Nicholas Tan

Pak Ary Rusdianto

Biology SL 2

17 January 2020

Impact of sugar type on bubble volume in yeast fermentation ± 0.1 cm

Type of sugar Time (Minutes) Standard deviation

5 10 15

Controlled 0 1 1 0.58

Starch 0 -1 -1 0.58

Glucose 12 22 30 9.0

Sucrose 15 27 34 9.6

Impact of Sugar Type on Yeast Respiration

40
y = 9.5x + 6.3333
35 R² = 0.9774

30
y = 9x + 3.3333
V olume of Bubbles

25 R² = 0.9959
20

15

10
y = 0.5x - 0.3333
5
R² = 0.75
0 y = -0.5x + 0.3333
5 min 10 min 15 min R² = 0.75
-5
Time

Starch Glucose Sucrose Controlled

Linear (Starch) Linear (Glucose) Linear (Sucrose) Linear (Controlled)
Aims:

 To measure the amount of CO2 produced using three different substrates.

 To estimate the rate of respiration in each case using data processing.

 To link the theory of respiration with our knowledge of carbohydrates.

Hypothesis: As the substrate for glycolysis in respiration is glucose, yeast will respire more

rapidly if the dough is made with yeast, slowly with a disaccharide and slower with starch.

 The theory behind this hypothesis is that since respiration is a catabolic process, it

will be more difficult to break down complex carbohydrates (such as starch) in

comparison to simple ones (such as glucose).

Conclusion based on the graph:

For the solution that did not mix with any sugar (controlled), the trendline equation is

y = 0,5x + 0,3333. This means that the solution increased its bubble volume by 0.5 cm on

average every 5 minutes. For the solution that mixed with glucose (a monosaccharide), the

trendline equation is y = 9x + 3,3333. This means that the solution increased its bubble

volume 9 cm on average every 5 minutes. For the solution that mixed with sucrose (a

disaccharide), the trendline equation is y = 9,5x + 6,3333. This means that the solution

increased its bubble volume by 9.5 cm on average every 5 minuets. For the solution that

mixed with starch (a polysaccharide), the trendline equation is y = -0,5x + 0,3333. This

means that the solution did not respire at all.

In conclusion, the hypothesis was correct to a certain extent. This is because even

though the solution that had starch respired the slowest, the solution that had glucose did not

respire the fastest. The solution that had sucrose in it (disaccharide) was the one that respired

the fastest, which contrasts the original thinking and the theory that was used in the

hypothesis. This may be due to limitations and human errors that will be discussed later.
Limitation and evaluation:

As stated before, the data supports the hypothesis to a certain extent. There are several

limitations to the experiment that may contributed to this factor. Firstly, human errors may be

present during the methodology. It is possible that the dough was not divided into four equal

portions into the beakers as it was eye-balled during the day of the experiment. This may be

improved by weighing the portions out first so that each beaker had the same amount. Also,

the two spatulas of the test substances may not be entirely accurate as it was not measured at

all. Furthermore, the measurement of the bubbles was a difficult task to do as we were using

rulers. The bubbles were not clear enough on the beakers which made it difficult to precisely

locate how high it has grown, thus contributing to the human errors of this experiment. This

can be improved by using technology such as a carbon respirometer to precisely measure the

rate of reaction of the solution. Another weakness of this experiment is the lack of

temperature control. Although the water that was used had its temperature controlled initially,

as the yeast was left out to respire, the temperature decreased over time which ultimately

slowed the rate of reaction. This error significantly impacts the accuracy of the results as

temperature is one of the factors that affect rate of reaction and having it changed mid-

experiment will affect the R-squared value of the trendline. This can be improved by having

the solutions placed in a water bath as it respired to maintain temperature throughout the

entire experiment.

From the standard deviations, it is difficult to draw a conclusion as to whether or not

the methodology of the experiment was reliable. A lower standard deviation indicates that the

results is closer to the mean while a higher standard deviation implies that the data is far more

spread out. The standard deviation of the solutions with starch and nothing in it is very low

(0.58) while the standard deviation of the solutions with sucrose and glucose in it is very high
(9.0 and 9.6). From this, it is difficult to establish the reliability of the methodology as half of

the results support it while the other half challenges it.

The results were accurate to a certain extent. The accuracy of data can be tested by

comparing it with information that was previously established and taking a look at the R-

squared value of the trendline. A R-square value that is closer to 1 will indicate that the

results were more accurate while a r-square value that is closer to 0 implies that the results

were not consistent. When comparing it with established information, the data is accurate to a

certain extent as stated before. The solution that had starch was supposed to respire the

slowest due to it being a polysaccharide and the solution that had glucose was supposed to

respire the fastest due to it being a monosaccharide. The results showed that although the

solution with starch respired the slowest, the solution with sucrose (a disaccharide) respired

faster than the solution with glucose, which implies that the accuracy of the results may be

questioned. On the other hand, the R-squared value of all the solutions were relatively high,

with 0.9959 being the highest and 0.75 being the lowest. This contributes to the accuracy of

the data as it implies that the results were somewhat consistent.