Experiment 1-3-4 Report

General Advice

Prior to writing your report, accumulate all the data for your two nature isolates. Then, using Bergey's Manual of Determinative Bacteriology (we have copies in the lab and there is a copy at Steenbock Library) identify your isolates. This can take a while so start early. Some hints: Only a few genera are capable of growth in NEM. If your microbe is a gram-positive cocci, it is likely an Arthrobacter species. If it is a gram-negative rod, it may be a Pseudomonad. Your NGY isolate can be many things. Start with its Gram reaction and oxygen relationship and compare it to the table of contents in Bergey's Manual. This can help you narrow down the possibilities. The TAs and I are always willing to help, just ask.

This is a partial report, you are required to hand in a results section and a discussion of the results for this series of experiments. This is also a combined report. Do not write three lab reports, one for each section, combine your data. The results will present all the data that you have gathered on your isolate and describe the isolation. Do not give a blow-by-blow as in your lab notes, but provide a context for the isolation so that the reader can understand your data. The results table(s) should be clear, well labeled and include a description such that the data in the table(s) is understandable and someone could use your table alone to identify the microbe. The discussion should first address whether your isolate is pure, and any errors that were made. Once you have established that you data is valid, you should then identify your microbe and indicated key evidence that supports your assignment. Finally, you should propose tests or experiments that would verify your identification and could be used to identify the species your microbe.
Note. You are limited to 1500 words. Do not go over this limit. The wiki will warn you when you save your page.

Here I present a rubric for grading the experiment 1,3,4 report to help you get an idea of what a good paper will contain.

CriteriaSophisticatedGoodNeeds improvementUnacceptable
OrganizationSections of paper are in proper order: Results, Discussion. Writing has been initially outlined, so that ideas and topics follows a logical flow. Sentences in each paragraph adhere to the topic sentenceSections of paper are in proper order. Writing has a few minor problems with sentences not always following from the topic at hand.Sections of paper are in proper order. Ideas and data were not organized before writing, but the organization is still discernible. The paper is not organized chronologically and it is sometimes difficult to find things.Sections of paper are not in order. Name or section number is left off of the paper and the paper was not placed in the drop box or the correct section categoreis. No effort at organizing thoughts has been done and the paper is a stream of unconnected ideas.
WritingNo misspellings or grammatical errors. Ideas are clear and easily understood. Sentences are constructed to clarify ideas and understanding.A few misspellings or grammatical errors. Ideas are still clear and easily understood.Enough misspellings or grammatical errors, that it is a distraction, but the ideas present in the paper still come through.Poor grammar and numerous misspellings pollute paper. These interfere with the ideas that the writer is trying to present. It is obvious the paper has not been proof-read. Sections are missing
Presentation of resultsAll data is present and is it clear where each piece of data fits for each isolate. Tables are well formatted for easy interpretation. Graphs use appropriate number scales and labels. Descriptions are detailed enough to allow interpretation of the data. Raw data is not presented. (i.e. A420 readings from a β-gal experiment instead of Units of enzyme activity).All important data is present. Some raw or unfinished results are present Descriptions are detailed enough to understand the experiment, but some key points for interpretation are missing.Graphs and tables are labeled appropriately. Most data is present,. Some data is incorrectly assigned or not assigned to a particular isolate. Tables or graphs are hand written. Descriptions are not detailed enough to understand the experiment. Incorrect or poor labels are used.Important data is missing. Data is contradictory (i.e. one table says an isolate can ferment lactose, a second test says it cannot.) Descriptions of tables and graphs are not present. Explanation of the initial isolation is not present.
Discussion - Analysis of dataAn error analysis is performed including validity of all tests and assessment of the purity of the culture. Any errors identified are things that actually happened and not a laundry list of possible problems, most of which did not occur. Results are not repeated except to support an analytical point. Results are examined to determine if they support or reject the hypothesis of the experiment. Unexpected results are identified and explained. Explanations are scientifically valid and do not contain factual errors. These explanations are supported with other observations or experiments are proposed to test these explanations.Error analysis is done, but some things are missing or interpreted incorrectly. The purity of the culture is not addressed. Results are not repeated except to support an analytical point. Results are examined to see if they support or reject the hypothesis, but some results are ignored or contradictory results are ignored. Unexpected results are identified, and explained. Experiments to test explanations are not proposed.Error analysis is done in a cursory fashion or parts of it are ignored. Results are repeated in full. Some data analysis is performed, but explanations of the data are unlikely or incorrect. Explanations are not compared to generated results and experimentsNo error analysis is performed. Results are repeated with no interpretation of what it means. Unexpected results are ignored. The impact of the results to the hypothesis is not discussed.

If you have questions, please seek out Dr. Paustian as he is the final arbiter on what should and should not be in papers.

To create your wiki page, follow these directions
  1. Click on Create a Wiki Page located in the left side bar under Useful Links.
  2. Name your page, LastName_FirstName_Experiment_1_3_4. Failure to do this correctly will cost you 3 points.
  3. Click on create.
  4. Click on the Categories tab and check the Sections box that corresponds to your section (Section1=MW, Section2=TR morning in the room with the big window, Section3=TR morning across the hall, no big window, Section4=TR afteroon). Do not check the dropbox catagorie at this time.
  5. Start typing. If you want to write most of your paper in a word processor, go ahead, but do not do any formatting until you paste the text into the wiki.
  6. When you are finished with the paper, remember to click on the Categories tab and check the Drop Box category. After doing so, you will still be able to see it, but no one else will. After you leave the wiki page, you will not be able to find it, but if you go back to the exact link, you will be able to load it.