1. How do the three objective lenses on the microscope you used differ and what are the advantages and disadvantages of each?
• The three main objective lenses we used were the 4x, 10x, and 40x magnification.
• The 4x was great in initially finding the item we were looking for. It also gave a good look at general size of the overall item we were viewing. It wasn’t that great at letting you see a ton of detail.
• The 10x was the most frequently used objective. It gave us a really nice view of each of the items with plenty of detail, without getting too fuzzy and losing on detail. We could find the items somewhat well, but it was not as easy as it was with the 4x.
• The 40x was the least used objective lens. The 40x lens is great for items …show more content…
How variable were the lengths of Paramecium caudatum cells relative to the lengths and widths of the cells you observed in Elodea leaves?
• The lengths of the Paramecium caudatum in comparison to the lengths of the Elodea leaves, were actually pretty similar. The Paramecium caudatum were rounder in shape, and kind of skinny, while the Elodea leaves were a little wider and squarer in shape. But in overall length, they were pretty similar, however, the Elodea leaves varied more in length than did the Paramecium caudatum. Some of the Elodea leaves were more square-ish than rectangular. Most of the Paramecium caudatum were pretty uniform in length and size in general.
3. What size range did the single eukaryotic cells you examined span?
• The size range that I came up with is approximately 140 to 300 micrometers for the Paramecium caudatum. The average length of the Paramecium caudatum was 0.0488 µm.
4. What subcellular feature did you recognize and identify in all of the organisms you examined?
• We noticed the cell wall or the plasma membrane of each of the organisms. In the Rotifer that we saw, we also seen what looked to be part of the digestive system, including the mouth, and butt of the …show more content…
Which of the three objective lenses you used gives you the best overview of the threads, allows you to see the greatest detail of the substructure of each threads, and is most useful for finding the threads to look at in the first place?
• The objective lens that gave us the best overview of the threads would be the 4x. This kind of goes back to my answer for number one. The 4x allowed us to find the threads quickly, as well as giving us a good overview of the threads without giving us much detail. It is also the objective that was most useful for finding the threads to look at in the first place.
• The objective lens that allowed us to see the greatest detail of the substructure of each thread would probably be the 10x. It allowed us to see the details of each thread and how each individual thread is made up of material twisted together. We originally thought that the 40x would be a better objective to use, however, when we were looking at the threads at that magnification, the details began to blur together. This could be a user error (and I’m sure it is), however, we still believe the 10x is the best
• The three main objective lenses we used were the 4x, 10x, and 40x magnification.
• The 4x was great in initially finding the item we were looking for. It also gave a good look at general size of the overall item we were viewing. It wasn’t that great at letting you see a ton of detail.
• The 10x was the most frequently used objective. It gave us a really nice view of each of the items with plenty of detail, without getting too fuzzy and losing on detail. We could find the items somewhat well, but it was not as easy as it was with the 4x.
• The 40x was the least used objective lens. The 40x lens is great for items …show more content…
How variable were the lengths of Paramecium caudatum cells relative to the lengths and widths of the cells you observed in Elodea leaves?
• The lengths of the Paramecium caudatum in comparison to the lengths of the Elodea leaves, were actually pretty similar. The Paramecium caudatum were rounder in shape, and kind of skinny, while the Elodea leaves were a little wider and squarer in shape. But in overall length, they were pretty similar, however, the Elodea leaves varied more in length than did the Paramecium caudatum. Some of the Elodea leaves were more square-ish than rectangular. Most of the Paramecium caudatum were pretty uniform in length and size in general.
3. What size range did the single eukaryotic cells you examined span?
• The size range that I came up with is approximately 140 to 300 micrometers for the Paramecium caudatum. The average length of the Paramecium caudatum was 0.0488 µm.
4. What subcellular feature did you recognize and identify in all of the organisms you examined?
• We noticed the cell wall or the plasma membrane of each of the organisms. In the Rotifer that we saw, we also seen what looked to be part of the digestive system, including the mouth, and butt of the …show more content…
Which of the three objective lenses you used gives you the best overview of the threads, allows you to see the greatest detail of the substructure of each threads, and is most useful for finding the threads to look at in the first place?
• The objective lens that gave us the best overview of the threads would be the 4x. This kind of goes back to my answer for number one. The 4x allowed us to find the threads quickly, as well as giving us a good overview of the threads without giving us much detail. It is also the objective that was most useful for finding the threads to look at in the first place.
• The objective lens that allowed us to see the greatest detail of the substructure of each thread would probably be the 10x. It allowed us to see the details of each thread and how each individual thread is made up of material twisted together. We originally thought that the 40x would be a better objective to use, however, when we were looking at the threads at that magnification, the details began to blur together. This could be a user error (and I’m sure it is), however, we still believe the 10x is the best