proteins.) If necessary, it may be useful for you to review the Scientific Method Tutorial (found in the Course Content section of the classroom). Lab Materials You may need the following, depending on your experimental design: Materials in your lab kit: none Additional materials you may need: plastic beakers or cups hydrogen peroxide solution (from Lab 4) yeast (from Lab 4) sample of fresh meat, about 1 cm cubed in size (unprocessed and uncooked, e.g., liver, steak, fish, or poultry—particularly organs) sample of fresh vegetable, about 1 cm cubed in size (e.g., potatoes or other root vegetables) a pen for labeling the beakers or cups a ruler with centimeter markings 1. Write a brief introduction. Include the question that you are asking and a clear hypothesis for your experiment (15 points). 2. Design an experiment. Provide a detailed account of the materials and methods used to conduct the experiment. Also include the methods for data collection and analysis (20 points). 3. Conduct the experiment and record your results below. What did you observe? Which samples showed bubbling? Rate the bubbling for comparison between samples. Present your data in table or graph format. You might also include pictures (20 points). 4. Use your knowledge about enzymes to interpret and discuss your results. It may be necessary for you to refer to your textbook and/or use other information resources. What effect does the acid have on the enzyme? Looking back, how could you have improved the experiment? (20 points) 5. What is your conclusion? Was your hypothesis supported? (15 points) 6. Cite all reference sources used (including text book) and provide a reference section with citations in APA format (10 points). Grading Your Final Applied Lab Project will be graded based on the following criteria (100 points total): Excellent Good Poor Unacceptable Outline 5 points Outline includes brief description of planned experiment that meets the assignment description. Submitted on time. 5 points Outline includes brief description of planned experiment, but a few issues with content, relevance and/or organization. Submitted on time. 3-4 points Outline includes brief description of planned experiment, but major issues with content, relevance and/or organization, and/or not submitted on time. 1-2 points No outline submitted 0 points Introduction, Question and Hypothesis 15 points Accurate and specific introduction, question and hypothesis that is directly related to the experiment 12-15 points Introduction, question, and/or hypothesis is somewhat vague or includes some mitakes, and/or not directly related to experiment 5-11 points Missing introduction, question and/or hypothesis, and/or very vague and/or not related to experiment. 1-4 point Question and hypothesis missing 0 points Experimental Design, Materials and Methods 20 points Experiment is designed to directly test the hypothesis; description of experiment is detailed and well written and includes all materials and methods used. 18-20 points Experiment is designed to directly test the hypothesis, but description is somewhat inaccurate and/or some information about materials and methods used is missing and/or minor problems with language and/or organization. 9-17 points Experiment is not well designed to test the hypothesis, and/or most of the materials and methods used are not described well, and/or major problems with language and organization. 1-8 points No description of experimental design, materials and methods used. 0 points Results 20 points Results are clearly and accurately presented in a table or graph format. Pictures support the data in the table and/or graphs. 18-20 points Results are presented, but minor problems with clarity and/or accuracy. 9-17 points Results are described, but major problems with clarity and/or accuracy and/or results not presented in table or graph. 1-8 points Results are not included. 0 points Discussion of Results 20 points A well written discussion of results that includes knowledge about enzymes learned from text book and course modules and/or web-sources and how experiment could have been improved.