HKAL 2000

BIOLOGY
ADVANCED LEVEL

The number of candidates sitting the English and the Chinese versions of the written examinations were 6,157 and 509 respectively. In view of the small number of candidates taking the Chinese version, the comments made in this subject report are based mainly on the performance of the English-version candidates. Paper 1 The whole of Paper 1 was used as the moderation instrument for the Teacher Assessment Scheme (TAS). Candidates performance on this paper is summarized in the table below: Question Number Section A Q.1 8 Section B Q.9 Q.10 Q.11 Q.12 All questions were compulsory. Section A Q.1 Good. A common problem was that some candidates failed to relate the abundance of the organelles to the functions of the liver cells. In most cases, they just mentioned the functions of the named organelles. Good. However, some candidates were confused about the type of nuclear division involved in the formation of pollen grains and male gametes in flowering plants, as well as the formation of spermatogonia and sperms in mammals. Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Performance in General

Q.2

2000-AL-BIO

Q.3

(b)

Although some candidates mentioned the correct way to prevent the development of a follicle, they failed to give an accurate explanation of the mechanism involved. They either gave the functions of FSH and LH in the development of the follicle or stated that there was no FSH or no LH produced when the hormones(s) progesterone and / or oestrogen was / were applied. Poor. Most candidates failed to identify the corpus luteum in the photomicrograph, and thus also lost the mark for stating its function.

(c)

Q.4

Fair. The examiners agreed that they would accept either graph A or B as an answer as long as the explanation was correct and concurred with the graph selected. Most candidates indicated that graph A represented the growth pattern of a rice plant, but they failed to give an appropriate explanation for their answer. They just gave a detailed description of the shape of the curve. Only a few gave a reasonable explanation to account for the drop of biomass at the end. (a) Satisfactory. Most candidates correctly identified the organisms, however, many failed to underline their scientific names. Some showed clear weakness in using the key to identify the specimens. Poor. It was rather disappointing that candidates were not very familiar with the binomial nomenclature. They mixed up genus and species names. Poor. Most candidates failed to indicate the correct location of the locomotory organs of a starfish.

Q.5

(b)

(c)

Based on markers comments, this was one of the easiest question in 1A. However, candidates failed to score very high marks here. It is recommended that candidates should practise more on the usage and construction of a key. The concept and rules of binomial nomenclature should not be overlooked.

2000-AL-BIO

Q.6

Fair. Most candidates gave an appropriate experimental design but failed to point out some important steps, such as incubation and filtration to separate the yeast cells from the supernatant. A few candidates wrongly designed an experiment to show that carbon dioxide was produced, or to show the effect of temperature on invertase activity in a yeast culture. More hands-on training in the laboratory is needed to make candidates realize how they can put experimental designs to work. Good. Some candidates failed to relate the well-developed posterior lobe of the pituitary to the water conservation mechanism involved. The candidates were confused about the usage of terms such as produce, secrete and release of ADH. (a) Unsatisfactory. Only a small proportion of the drawings was of an acceptable quality. The drawings showed little resemblance to the photomicrograph and were not in the right proportion and size. A few candidates did not draw the larvae shown in the photomicrograph at all. Good. Some candidates wrongly indicated that the segmented abdomen was used for locomotion. This indicated that these candidates had not read the question carefully which asked them to point out the appendages involved in locomotion. Poor. Some candidates failed to point out the significance of the larval stage to the marine crab. Most failed to state that the larval stage was important for dispersal to a new habitat.

Q.7

Q.8

(b)

(c)

Section B In general, candidates were handicapped by their inability to communicate effectively. They failed to express their ideas concisely and precisely in an organized manner. Their data interpretation skill and deduction skill were also rather weak.

2000-AL-BIO

Q.9

(a)

(i)

Quite a number of candidates failed to use the appropriate significant figures in their answers. Some candidates did not interpret the data as required. They just restated the numerical data. Many candidates wrote erroneously on the denaturing effect of heat on protein structure. They were confused about the meaning of and the relationship among primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary structures of proteins. Many did not know that the breaking of covalent bonds (i.e. peptide bonds and disulphide bonds) actually involves chemical reactions, thus, heat treatment (except under extreme condition), which is a physical process, would not break these bonds readily. This part was quite well answered on the whole. However, quite a number of candidates had difficulties in making comparisons and in adopting a systematic and logical approach to explain their answers. Candidates seldom linked their explanations with growth / increase in body mass.

(ii)

(iii)

(b)

(iii)

Q.10

Many candidates failed to relate the experimental data with genetic principles to give logical deductions and interpretations. In many cases, candidates just regurgitated textbook knowledge without showing an ability to apply their knowledge in a novel situation. Very often, limitations in the effective use of language severely affected performance. (a) Many candidates failed to explain the concept that the dominant allele is expressed in the heterozygous condition. Many did not understand that phenotype refers to the observed characteristics of an organism that is a consequence of gene expression (in this case, the expression of dominant alleles). Moreover, some candidates wrongly spelt heterozygous as heterologous, which has a different meaning altogether.

2000-AL-BIO

(b)

Many candidates had problems in distinguishing genes from alleles. Some candidates failed to select the appropriate data from Table 2, to derive genetic ratios using these data and to use them to explain their answer. (i) Most candidates who received a high score in this part also performed well in Q.10 on the whole. The less able candidates failed to make use of the given data to generate a ratio that showed deviations from Mendels Law. Many candidates had difficulties in the proper usage of terms such as linkage, linkage group, complete linkage, incomplete linkage, etc.

(c)

(ii)

(d)

Many candidates just stated the pattern of inheritance of a quantitative trait by recalling text book knowledge instead of relating the data from the two tables to illustrate the pattern and the characteristics of polygenic inheritance. It was quite common that candidates erroneously considered monohybrid inheritance as the cause of discontinuous variation.

Q.11

Many keywords were wrongly spelt, e.g. pancreas, insulin, diabetes, etc. Some carelessly mixed up glucagon with glycogen. (a) (i) Many wrongly stated that the purpose of fasting is to use up the glucose reserve. Only a few candidates correctly pointed out that glucose in plasma would be consumed by blood cells. Many candidates had difficulties in clearly explaining the function of insulin in regulating plasma glucose level. Many erroneously stated that insulin converts glucose into glycogen, as if insulin works like an enzyme. Some candidates had the wrong concept that blood glucose level is monitored by the hypothalamus and the liver

(ii)

(iii)

2000-AL-BIO

instead of the pancreas. A few even stated that the liver produces insulin, which is not correct. (b) Most candidates were rather weak in this part. They had severe difficulties in giving precise and concise logical deductions. Some of these problems may be due to poor language ability. Many candidates wrongly stated that insulin can cure diabetes. The accurate verb to use here is to treat diabetes, not to cure.

(c)

Q.12

(a)

Some common weaknesses included : failure to give a meaningful title to the graph which can stand alone to tell the reader what the graph is about; bad choice of scale for the Y axis which subsequently reduced the accuracy in plotting the data points; failure to use different symbols to distinguish the data points for the different curves; in this question using the same symbol for the different curves would lead to an overlapping point; illegitimate extrapolation of curves; and failure to determine when to use jointed-line curves and smooth line curves.

(b)

In general, most candidates were good at describing the data based on the plotted graph. Some have difficulties in : distinguishing the term growth from growth rate; deducing the effect of phosphate on growth; and deducing the effect of salinity stress.

A few candidates who did not know the exact factor(s) affecting the growth of algae tried to state all factors in their answers, i.e. they tended to make wild guesses which contradict each other.

2000-AL-BIO

(c)

Some outstanding candidates capably identified the multifactorial influences on the growth of algae, and provided very good answers in depicting the limiting factor (such as the limitation of marine algal growth due to freshwater at the surface of an estuary even though light is sufficient, and the limitation of light intensity at deep water even though salinity is suitable).

2000-AL-BIO

Paper 2 Question Number * Section A Q.1 Q.2 Q.3 * Section B Q.4 Q.5 Q.6 Section C Q.7 Q.8 Q.9 Q.10 * (E) (C) 3% 19% 43% 35% Poor (E) / Fair (C) Good Fair (E) / Good (C) Fair 67% 50% 81% Good Satisfactory (E) / Fair (C) Satisfactory (E) / Poor (C) 57% 87% 55% Satisfactory (E) / Good (C) Good (E) / Fair (C) Good (E) / Fair (C) Popularity Performance in General

A choice of 2 out of 3 questions A choice of 1 out of 4 questions English-version candidates Chinese-version candidates

Section A The overall performance was satisfactory. For Q.2 and Q.3, although some candidates obtained full marks, a diverse range of marks was achieved by candidates. One general weakness in candidates performance was their inability to answer in a concise manner. Regurgitation of memorized information which was not relevant to the question was evident from the answers to Q.2 (a) and Q.3(a)(i). Q.1 (a) Many candidates did not have a clear concept of seed dormancy. Only a few correctly addressed the fact that seeds fail to germinate even when the necessary conditions are available. Most of the candidates took the advantage of seed dormancy (to survive unfavorable conditions) as the

2000-AL-BIO

meaning of seed dormancy, which is not correct. Other mistakes included mixing up pollination with seed dispersal, failure to distinguish between gamete and seed, etc. (b) Many candidates failed to give a satisfactory answer because they were not familiar with farming practices, e.g. they did not even know that only the grains of wheat are harvested and not the entire plant. Most candidates did not refer to the characteristics of seed dormancy and seed dispersal in their discussion, instead they discussed artificial selection and gene mutation of plants in general. Some answered in detail the mechanism of gene mutation and the applications of genetic engineering in the domestication of wheat. Many candidates did not know the meaning of cease in the question and gave wrong answers. Some candidates mistook artificial vegetative propagation as artificial selection. Instead of naming the pump at the membrane as sodium and potassium pump, most candidates gave inaccurate answers such as sodium pump or cation pump. Many of them were confused about the direction of fluxes of sodium and potassium ions during the process. Many candidates described the events as triggered by the arrival of an action potential at a particular site of the neurone, a phenomenon which was not related to the maintenance of the resting potential in a neurone. Many candidates erroneously stated that the nature of neural transmission is electrical. The correct answer should be electrochemical. A lot of the candidates mistook that the reason for the faster rate of transmission along a neurone when compared to that across the synapse was the presence of the myelin sheath. Some candidates confused the use of terms such as the binding site and active site. Some did not contrast the two types of transmission as asked, instead they treated the two events as consecutive events.

(c)

Q.2

(a)

(b)

2000-AL-BIO

(c)

Many candidates failed to draw a proper flow chart. In a flow chart, only terms or phrases should be used; and they should be connected by arrows to show the sequence of events and the structures involved. Long sentences should be avoided. Concerning the transmission of the auditory signal, some candidates wrongly indicated in the flow chart that the auditory nerve has to go through the spinal cord before reaching the cerebrum. Some candidates wrongly considered those events in the ear prior to the cochlea as part of the nervous pathway. Some mistook the auditory sense as visual or pain sensations. Others did not have a clear picture of the nervous pathway between the various centres in the cerebrum. A lot of candidates mispelled and mixed up the terms cerebrum and cerebellum. Many candidates did not master the skill in answering compare and contrast type question. They simply described the two respiratory processes in separate paragraphs without making comparisons. Thus, although they knew the processes well, they lost a lot of marks due to this failure to compare. Those candidates who did proper comparisons obtained high marks in this question. Some candidates used the symbol ETC as a short form for electron transport chain. This is not recommended, as ETC is not commonly used in biochemistry literature. Many candidates explained in detail the process of the Krebs cycle. This was a waste of time as this process is not involved in anaerobic respiration and no comparison could be made. Many candidates did not fully understand the meaning of wilting. They wrongly considered wilting as the death of the plant. Very few candidates correctly pointed out that losing turgor of mesophyll cells resulted in wilting. They only mentioned plant cells or cells instead of mesophyll cells specifically. Quite a number of candidates did not know that anaerobic respiration in plant and animal cells are different, and wrongly stated that lactic acid fermentation occurs in plants.

Q3

(a) (i)

(ii)

2000-AL-BIO

(b)

Only a few candidates pointed out specifically that only skeletal muscle cells can undergo anaerobic respiration. However, most of them knew that lactic acid is the product of the process.

Section B Section B requires essay-type answers. This year, part of each of the three questions required candidates to give a comparative account. Some candidates answered in table and/or note form. This is not appropriate and a mark penalty was imposed. Other candidates wrote, at length and in paragraphs, all that they knew about the systems / processes to be compared. But, there was hardly any serious effort in making a proper comparison. This was quite a common mistake, notwithstanding similar comments in previous examiners reports. In handling this type of question, candidates are expected to identify parallel features for comparison. Some spelling mistakes were detected in the answers year after year. Sometimes, the misspelt word carries an entirely different meaning, e.g. bone misspelled as bond. Candidates should pay more attention to spelling. Q.4 On the whole, this was the best answered question in 2B. However, some of the candidates attempted to compare only two of the three required animals and totally neglected the third one. Some made very little effort in elaborating the role of the skeletal systems during locomotion in the earthworm and in the rabbit. They merged their very brief answers to this latter part of the question with their answers to the first part of the question. Some simply wrote independent accounts for each of the animals without attempting to make a comparison. Not all candidates correctly pointed out that the skeletons in earthworms, grasshoppers and rabbits are respectively a hydroskeleton, an exoskeleton and an endoskeleton. In some instances there were confusions : the grasshopper and earthworm skeletons were erroneously stated as endoskeletons and the rabbit skeleton as an exoskeleton. Not all candidates realized that rabbits are segmented just like earthworms and grasshoppers and that earthworms are not jointed, in contrast to grasshoppers and rabbits.

2000-AL-BIO

Lengthy but irrelevant descriptions of changes in the A band and I band during muscle contraction in rabbits and accounts of external morphology of grasshoppers appeared in some answers. Misconceptions such as the following were detected : the grasshopper skeleton is made of bones, coelomic fluid in earthworms is compressible, contraction of circular muscle and longitudinal muscle results in shortening and lengthening respectively of the affected body region in the earthworm, longitudinal / circular and radial muscles are antagonistic in action. Not many candidates made the point that the lever system involved in rabbit locomotion serves to amplify the range of movement. The following words were frequently misspelt: bone, cartilage, cuticle, lever and antagonistic. Muscle relaxation was often written as muscle release. The word both was used instead of all when reference was made to all three animals. Despite the aforementioned shortcomings, this question was still the best answered one in Section B. Q.5 There was a lack of thorough understanding of the term incorporation which was a keyword in the question. It was misconstrued as absorption and transport. A variety of misconceptions were apparent in the answers: ammonia is generated during lightning nitrate is produced from atmospheric nitrogen during nitrogen fixation

In general, candidates confused nitrogen fixation with nitrification. Nitrogen fixation was thought to take place through the stomata and carbon fixation in the stomata and root hairs. Very few candidates mentioned ammonia production as a consequence of industrial processes. Some candidates presented in their answers accounts of the carbon cycle, photosynthesis and nitrogen cycle without making a serious effort to contrast N2 incorporation and CO2 incorporation into the angiosperm body. Many candidates spelt lightning and nitrifying incorrectly.

2000-AL-BIO

Q.6

Many candidates failed to handle this type of compare and contrast questions well. They merely wrote detailed but separate descriptions of the angiosperm and mammalian vascular systems. Lengthy accounts of blood vessel histology and cardiac cycle initiation were provided. The following misconceptions were noted in some candidates answers: l sieve tubes are made up of dead cells l heart rate is controlled by the hypothalamus l acetylcholine is a hormone The vascular system was carelessly mistaken as the digestive system or the respiratory system in some answers. Some candidates did not give an answer to the last part of the question. They had probably overlooked this part of the question. The words phloem, sympathetic, parasympathetic, heart and valve were frequently misspelt.

Section C The overall performance was satisfactory. Some outstanding candidates are to be commended for the breadth and depth of their knowledge of general biological issues. Some candidates, on the other hand, only provided superficial answers, reflecting their lack of awareness of general biological events. It is strongly recommended that students should receive a more comprehensive biological education through the use of the internet, oral presentations and/ or debates on global and local biologyrelated topics. The overall presentation and style of the essays had improved though the concluding remarks of many answers were still weak and lacking in direction. More practice on essay writing will definitely help to gear up students ability in giving answers in a structured and systematic manner.

Q.7

Many candidates were not familiar with the principles of ecological succession and their knowledge of the marine ecosystem was on the whole fragmentary. The process of ecological succession at the implementation sites given by the candidates were inappropriate. They also failed to differentiate the biological impacts of the artificial reef on the pelagic and benthic communities. The use of the artificial reef as a breeding ground and its contribution to the

2000-AL-BIO

conservation of marine species were very often neglected by the candidates. Candidates knowledge of the negative impacts of the artificial reef was also relatively poor. Q.8 Though many candidates seemed to have some knowledge of transgenic technology and genetically modified (GM) foods, their understanding of the underlying principles was incomplete. Many failed to mention the selection / screening process as well as the maintenance / propagation of the transformed lines. Candidates answers showed confusion between traditional agricultural practices such as breeding and hybridization, and transgenic technology. Candidates, however, showed a fairly good understanding of the enhancement of yield and quality of food by transgenic technology. Suitable examples of GM foods were cited in many cases. Knowledge of the preventive measures in minimizing the potential risks to health and environment was, however, inadequate. Many candidates misunderstood that the mad cow disease was caused by either virus or bacteria; only very few candidates correctly indicated that prion is the causative agent. Almost all candidates erroneously put thorough cooking of the contaminated beef as a means to avoid getting the mad cow disease. The part on bird's flu was not as well attempted as that on AIDS. The prospects for vaccine development were poorly discussed. Many answers did not have an introduction and a conclusion. Many candidates described the physiological changes during exercise rather than the physiological adjustments induced after regular aerobic exercise. Some candidates confused the adjustments induced after aerobic exercise with those induced by short-duration maximal effort exercise. Quite a number of candidates gave an over-simplified description of the beneficial effects of exercise on the body as a whole such as strengthening the system and enhancing the function. They failed to address the specific systems asked for in the question. Many candidates failed to relate the health-related benefits with the correct physiological adjustments induced. The part on environmental conditions was not well answered. Many candidates quoted irrelevant environmental situations which had no physiological implications . Only a few candidates had a clear concept of the physiological effects of unfavourable environmental conditions under which exercise should be avoided.

Q.9

Q.10

2000-AL-BIO

Paper 4 Practical Q.1 Physiology : Osmotic potential in leaf cells Most of the candidates gave the correct experimental method but some of them did not know the underlying principles. Only one candidate presented the results on graph paper. Q.2 Botany spot (a) Most of the H.P. drawings did not resemble the cell types specialized in transport. The annotations were wrongly focused on the thickening of the wall of the xylem vessels instead of features related to transport. Many candidates did not realize that xylem and phloem are the names of the tissues, not the names of the cell types. Those who tried did a reasonable comparison of specimens C and D. A few candidates carelessly confused the two specimens. Some of the accounts of the structural modifications were not related to habitat adaptation.

(b)

Q.3

Zoology spot (a) Only very few candidates correctly identified both of the given slides. Most of them were misled by the assumption that if one of the given slides was T.S. artery then the other slide must be T.S. vein. Candidates correctly related the finger-like projections of the ileum with the absorption of nutrients. However, only a few related the muscle layers with peristalsis. Candidates who identified the artery correctly also described the function of its muscle layer properly. Most of the candidates did well in stating that the exoskeleton limits the growth in size of insects and growth could only take place during periodic moulting. Most candidates failed to relate the morphology of the mouthparts to the feeding mode of the insect. The standard of the drawings of candidates was below the acceptable level and the annotations were poor.

(b)

2000-AL-BIO

TEACHER ASSESSMENT SCHEME SUPERVISORS REPORT

A-LEVEL AND AS-LEVEL

In the 2000 A-level Biology Examination, 5811 candidates participated in the A-level TAS and 6 candidates participated in the AS-level TAS. The 368 participating schools were organized into 24 groups, each made up of 14-15 schools. The assessment work of the teachers in each group was monitored by a coordinator throughout the two years of the A-level or AS-level course. Feedback from the coordinators indicated that the overall performance of candidates in their practical work was satisfactory, the quality of biological drawings and report writing for investigations still require much improvement. Specific comments on the performance of the candidates in individual assessment areas are elaborated in the following paragraphs. Area A Many candidates did not have the basic skills for making biological drawings. Some L.P. drawings were rather diagrammatic, showing little or poor resemblance to the original specimens; they were made up of broken and wavy lines, and showed inaccurate proportions. The quality of H.P. drawings was in general not satisfactory. One main reason was that the drawings tended to include too many cells that lacked cellular details. It is expected that a H.P. drawing should either show cellular details of a variety of cell types or a diversity of subcellular structures of a single cell type. Other problems of the drawings included using shading for cellular structures, wrong spellings for labels and incomplete titles. Area B This year, more candidates attempted to include the principle of design in B1. This was an improvement. However, many could not distinguish between hypothesis, theory and principle of design. It was noted that some reports just included the theoretical basis of the investigation without referring to the application of such theory to the design and methodology of the investigations concerned. The general performance on Area B2 was satisfactory. A common weakness was that the tables or graphs of results did not have suitable titles, units or labels. It was noted in a couple of cases that the graphs for the estimation of water potential and osmotic potential were wrongly plotted using a series of
2000-AL-BIO

straight lines. Such graphs should be plotted by joining the data points with a smooth curve or a best straight line as these graphs were used for prediction purposes. In Area B3, many candidates did not know how to analyse and interpret their results. They were weak in looking for trends or relationships in their experimental data, and in drawing and evaluating conclusions based on the results obtained. Many reports elaborated the precautions, which should have been stated in B1 as part of the procedure. Some elaborated the sources of error without discussing the significance of the data collected. Some even put the discussion after the conclusion, which should be logically derived from the discussion.

2000-AL-BIO