Clorox Household Cleaner Lab Report
Paragraph 1 In experiment 2, the statistical analysis of data collected showed that Clorox Household Cleaner was not significantly different than the Clorox Toilet Bowl cleaner. This is due to the fact our calculated P-value was 11.45%, which is larger than the 5% maximum allowed to us to be able to support the alternative hypothesis. This indicates there was not support for our alternative hypothesis, causing us to reject it. In doing so, we had to accept our null hypothesis. Our Null hypothesis states the Clorox Household Cleaner will not inhibit E. coli bacteria more than the Clorox Toilet Bowl Cleaner.
Paragraph 2 After researching the active ingredient in Clorox Household Cleaner, I have come to the conclusion that the active ingredient …show more content…
These sources of uncertainty could have had major impacts on the data we were able to collect. The quality of swabbing conducted on each plate couldn’t be the same for every single plate, and that showed in our results. One of the plates had insufficient E. coli bacteria growth in a region of about 1/3 of the plate size. Because of this, we did not get an accurate reading of the inhibition zone for one of the discs in that area, changing our data. Another source of uncertainty is if the paper discs were placed in the right locations. One of the discs was supposed to have a rather large inhibition zone and instead it was very small. Because of this, we question if it was placed right, and again, it changed the data we were able to collect. The last source of uncertainty for our experiment was how long the plates were uncovered in the swabbing and disc application process. If they were left uncovered for an uncertain amount of time, it would impact how the E. coli bacteria would have grown on the plate. In addition to that, if there were some other sort of air born microbe that could have landed on the plate, it could impact how the E. coli would
Paragraph 2 After researching the active ingredient in Clorox Household Cleaner, I have come to the conclusion that the active ingredient …show more content…
These sources of uncertainty could have had major impacts on the data we were able to collect. The quality of swabbing conducted on each plate couldn’t be the same for every single plate, and that showed in our results. One of the plates had insufficient E. coli bacteria growth in a region of about 1/3 of the plate size. Because of this, we did not get an accurate reading of the inhibition zone for one of the discs in that area, changing our data. Another source of uncertainty is if the paper discs were placed in the right locations. One of the discs was supposed to have a rather large inhibition zone and instead it was very small. Because of this, we question if it was placed right, and again, it changed the data we were able to collect. The last source of uncertainty for our experiment was how long the plates were uncovered in the swabbing and disc application process. If they were left uncovered for an uncertain amount of time, it would impact how the E. coli bacteria would have grown on the plate. In addition to that, if there were some other sort of air born microbe that could have landed on the plate, it could impact how the E. coli would