8. Repeated
steps
3-4
and
6
with
ring
$inger,
because
the
IV
(disinfectant)
is
not
changed
in
a
control
group.
9. Put
petri
dishes
in
incubator.
10. Observed
growth
of
bacteria
on
the
petri
dish
once
a
day
for
three
days,
noting
number
of
colonies,
approximate
size,
and
total
surface
area
covered.
Data
Comparison
of
Number
of
Bacterial
Colonies,
Size
of
the
Colonies,
and
Total
Surface
Area
Covered
between
the
Three
Test
Groups
on
Day
1--Chart
1
Type of
Disinfectant
Used
Number of
Colonies
Size of
Bacterial
Colonies
Surface
Area of
Petri Plate
Covered
Zep
Small to
Miniscule
0.5%
Spic and
Span
Small to
Miniscule
0.4%
Control
47
Small to
Miniscule
4.7%
Comparison
of
Number
of
Bacterial
Colonies,
Size
of
the
Colonies,
and
Total
Surface
Area
Covered
between
the
Three
Test
Groups
on
Day
2--Chart
2
Type of
Disinfectant
used
Number of
Colonies
Size of
Bacterial
Colonies
Surface
Area of
Petri Plate
Covered
Zep
medium to
medium
large
1.3%
Spic and
Span
medium to
medium
large
0.9%
Control
47
medium to
medium
large
11.5%
Comparison
of
Number
of
Bacterial
Colonies,
Size
of
the
Colonies,
and
Total
Surface
Area
Covered
between
the
Three
Test
Groups
on
Day
3--Chart
3
Type of
Disinfectant
used
Number
of
Colonies
Size of
Bacterial
Colonies
Surface
Area of
Petri Plate
Covered
Zep
medium
large to
large
2.6%
Spic and
Span
medium
large to
large
1.8%
Control
47
medium
large to
large
17.5%
Day 1 to
Day 2
Growth
Day 2 to
Day 3
Growth
Average
Growth
Zep
2.6x
2x
2.3x more
bacteria
per day
Spic and
Span
2.25x
2x
2.125x
more
bacteria
per
day
Control
Zep
30
22.5
15
7.5
0
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day
Discussion
This
experiment
was
an
experiment
done
in
order
to
see
which
disinfectants
were
most
effective
at
limiting
bacterial
growth.
The
original
thought
was
that
the
best
disinfectant
would
leave
the
least
surface
area
of
the
Agar
Petri
Plate
covered,
because
Disinfectants
are
meant
to
kill
bacteria.
However,
the
student
did
not
know
which
disinfectant
would
be
the
best.
In
the
dish
treated
by
Zep,
there
were
5
bacterial
colonies
(chart
1)
to
begin
with,
but
after
that,
number
of
bacterial
colonies
did
not
grow
(charts
2-3).
However,
everyday,
the
average
amount
more
bacteria
per
day
was
2.3x
(Chart
4).
The
reason
the
number
percent
covered
went
up
was
that
though
the
amount
of
colonies
stayed
the
same,
the
size
of
each
colony
doubled
each
day.
The
case
was
almost
the
same
for
every
dish.
With
the
bacteria
treated
by
Spic
and
Span,
there
was
originally
5
bacterial
colonies
(chart
1).
That
amount
did
not
change
(charts
2-3)
and
the
amount
more
surface
area
covered
went
up
an
average
of
2.125x
each
day,
a
mere
.275x
more
than
with
Zep
(chart
4),
due
to
the
change
in
size
of
the
colonies.
On
the
control
dish,
the
amount
of
bacterial
colonies
started
at
47
(chart
1),
stayed
the
same
throughout
the
experiment
(charts
1-3).
The
average
growth
was
approximately
1.98x
per
day
(chart
4).
As
shown,
the
only
factor
that
changed
in
each
dish
was
the
size
of
the
colonies,
causing
the
growth
in
size.
Each
dish
each
approximately
doubled
each
day,
as
the
average
growth
per
day
was
2.1364624607x
(chart
4).
This
growth
in
size,
not
number,
of
the
bacterial
colonies
becoming
bigger
can
be
attributed
to
the
genetic
mutations
of
the
bacteria
in
the
colonies.
After
the
$irst
day,
all
the
bacteria
that
were
not
immune
to
the
disinfectant
were
either
killed
or
stopped
from
reproducing.
The
only
bacteria
left
were
the
bacteria
that
were
immune
to
the
disinfectant,
and
those
bacteria
began
reproducing,
creating
colonies
around
the
afore-mentioned
bacteria,
but
not
creating
new
colonies.
No
more
bacteria
entered
the
petri
plate,
so
the
only
bacterial
colonies
that
could
exist
were
the
ones
in
which
there
was
an
originally
immune
bacteria.
This
is
one
of
the
dangers
of
using
disinfectants,
that
if
one
keeps
using
disinfectants
on
a
certain
area,
the
only
bacteria
left
will
be
the
bacteria
immune
to
everything,
which
will
no
longer
be
able
to
kill
be
killed
using
disinfectants.
When
using
disinfectants,
one
must
kill
all
bacteria
to
make
sure
this
will
not
happen.
Though
one
should
not
normally
use
disinfectant
for
the
reasons
stated
above,
the
most
effective
disinfectant
was
Spic
and
Span.
The
most
bacterial
colonies
on
Spic
and
Span
was
4,
1
less
than
Zep,
and
43
less
than
the
non-treated
control
(charts
1-3).
The
total
surface
area
covered
was
always
less
than
the
other
two
groups
($ig
1),
especially
less
than
the
control
group,
coming
in
with
.8%
less
covered
than
Zep,
and
15.7%
less
than
the
control
on
the
$inal
day
end
(chart
3).
Zep
was
the
less
effective
out
of
the
two,
though
Zep
still
did
much
better
than
the
control
group,
showing
that
disinfectant
is
still
better
than
nothing,
the
control.
The
control
is
much
needed
in
these
experiments
in
drawing
conclusions
as
the
control
shows
what
would
happen
with
no
disinfectant.
One
can
then
compare
what
happens
with
disinfectant
in
the
different
categories
to
see
if
the
disinfectant
actually
did
anything
more
successful
than
normal.
For
this
experiment,
one
important
thing
was
to
inoculate
the
bacteria
from
the
same
site
so
that
there
would
be
the
same
amount
of
bacteria
on
the
petri
dish
before
the
disinfectant
was
applied.
This
limits
sources
of
error.
However,
even
when
sterilized,
a
$inger
can
not
possibly
not
have
bacteria
already
existing
on
the
afore-mentioned
$inger.
This
is
a
source
of
error
as
some
petri
plates
started
out
with
more
bacteria
than
others.
Also,
the
time
that
the
$inger
was
rubbed
against
the
doorknob
varied,
so
some
$ingers
had
more
bacteria
on
them.
To
solve
these
sources
of
error,
one
could
use
a
sterile
cotton
swab
and
wipe
the
doorknob
for
a
set
time,
such
as
5
seconds.
Conclusion
The
hypothesis
was
approved,
and
the
most
effective
disinfectant
did
kill
the
most
bacteria.
The
student
did
learn
about
using
disinfectants
and
how
disinfectants
limit
bacterial
growth.