Table of ContentsIntroductionExperiment DesignConstant Factors:Materials:Method:DiscussionConclusionIntroductionThe survival of any population relies on several different factors, a combination of abiotic and biotic. Over time, emperor penguins have evolved a strategy of cooperative behavior that ensures the survival of individual penguins and the population itself. Because of how quickly heat is lost in Antarctica, a single penguin is at risk of freezing to death. Penguins huddle together to try to keep warm and can reach temperatures of 20°C, despite ambient temperatures reaching -50°C. (Gammon, 2012). By grouping together, they reduce their surface/volume ratio. A group of penguins has a limited area of ​​the overall volume open to the elements. An isolated and alone penguin has a greater surface area in relation to its volume. Surface area is a critical aspect of heat transfer. The higher the surface area to volume ratio, the more heat can be lost through it. By creating a group, penguins reduce the amount of heat they can lose to the environment due to the reduction in surface area. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay For populations to be maintained in an ecosystem, there must be access to a combination of biotic and abiotic factors. Examples of biotic factors necessary for penguin survival are fish, krill and squid for food, although they can go without food for up to 100 days. Other penguins constitute the most essential biotic factor for their survival. These protect them from any abiotic factors dangerous to life, such as temperature and wind. Isolated penguins are more likely to suffer from abiotic factors due to the larger surface area that can be compromised. Penguins on the outer ring of the group will not be as affected as the single penguin, because they have less surface area open to abiotic factors. The least affected penguins would be the interior penguins because they have a very small area available. Grouping is a form of behavioral adaptation, in which penguins change their actions to better fit the environment. If a penguin were subjected to the harsh temperatures and wind of the environment, it could cause its body temperature to drop rapidly, affecting its nervous system and bodily functions. Overexposure of penguins to this environment causes heart and respiratory system failure, leading to their death. Homeostasis is a self-regulatory process that allows animals to maintain an optimal internal environment for their survival. (Encyclopedia Britannica, nd) An isolated penguin will need to increase its body temperature to survive. Homeostasis increases body temperature by sending a message to the brain's temperature regulating center, the hypothalamus. The temperature receptors in the skin send the message, the nervous system then sends it to the effector, in this case the penguin muscles. The penguin's response is to shiver in an attempt to increase its body temperature. (ABPI, nd)However, the process of homeostasis cannot help with the overexposure of an isolated penguin, because heat cannot be gained as quickly as it is lost. (Mayo Clinic, nd) This will result in the death of isolated penguins. Experiment Design The aim of this investigation is to determine the effect of variable protection on penguin heat loss. Test tubes will be used as a substitute forpenguins in this experiment. The hypothesis is: as test tube protection decreases, temperature loss over time will increase. The insulated test tube will lose heat the fastest. Independent variable: amount of protection Dependent variable: change in water temperature Constant factors: · Amount of water placed in each test tube · Size of each test tube · Time of Use of the test tubes · Initial temperature of the water that was placed in each test tube Materials: 500 ml beaker x 2 Hot water Test tube holder Thermometer x 3 Timer Rubber bands x 2 Test tubes x 15 Method: 14 test tubes were grouped together and fixed with two elastics, one at the top and one at the bottom. The group of test tubes was placed in a 500 ml beaker. The warm water was poured into all 14 test tubes at the same level, also filling the insulated test tube to the same level. The test tubes were transferred to a new empty 500 ml beaker and the isolated test tube was placed in the test tube rack. A thermometer was placed in the insulated test tube, the innermost test tube, and a test tube on the outer ring. The initial temperature was recorded. The temperature of the water test tubes was recorded every minute for 10 minutes. The temperature change from the initial water temperature was calculated and recorded. The initial temperature of each test tube was 34 degrees Celsius. The plot on the graph whose heat decreases the most over time is the plot of the insulated test tube. The insulated test tube lost 27 degrees in 10 minutes. The temperature of the insulated trays reaches 7 degrees from 7 minutes. The outer test tube lost a total temperature of 15 degrees Celsius and the temperature did not reach a plateau. The center test tube lost the least heat, losing only 10 degrees over the entire 10 minutes. The temperature dropped steadily throughout this period. Discussion The results obtained from this experiment were similar to those predicted. The water placed in the insulated test tube representing the isolated penguin lost the most heat throughout the experiment. This is due to the increased exposure to the cool environment together with the large surface area of ​​the test tube. The surface area of ​​the insulated test tube was much larger than the volume of water inside, meaning more heat could escape over time due to the large surface area to volume ratio. The water on the outer ring of the group lost the second greatest amount of heat. The least amount of heat was lost from the test tube located in the middle of the group of test tubes. This was predicted because the outer ring test tube has a smaller surface area to volume ratio than the insulated test tube and a larger surface area to volume ratio than the center test tube. The center test tube lost the smallest amount of heat due to the smallest surface area to lose. Although the results collected were predicted before the experiment, there were several unexpected data points. The insulated test tube was not expected to top out at 7 degrees. However, it was expected that the heat of the insulated test tube would decrease rapidly and eventually reach a plateau, but it was assumed that this would occur at room temperature. The other two test tubes measured did not reach a plateau, which was also expected because these test tubes retained more heat. There are several different sources from which random errors could arise throughout the investigation. One of them understands that the water in the test tubes was not measured precisely with a graduated cylinder, but by observation. The experiment required that the water bemeasured with the naked eye rather than using a cylinder, because the transfer of water between the different containers would have resulted in some heat loss and would have considerably reduced the accuracy of the data. This remains an error because we do not know if the quantity of water was the same in each test tube. If each test tube contained a different amount of water, the volume would not be the same, resulting in heat loss. A second random error could have been an incorrect temperature reading on the thermometer. Since more than one person in each experimental group was taking measurements, people could have read the thermometer differently each time. This means that the recorded temperature might not be the true value, which is seriously affecting the experiment results. A systematic error that could have occurred could be that the thermometer used was not properly calibrated. This means that the results recorded would not be accurate, but the trend of the data would still be visible. Only a very small sample size was used during this investigation. Only the isolated test tubes, the outer ring and the center were actually measured, and no repetitions were performed. Due to these factors, the effect of random errors would be larger and more significant. In an experiment like this, it is essential that it is repeated and with a larger sample in order to reduce the number of random errors. The more values ​​recorded and averaged, the less significant impact data outliers will have. As there are no actual values ​​for this experiment and no repetitions were carried out, the accuracy and precision cannot be discussed. One of the highlights of this experiment was that the temperatures of each test tube recorded were recorded with a thermometer with a resolution of one. This means that the thermometer accurately measures the water temperature. Another strength of this investigation was that the experiment was carried out with each test tube at the same time and in the same environment. This meant that external factors affecting the test tubes would affect them at the same rate. There would be no temperature variation in the room, so the test tubes would not be dramatically affected. However, despite the strengths of this experience, there were also multiple weaknesses. One weakness was that the thermometer could have been read differently by each person recording the results. This means that the readings would not be true to the experiment and would affect the results and conclusion. Another weakness is measuring the water in each test tube without a test tube. It was important that all quantities were the same in each test tube, in order to obtain an accurate result regarding the rate of heat loss. Without precise measurements, the amount of heat loss would vary with different volumes. A third weakness was that the thermometer was not calibrated accurately enough to read temperature to a specific degree. This can be identified as a weakness, as actual water temperatures would not have been reflected in the results. Conclusions could still be drawn; however, the values ​​would be incorrect even if the data trend remains correct. The small sample size and lack of replications in the experiment were another pair of weaknesses that reduced the significance of the data. The effect of random errors has therefore been increased. The most significant weakness of the entire experiment was that the test tubes in no way accurately represented how.