It will be very interesting to see how light will influence the rate of photosynthesis in plants and what will happen if they do not get the required light in order to produce starch .
Light is a very important factor in the rate of photosynthesis, in my project I am going to test that plants do need light in order to photosynthesise.
The importance of transpiration in carrying nutrients to the shoot has long been debated. However, experimental evidence showed that transpiration was not necessary to get nutrients to the shoot, as growth rates and net nutrient transport rates were unaffected by humidity and other environmental conditions that would reduce transpiration (Tanner and Beevers 2001). Transpiration was not a prerequisite for long-distance transport of nutrients, as root pressure (see below) in the absence of transpiration can supply the shoot with the required nutrients.
The current inability to accurately quantify the mean CO2 sink regionally or locally also suggests that present-day observational constraints are inadequate to support a detailed, quantitative, and mechanistic understanding of how the ocean carbon sink works and how it is responding to intensifying climate change. This lack of mechanistic understanding implies that our ability to model (Roy et al. 2011, Ciais et al. 2013, Frolicher et al. 2015, Randerson et al. ¨ 2015), and thus to project the future ocean carbon sink, including feedbacks caused by warming and other climate change, is seriously limited. … The sum of the available evidence indicates that variability in the ocean carbon sink is significant and is driven primarily by physical processes of upwelling, convection, and advection. Despite evidence for a growing sink when globally integrated (Khatiwala et al. 2009, 2013; Ciais et al. 2013; DeVries 2014), this variability, combined with sparse sampling, means that it is not yet possible to directly confirm from surface observations that long-term growth in the oceanic sink is occurring. … [T]his CESM-LE analysis further illustrates that variability in CO2 flux is large and sufficient to prevent detection of anthropogenic trends in ocean carbon uptake on decadal timescales.
I’ll ask for a FIFTH time, since you keep on avoiding answering. YES or NO. Did the oceans function as a net source as the CO2 concentration rose from 180 ppm to 300 ppm from glacials to interglacials? YES or NO? Answer the question instead of ducking it for a FIFTH time.
If we had conducted the
experiment with the surrounding temperature at 30 degrees then we may
have found that the rate of photosynthesis would have been very low,
or even that photosynthesis within the pond weed was non existent.
In the case of
the pond weed if they enzymes within the plant became denatured then
it would become unable to photosynthesise, as well as not being able
to complete other functions.
Effectively this shows
that if more of these limiting factors can be used by a larger sample
compared to a smaller sample, then the rate or amount at which the
products of photosynthesis are given off will be at a higher level
And as both methods (finding starch/ measuring
oxygen given off by the plant) show that photosynthesis is taking
place, I chose to measure the rate of oxygen produced.
Similarly, I had no idea at what
distance the plant would cease to photosynthesise, as the lamp was the
only source of intense light available.
When the green plant is provided with a higher concentration of CO2 in
the environment it is photosynthesising in, the rate of photosynthesis
conducted by the plant will be higher - the availability of one of the
limiting factors was higher.
The lab in which the
experiment took place was not very well supplied with light, if the
lamp was not present, it would not be wrong to say that photosynthesis
would have ceased to take place within the lab at all.
Prediction : I predict that as I increase the distance between the light source and the Canadian Pondweed (reducing the light intensity), the volume of oxygen produced within the time limit (the measure of the rate of photosynthesis) will decrease.
Lab experiments using tubes filled with CO2 to represent the atmosphere show that the IR transmission is essentially saturated and doubling the amount changes the transmission very slightly . So what is wrong and how are these arguments refuted by the majority of climate scientists? There are two main arguments why global warming is important despite apparent saturation when man adds CO2 to the atmosphere (see ). The first of these is rather convincing.
Although this is slightly high for
the temperature in which a plant generally photosynthesises best, (20
degrees centigrade) it was the first temperature at which the
experiment worked successfully, and so we decided that it should be
kept constantly at this in order to conduct a fair test.