In my group’s experiment, we predicted that if we increase the temperature and the time under the light, then the oxygen concentration will decrease. I was gone for a couple of days when we originally started out experiment, but from what I was there for; on my first day back our experiment had been messed up because the light that was supposed to be constant on the fish bowls was turned off. We decided because of the mishap in out experiment, we would change our lab up a little. We kept our same hypothesis but changed from three fish bowls to only one. In my group’s original planning, we decided that we were going to leave the first bowl completely uncovered under the light, the second with one screen over the bowl to block a little of the light and two screens over the third to block out even more light. We predicted that because of our screens on the bowls, the oxygen concentration would go down with more screens. Once we changed our experiment to only one bowl, we decided to carry out the procedure for three days. We decided not to put the screens on either, we thought that the more light it had, throughout the three days then the less oxygen concentration it would have. When we were all finished with our lab, we were able to conclude that our hypothesis was incorrect. The oxygen concentration did not decrease, it actually increased/ stayed the same. We were very surprised by our findings.
Since I missed a lot during this lab, I found myself to be confused about what we were doing, especially after we had to change our experiment. I was really surprised to find that the oxygen concentration had increased instead of decreased like we predicted. Was it the fish that
