary tube volumes. T-tests results comparing each successive capillary tube volume. The table above shows the results for the three different t-tests comparing the capillary tube volume. The first comparison resulted in a t-statistic value of -8.252 and means there was not a significant difference between the flow rate of the capillary tube. We see this theme throughout the rest of the comparisons two comparisons. Based on their t-statistic and p-value we fail to reject the null hypothesis; therefore, no correlation between the capillary tube volume and flow rate. Using the equation for the power function to predict the flow rate (mL/s) for capillary tubes with volumes of 70 μL and 162 μL. Volume of capillary tube ( μ L) r (mm) Mean flow rate (mL/s) Standard deviation2x Standard deviation Filter lower limit Filter upper limit 10 0.158 0.129 0.047 0.094 0 0.367 20 0.224 0.221 0.068 0.136 0 0.5 50 0.354 0.369 0.348 0.696 0 1.337 100 0.501 0.845 0.852 1.704 0 3 Flow Rate Comparison t-statistic t crit ( α = 0.05) Interpretation of p-value 10 μ L v 20 μ L -8.252 1.983 5.78E-13 20 μ L v 50 μ L -15.602 1.998 2.56E-23 50 μ L v 100 μ L -9.878 1.991 2.47E-15 Two-sample t-tests Volume of capillary tube ( μ L) r (mm) Predicted flow rate (mL/s) 70 0.419 0.572 100 0.5 0.754 162 0.637 1.102 Predicted values

Graph which shows the relationship between mean flow rate (mL/s) and capillary tube radius (mm). The graph includes a power function trendline with slope and intercept displayed. Figure 1: The scatterplot shows the relationship between mean flow rate (mL/s) and capillary tube radius (mm). The graphs trendline is included as a power function. This graph displays how the increase in capillary tube radius also increases with the flow rate. y = 2.217x 1.5594 R ² = 0.9682 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 FLow Rate (mL/s) Capillary Tube Radius (mm) Flow Rate vs. Capillary Tube Radius

Graph which shows the relationship between flow rate (mL/s) and sapwood area (mm2) for the two plant types. Figure 2: Scatterplot graph demonstrates the comparison between Angiosperm and Gymnosperm regarding the flow rate (mL/S) and the sapwood area (mm2). With the graph comes included the errors for both directions. In the graph we see but a slight increase with a slightly larger flow rate to sapwood area.

Part 3: 1. Compare and contrast the water conducting cells in gymnosperm and angiosperm xylem. Gymnosperm and angiosperm both utilize tracheid for water conducting cells. On the other hand, angiosperms not only utilize tracheid but also use vessel elements. This addition makes for efficient movement of water. The xylems of the gymnosperm do not have these vessel elements and rely on that of the tracheid. While one may be more efficient than the other, they still provide the same purpose of moving water. 2. How do the diameters of water conducting cells differ between gymnosperms and angiosperms? (Include references to actual sizes found in the Pre-Lab Materials). Looking at the Pre-Lab Materials we come to find the diameter of water conducting cells in gymnosperms are around 30 microns. In angiosperms they come to around 20-800 microns. This means that angiosperms have cell diameters that are larger than those of gymnosperms. 3. Describe how the results of your experiment summarized in Part 2 relate to the results summarized in Part 1 and the diameter of water conducting cells in angiosperms versus gymnosperms. The results of my experiment summarized in Part 2 relates to the results summarized in Part 1 with the diameter of water conducting cells in angiosperms versus gymnosperms such as that the data shows that with increased diameter also results with and increased sapwood area when it is contrasted to that of a gymnosperm. This relationship between diameter and flow rate also are seen when looking at the efficient vessel elements.