Abstract
Plants like any other living organisms are subject to the effects of radiation. Several experiments seek to find out what exactly happens in the exposure of plants to radiation processes. The purposes of these experiments seek to; develop an understanding of the effects radiation. The experiments ensure the accurate conclusions upon their performance on different plant materials (Karl 361). This does not look at the effects only, but it incorporates the benefits to ensure, the conclusion is free from bias. In this process, different plants ensure total analysis that facilitates distinction of various tests. Generally, the test mainly focuses on the effects and the possible mechanisms towards curbing them. This brings into vision their effects, the possible solutions, as well as the reason towards their avoidance.
Introduction
In the living environment, all living things are subject to various dangers posed by radiation. These effects depend on the type of radiation. For example, solar radiation is mildly strong, but it plays a vital role to the development of plants (Kochupillai 261). It is vital in photosynthesis process. Another example of radiation is the gamma rays. These are very strong and tend to destroy all living cells of the plant since they have high power. They are fast and capable of destroying living cell in plant. Their effects are very serious to an extent of altering the plants growth (Morgan, 570). The common three radiations that take part in plant germination, and growth include; “alpha, beta, and the gamma rays”. Alpha is extremely heavy; therefore, they are not capable of traveling so fast. This reduces their rate of impact which they posses to the living organisms”. In terms of danger that they pose to living organisms is that, they are extremely destructive to the living tissues. Beta travels at a faster rate than the alpha. Due to their nature, and speed they are not that destructive too. They are also absorbed into the body (Muller 43). When we consider the gamma decay, it is the most penetrative. These are extremely destructive to plant body from both the inner side, and the outer side. These radiations are extremely destructive to plants. Therefore, they result to malfunction of the plants. For the purposes of getting the right figures, scientists do this through ascertaining of the right radioactivity dose delivered, and the amount of absorbed dose. Because of the differences in the levels of penetration, damages caused vary respectively.
Hypothesis question:
Does radiation affect germination, and growth of seedlings? (Karl 361).
The crucial aspect of this experiment is to develop an understanding of the effects of radiation to the living plants. The motive is to develop a clear picture of these effects, and to ensure they are in the right proportions. It also reflects the effects that qualify minimization to ensure an accurate conclusion (David 72). From the scientific point of view, radiation is destructive. The rates of radiation require a substantial reduction to ensure outstanding safety against its adverse effects.
The experiment will take a couple of steps to ensure accurate conclusions. The effects of radiation on plants will also clearly reflect in the steps. It is worth noting that, seeds are subject to the radiation effect than the already germinated plants. At the end of the experiment, the results should indicate the seed that is highly affected by radiation. This will specify if it is the control seed or the radiated seeds (Muller 43).
This process takes a couple of stages before the final decision-making step. To ensure the right conclusion, the following procedure is most suitable. This is because it ensures a stable arrival to the final answer. The experimenters can base their arguments on the final answer (Kochupillai 261). In this experiment, the seeds used undergo the process of radiation. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the seeds are radioactive materials.
The following procedure is a stable mechanism towards the attainment of the expected results. Therefore, the experimenter ought to follow the procedure keenly.
Procedure
1. “Take the plastic cups and fill them with vermiculite (David 72). The cups should be according to the number of seeds which are to be tested for”.
2. “Wet the vermiculite until it is damp. Using a towel, dry any excess water by allowing it to drain out”
3. The cups should bare labels according to; Group name, Class period, Date, Dose of radiation given to the seeds, which are in the cup, and finally place number above the position of each seed.
Before the seeds plantation, they should be; observed, and details recorded to ensure they comply with set standards. During this stage, a proper analysis is required to ensure they verify with given charts. After that, the seeds undergo an introduction. After this, the experimenters plant the seeds ensuring the consideration of all details (Karl 361). This is vital as it helps to avoids missing figures, which might be required in the conclusion of the experiment, and to ensure they complied with the total regulations. At this stage, the experimenter ought to determine the depth through the diameter of the seed. More importantly, the experimenter should place the seed at the side of the cup where they will be visible. The depth should be around 2-3 times the size of the diameter.
4. After this, the cups should be covered using sandwich bags in order to minimize the evaporation process from taking place.
5. The cups should take an alighted place with a temperature ranging between 15-27 degrees.
Each day, the experimenter ought to check the seeds, and take records. Readings of roots and stem growth should take a keen trend to avoid misrepresentation.
6. After the final reading, remove the seeds from the cups carefully and observe other features like root hair using lenses (Muller 43).
Observations
Before any action, try to identify the variations between the control seed, and the treated seeds. At this stage, a table should be draw as from zero days up to the final day of the experiment. On daily basis, record the observations made. It should include the length of the roots, and the stem of all seeds (David 72). To measure the length of these roots, it is more accurate to use a string and then measure the length of the string. In situations where germination failed, the experimenter ought to indicate this sign (-). This straight line shows that, no germination, which had, took place. When recording the observations, the experimenter ought to uphold clarity to increase the visual ability of the details obtained. For a better representation, a graph should be draw to show the trend in change, and draw a clear comparison between the control seeds, and the treated seeds (Karl 361).
In this case, the table should be draw to show relationships in terms of the roots and another one, which will show the relationship on the stems.
Result analysis
To come up with right results, it is worth drawing graphs with the help of using the available data. Through this, the conclusions emerge effectively and hence propagating a better understanding. Using these plotted graphs one can make a clear conclusion based on the available evidence (Kochupillai 261). To deduce the information one needs to ensure the right steps towards gathering the necessary materials. These are necessary towards generating which the right results.
The graph above provides the right changes of height with change in time. Control seed have a greater height has they are not affected by the changes in the environment. As radiation is increased, the height varies for the control seeds, but at a certain point the height starts to decline again.
In this diagram, changes do not vary in an immense extent with the figure in the first graph. Height increasingly falls down with changes in the level of radiation. This may be a constant fall but it depends with the type of seeds in the experiment.
Discussion
From the descriptive data obtained, it is worth to analyzing them one by one then a general conclusion is draw for decision-making. When computing the mean of the two samples, i.e. control seed, and the radiated seeds then, you will find out that, mean for the control seed is more as compared to the radiated seeds. The mean obtained from the radiated seeds will keep on increasing as the level of radiation increases. This implies that, radiation has a greater effect on the seeds (Morgan, 570). This report shows that, radiation has an effect on the heights of plants, which grow from the use of these seeds. This is essential as it helps to make inferences on why plants growing in region where radioactivity is taking place will tend to be short as they might be facing a challenge of radiation effects on their cells.
When we compare the standard deviation, which computed from the use of the mean that we would find out that, deviation keeps on decreasing as the radiation increases. This is an important factor, which needs consideration when one wants to select seed for germination. The effect of the radiation might be very strong making the seeds dormant hence hindering their germination potential. The level of deviation keeps on increasing to the extent that maximum deviation goes up to 15 and 18 for both the control seed, and radiation seeds respectively. The minimum figure is zero, since it cannot go to a level of negative time (Muller 43).
The level of variance for radiated seeds is higher that of control seeds. This is only for those affected by lower effects of radiation, but as this increases the variance increases. This is crucial factors, which need consideration to ensure they get the best results for their intended objectives.
The standard error begins at a lower note for control seed than that of radiated seeds. Even though the radiated seed peaks at higher note, this keeps on falling as the level of radiation increases. This implies that, it has an inverse relationship. These results are extremely vital in determination of the factors, which influence the development, and growth level of seeds. This experiment seeks to; help the agriculturist in the determination of the best seed, which they should consider when making choices.
The coefficient of variation also reflects in this data. The importance of this is that, it helps in determining the dispersion of data in determining the level of variation in the corrected information (Karl 361). It helps in computing the level of accuracy which was exercised when gathering, the data used in the computation of the final values to be used in decision-making. In this sense, it implies that the CV helps in computation of risk levels, which are likely to face someone if he/she basis decision on given data.
When computing the median of these data, this is very critical, and should have a very good preference to ensure it shows the trend of the information. This is crucial in decision-making. The median tries to divide the data into two equal parts. This helps in checking whether they have any similarities. It also helps to test whether they can assist to make a decision. In connection to the available median for the four samples, it shows that control seed has greater heights as opposed to radiated seeds (Muller 43). More importantly, the median height of the radiated seeds seems to be moving down wards as time passes.
On the other hand, qualities also give the same information. This shows that, the data underwent an accurate correction, and it is essential to make decision, and to answer the hypothesis questions. This shows that the information distributes at a given rate, and it is paramount to observe the performance trends in terms of quarters.
From the use of graphs drawn, it gives a clearer impression of how the data is distributed. This is crucial in the decision-making, the graph clear that as time passes growth takes place in all seed, but it starts to slow down as time goes up (Morgan, 570). The results for these experiments prove that there is a direct correlation between the levels of radiation and seed growth. In the third week of the test experiments, results demonstrate that there is a significant difference among the three treatments under investigation. Between the control and the 150 and 500mrad treatments, the seedling growth takes a shorter time when exposed to gradually increasing levels of radiation. However, between the control and the 50mrad treatment, there is no significant difference in seedling growth. The standard deviations for the three experiments as compared to the control sample vary significantly in the third week, and are proportional to the growth rates documented within the same duration. The graph below illustrates the standard deviation for week 3, comparing the control and the other treatments to establish how radiation affects the growth rate of different seedlings.
From the observations done, it is essential to note that the hypothesis is positive since the level of radiation experienced affects growth of the plants. In this case, it is true the radiation affected the level of germination, and growth of the seeds. This is evident in the graphs hence making the tested hypothesis positive. The null hypothesis is vague in this circumstance. My hypothesis was to determine whether the level of radiation affects plants and I finally concluded that it is a true occurrence.
Conclusion
It is evident that, growth is dependent to the nature of the environment. Use of radiated seeds in this experiment shows that; radiation affects germination, and growth of seeds. Therefore, from this experiment is a determinant of finding out what factors affect the growth of seeds. This experiment also makes inferences on the effect and determination of factors that are conducive to the development of the seed.
Work cited
David, M. (2007). Effects of radiation on plant growth. Harvard university press. Pp. 67-74. Karl, Z. (2005). Reducing Medical Exposure to Ionizing Radiation’, American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, May, pp. 361-2.
Kochupillai, I. (2007). Down’s syndrome and Related Abnormalities in the Area of High Background Radiation in Coastal Kerala’, Nature, pp 260: 262.
Morgan, Z. (2006). Suggested Reduction of Permissible Exposure to Plutonium and Other Transuranium Elements’, American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, August, pp. 567-75.
Muller, H. (2008). Radiation and Heredity’, American Journal of Public Health, vol 54, no. 1, pp. 42-50.
