Global Worming: the solution or

complication to Global Warming

A Scientific Investigation
By
Year 8, 2017
Introduction:
Climate Change is a major problem our Earth is facing right now. It can impact human health and our water and food
security, which are the basic foundations to our civilisation today. As described by Tim Flannery in his book We Are
the Weather Makers, “Our cities are like rainforests in their complexity…Only in a rainforest is there a supply of energy
and moisture that is big enough and regular enough to feed such specialised creatures…” It would be the same way for
our cities; how it supplies us with clean water and nutritious food and resources to learn, work and make a living. But
think of the opposite, when we have no fresh water and filth would accumulate, petrol supplies would come to a halt
and people wouldn’t be able to get to work. This rapid shift in climate can place stress on our global society through the
altering of location of sources of water and food and their volume. Also, it would change weather patterns and create
hard predictions of how the weather will behave in the short and long terms. Is it due to our human actions? Or is it part
of mother nature for it to have an enhanced greenhouse effect? If so, what are the factors? Is it the animals? What about
earthworms and their contribution to global warming? What’s the discussion out there today regarding earthworms?
Earthworms, long standing in the position as a major part of the food chain being a crucial decomposer as a macro-
organism as well as being a food source for other consumers, are vital to soil health which in turn helps the plants. Some
say that the activity of earthworms can increase net carbon dioxide emissions from the soil while other experiments find
that earthworms decrease in net carbon dioxide emissions. Which is true?
The answer to this changes everything; it could present to us a new solution to be tried for one of our globe’s biggest
problem or could help us early prepare by minimising one of the causes which are earthworms (if proved to be the
complication). We are now at a stage where each factor whether contributing or stopping climate change matters since
what we do now decides the future of Earth and what happens to us. We need to address this important question so that
we can use the knowledge to the advantage to combat climate change.

Aim:
The aim of this experiment is to determine whether earthworms are the solution or complication to global warming;
whether with earthworms, will the soil produce more carbon dioxide than just normal soil with no earthworms. This
takes into context the respiration of earthworms as well as decomposition of material and suggested tunnelling of
earthworms to increase the release of carbon stored in the soil. This can also be one of the supporting evidence for one
side of the Earthworm dilemma, which can create more interest in the area to either open a new solution for climate
change or be the early warning of what is to come in the future due to earthworms so that we can act earlier and be
prepared.

Background Research:
BACKGROUND INFO ON EARTHWORMS
Earthworms, being hermaphrodites (exhibit both male and female characteristics), are the major decomposers of organic
matter, from consuming them, as well as the bacteria and fungi growing upon these materials.
Scientific Name – Lumbricina
Species – Divided into 23 families, more than 700 genera, and more than 7000 species.
Type – Invertebrates
Diet – Earthworms get their nutrition from the things in the soil such as decaying roots and/or leaves, as well as living
organisms such as nematodes, protozoans, rotifers, bacteria and fungi. Occasionally, animal manures and the
decomposing remains of other animals. They can eat up to one third its body weight in a day.
Average Lifespan in the Wild – Up to 6 years
Size – Up to 14 inches (35.56cm)
Weight – Up to 11g
Soil pH in Habitat – Earthworms live in soils that have a pH (CaCl2) more than 4.5. Since earthworms need a
continuous supply of calcium, they are absent in soils which are low in this element, therefore a pH less than 4.5. A
research was conducted in South Australia, discovering that earthworm numbers were doubled when the pH was from
4.1 to 6.7.
Background info on soil pH: Measuring soil pH is determining how acid or alkaline the soil is, on a scale of 0 to 14,
with a neutral value of 7. Soil pH is important because it directly affects root activity and the absorption of essential
nutrients, which in turn affects growth of plants. Refer to the tables below to see the relationships between soil pH and
nutrient availability and the plants which can grow in certain pH levels.

General Plants Acid loving Plants Only a few Plants can grow in
(preferring pH 6-7) (preferring Ph 5-6) slightly alkaline
(Ph 7-7.5)
Most fruits and citrus trees Azaleas and Camellias Lilac
Most vegetables Gardenia, Blue berries Figs
Rose and most flowers Rhododendrons Pink Hydrangeas
Lawn and most garden plants Blue Hydrangeas Black Currents

Habitat – Earthworms are found in most temperate soils and many tropical soils, and are found seasonally at all depths
in the soil. They also depend on the species, and they are separated into three major ecological groups based on their
feeding and burrowing habits:
Surface soil and litter species ~ Living in or near surface plant litter (compost piles), epigenic species are small and are
adapted to the varying levels of moisture and temperature at the soil surface. They will not survive in the low organic
matter environment of soil.
Upper soil species ~ Endogeic species habitat the upper soil strata, feeding on the soil and the organic matter (geophages).
They form temporary channels which gets filled with undigested material (cast material), that has passed through the
worm’s intestines.
Deep-burrowing species ~ Nightcrawlers which are Anecic species, being the common earthworm (Lumbricus terrestris),
create permanent burrows/tunnels that extend several metres into the soil. They feed on surface litter and they can block
the mouths of their burrows with organic matter, whether it be cast or plugs.
Body Composition – diagram. Protonium is a lip-like extension
Annuli, which are ring-like over the earthworm’s mouth to
segments that make up the assist in pushing food into the
worm’s body mouth. Note: The picture doesn’t
really show the mouth and other
surrounding parts in detail.

The collar-like organ, clitellum is

the component which earthworms
need to reproduce. It is normally
found near the first third of the
earthworm’s body.

Lacking lungs or any respiratory

Setae or small bristles which organs, earthworms breathe
cover the annuli for the worm to through their skin. There’s also a
use to move above and burrow. lubricating fluid is produced by
Anus, which is the end of the their skin to keep it moist and
There are four pairs of bristles on
earthworm’s body, otherwise known as helps them when moving through
each segment except the first and
the opening of the intestines. the soil.
last.

Inner Body Parts ~

Reproduction – They have a gestation period of 2-4

weeks where the sperm and egg cells are enclosed in a lemon-shaped cocoon made from a liquid secreted from its
clitellum (see diagram). The baby worms emerge after the gestation period.
Environmental Role – Earthworms are the source of food for many animals such as birds, rats, toads and used as bait
for fish. They play a major role in decomposition and there’s been debate regarding whether earthworms are able to
help the soil store carbon dioxide or when creating the many tunnels release the carbon dioxide into the atmosphere,
contributing to global warming.
So, first… WHAT IS GLOBAL WARMING?
In the past 1300 years, there has been an ongoing rise in global average temperatures near the Earth’s surface. This is
known as global warming.
Scientists have come to the undoubted conclusion that the increased levels of greenhouse gases must have caused the
Earth to warm in response. This is due to the known fact of the heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases,
as known since the mid-19th century. This is what is known as the greenhouse effect. But since carbon dioxide levels
have been increasing more and more with the increased levels of greenhouse gas emissions due to human activity*.
Evidence of the greenhouse effect has been seen in the global sea level rise, global temperature rise, warming oceans,
decreased snow cover and ice sheets (including the Arctic sea ice and glaciers), extreme climatic events (such as intense
rainfall and droughts), and ocean acidification.
 This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct
measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Credit: Vostok ice
core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.)

Overall, the current warming is occurring roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming,
according to NASA.
As stated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system
is unequivocal.”

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide – Currently it constitutes

about 0.04% (equal to 400 parts per million; ppm) by
volume of the atmosphere. Parts per million (ppm): The total
number of carbon dioxide molecules per million molecules
sampled.

THE EARTHWORM DILEMMA

Let’s look at the two sides of the argument, whether earthworms are accelerating or decelerating climate change:

EARHWORMS AS THE COMPLICATION

In a new study, published by Nature Climate Change, the researchers in Holland, the United States and Colombia
compiled the results of 237 separate experiments from other published studies to explore the earthworm’s role in global
greenhouse gas emissions which are the contributing cause to global warming.
The study found that approx. 20% of global carbon dioxide emissions and two thirds of nitrous oxide emissions come
from soil. And other statistics have said that the soil stores about 2.3 trillion tons of carbon—more than twice as much
as the atmosphere or vegetation. In comparison, burning fossil fuels releases about 9 billion tons of carbon dioxide per
year.
Soil Respiration and Decomposition
Soil respiration is a term used to describe the soil respiring carbon dioxide, from the organisms within the soil, which
includes the plants’ roots, the rhizosphere, microbes and fauna, which includes the macro-organisms, that also specifies
the earthworms.
Looking at an earthworm’s respiratory system and the carbon dioxide release from their respiration only, earthworms
do release carbon dioxide by letting it pass through their skin, and the skin must be moist for this diffusion to happen.
Earthworms get their skin moist by the body fluid and mucous released on the skin, which explains why earthworms
must be in damp or moist soil, as well as why they can’t go outside of the soil, except at night time, since they can
suffocate if it is too dry. The mucous covering the earthworm’s skin is what helps the earthworm take in the oxygen to
be carried to the heart, where it pumps out the oxygenated blood to the head of the earthworm and the carbon dioxide is
released from the earthworm’s skin again.
And this cellular respiration if released into the atmosphere, is able to contribute to 60% of soils’ CO2 emissions.
However, note that CO2 emissions are the movement of carbon dioxide from the soil to the atmosphere whereas,
decomposition and respiration is the production of CO2, but released into the soil. However, as soil carbon pools
accumulates over time, the CO2 is able to have high concentrations as to diffuse CO2 into the environment. Research
have concluded that if 10% of soil carbon pools was to be converted into CO2, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels would
increase by 1/5! However, this diffusion is affected by many other key factors within the environment which all
determines how fast CO2 molecules diffuse to the soil surface. For example, the soil moisture and soil texture, the
temperature, the pH and the density of the soil. And earthworms can play a role especially within soil texture…
Soil Porosity
As referred to by the authors of the study, earthworms act like soil ecosystem engineers; they help with the
decomposition of organic matter as well as helping with the soil’s physical structure by burrowing into it. This aerates
the soil, making it more porous, which has positive and negative effects ~
Positive (not to do with the soils producing carbon dioxide; not considered to be a supporting evidence for Earthworms
as the solution): Increase in porosity means a major tunnel for soil drainage, especially when there is heavy rainfall,
minimise surface water erosion including flash floods, increase water-holding capacity of soils, provide channels for
root growth (earthworms burrow deep and line these channels with nutrients already available for the roots to grow
deeper into the soil), and bury and shred plant residue (keeping the forest floor clean).
Negative: this increased porosity through earthworms creating these tunnels and airways, carbon dioxide which has been
stored in the soil can be gradually released.
Previous studies have shown that carbon binds to tiny mineral particles which is how carbon dioxide is stored in the soil.
This is the result of micro-organisms converting the carbon to bind to minerals in the soil. “We discovered veritable hot
spots showing a high proportion of carbon in the soil,” relates Cordula Vogel, the lead author of the latest study published
in Nature Communications, including researchers of the Technische Universitat Munchen (TUM). “Furthermore, new
carbon binds to areas which already have a high carbon content.”
In terms of earthworms making it more porous, through burrowing through the soil, aerating it, it releases the carbon
dioxide that was once trapped in the soil, contributing to global warming. Overall, the researchers determined that
earthworms' burrowing causes a 33% increase in carbon dioxide emissions, and a 42% increase in the emissions of
another greenhouse gas, nitrous oxide. However, the complication was that worms can increase the emissions of one
greenhouse gas while reducing the other. When experimenting with both gases, they found the overall impact of
earthworms as 16%; earthworms do increase net soil greenhouse gas emissions.
Increased Carbon Emissions with Increased Temperatures
According to an analysis of 439 studies, soils around the globe have increased their emissions of carbon dioxide over
the past few decades: increased 0.1% per year between 1989 and 2008.
This is due to the increasing temperatures (from global warming) have triggered microbes to speed up their consumption
of plant debris and other organic matter which is the same as decomposition for SOM, in turn increasing the flow of
carbon dioxide (contributing to global warming).
Basically, global warming is continuously contributing to global warming; the increased temperatures from global
warming trigger the faster decomposition and generates larger amounts of carbon dioxide quicker contributing to
global warming.
EARTHWORMS AS THE SOLUTION
According to a paper published in the journal Nature Communications, the combined team of researchers from the U.S.
and China have found that earthworms actually sequester more carbon dioxide than releasing it into the atmosphere.
This experiment was conducted with two kinds of earthworms and various soil types to see how much carbon dioxide
they sequester. This experiment was conducted after prior research concluding that the amount of carbon released from
the soil believed to be the impact of earthworms, up to 33%. This research team suggests that earlier studies have not
taken proper consideration of the amount of carbon which earthworms sequester.
With the given knowledge that soil contains lots of carbon, they looked at whether the stabilization and mineralization
(which is how plants absorb the nutrients due to this conversion) of carbon would affect net carbon sequestration,
according to their balance.
The Carbon Cycle
Carbon is one of the most important elements, as is what all living things are made of and are converted into different
forms through biological processes which continuously repeat as to what is known as the carbon cycle. It describes the
exchange of carbon between terrestrial vegetation, soil organic matter, the ocean and fossil fuels, all of which are not in
perfect balance to each other.
Human activity that plays a part in the carbon cycle is their burning of oil, coal, natural gas and soil and plant organic
matter. This releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere which contributes to the greenhouse effect and this can have
good consequences of the heat-trapping nature of these gases which is what keeps the earth warm and at a good
temperature which it is right now, with the carbon dioxide taking up about 1% of the atmosphere. However, if there was
a slight increase in carbon dioxide fluctuations, there would be big effects to our globe, which is what is gradually
happening now; the greenhouse effect and the carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere is at a rate larger that
the plants can intake through photosynthesis (where they absorb carbon dioxide and water in turn for oxygen and
glucose).
The next stage is when plants die and their parts break down into plant litter which is when it is decomposed into soil
organic matter (SOM), and this is performed by microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi and actinomycetes, all these
referred to as chemical decomposers (since they change the chemistry of organic wastes). There are also larger
decomposers known as macro-organisms, which includes mites, centipedes, snow bugs, snails, millipedes, springtails,
spiders, slugs, beetles, ants, flies, nematodes, flatworms, rotifers and earthworms. When they are decomposed, the
nutrients are transferred into the soil, adding to soil carbon pools which takes up more than twice as much carbon than
vegetation or the atmosphere which means that if all this carbon was released, the rate of the warming of earth would
be increased at least twenty times faster. This is what is gradually happening right now already with human activity to
the soil, from agricultural ploughing of large fields, accelerating the conversions of carbon into carbon dioxide and its
release into the atmosphere, and that is the last stage of the carbon cycle.
However, looking back at how the earthworms have played a part in this cycle, they do help retain the carbon through
the breaking down of plants and storing them in soil carbon pools.
Humification and Stabilization
Different products are released in the decomposition process. They include carbon dioxide, energy, water, plant nutrients
and resynthesized organic carbon compounds. This modified organic matter when successive in decomposition goes
through a process called humification, to form a more complex organic matter known as humus, which is able to affect
the soil properties. As it decomposes, the soil is coloured darker, soil aggregation (mixture) is increased, the ability to
attract and retain nutrients (CEC) is increased, adds nitrogen, phosphorus and other nutrients and most importantly,
allows stabilization. Stabilization is the process in which earthworms are able to convert the digestible carbon into a
form which can stay in the soil. Therefore, trapping the carbon dioxide.
Results and Other Supporting Research/Evidence
The results of the experiment proved that the rate of carbon stabilization was higher compared to carbon mineralization,
which increased net carbon sequestration.
Researchers in an international collaboration from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the University of Georgia,
Nanchang Institute of Technology, the University of Vermont, and the Guangdong Academy of Sciences have reached
the same conclusion. Their results, published in Nature Communications, suggest that earthworms actually trap carbon
dioxide in soil for an overall decrease in emissions.
"They’re stabilizing it through their faecal material. That type of carbon is more resistant to decay," said Deborah Neher
of the University of Vermont, in Burlington.
Known as litter, the organic matter which lies atop the soil is ingested by earthworms. In the earthworm’s body, it is
grounded to a pulp, then broken down and digested by their gut bacteria, later excreted back into the soil, which the
excrement holds/stores in the carbon.
The forests found in the northern part of the U.S. rely on the litter to regulate the temperature, moisture and nutrient
content of soil. However, some earthworm species in the area are invasive; they consume the litter quicker than the
forest regenerates and various tree species may not be able to survive with the decline in the litter layer.
A research was conducted, based on the knowledge of the problems that invasive earthworms bring. They compared a
microbe-infested soil with a microbe and earthworm-infested soil, looking at the carbon dioxide emission, carbon
mineralization and carbon stabilization. They found no difference. But they did discover that the excreted carbon was
trapped in the ground, rather than released into the air. This supported the carbon-trap theory.
"We're losing the litter on the surface of the soil which has affects on future forest composition but a lot of that may be
moving deeper into the soil and holding the carbon there," said Neher. "[The carbon] is just moving into deeper layers
in the soil."
SUMMARY
Earthworms as the complication refers to the fact that soil respiration as part of the carbon cycle, reinforced by the
decomposition of organic matter performed by earthworms is able to emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, when
there is build up of carbon storage pools. Also, the tunnelling of earthworms is able to release the once-trapped carbon
dioxide in the soil.
Earthworms as the solution refers to the fact that earthworms help with stabilization, converting carbon dioxide into a
different form so that it can be trapped in the soil. Also, their consumption of litter excretes carbon-stored faeces which
are not released into the atmosphere but trapped in the ground and this is helping the stabilization; this type of carbon is
more resistant to decay.
One says earthworms increase net carbon emissions; another says earthworms decrease net carbon emissions. We’ll
have to find out ourselves with conclusive evidence and objective evidence (based on true observations and research)
than inconclusive or subjective evidence (based on one’s opinions). However, since my experiment is not conducted
under perfect scientific conditions, including the length at which the measurements are taken and the number of repeats,
including the fairness of the test, my experiment result can only be referred to as a supporting evidence to a particular
point.
MY PROPOSED INVESTIGATION
While research has been done in the field of global worming; whether earthworms are accelerating climate change, the
results from each research have come to different conclusions which is what has formed the earthworm dilemma.
My scientific experiment will investigate the relationship between worms and the changes in the level of CO2 from the
soil, looking at the net increases in carbon dioxide, which from research can accumulate from their respiration or from
the soil porosity as caused by earthworms’ tunnelling. My experiment compares the changes in the level of CO2 from
where there are earthworms in the soil, compared to no earthworms, as well as collecting some data on the soil pH, to
see whether the soils provide a preferable home for the earthworms (since earthworms prefer a certain pH in soil).
I will be making use of a NeuLog CO2 logger sensor to measure the carbon dioxide levels. It is a carbon dioxide
measurement device, that is classified as a Chemical-Based CO2 sensor.
A little background of how this works: is that the sensor contains two electrodes (electrodes are electrical conductors);
an oxide electrode (formed when metals react with oxygen) and a reference electrode (an electrode which is accurately
maintained, for referencing; also known as the sensing element), bicarbonate based internal electrolyte solution
(electrically conductive solution containing bicarbonate HCO3 ions), a gas permeable membrane at the bottom of the
sensor.
When the CO2 enters through the permeable membrane, an electrochemical reaction occurs where the CO2 reacts with
water to form carbonic acid which is then split into bicarbonate and proton ions. The chemical equation is written
below:

CO2 + H2O = H2CO3 is the carbonic acid

= HCO3- + H+ is the bicarbonate + proton ions

These are valences, which is basically the measurement of its compatibility with other
elements based on the amount of electrons on the outermost shell since the elements are
considered to form stable chemical bonds only at the number of 8 electrons. So here, they
are bicarbonate with a valency of -1 and hydrogen with a valency of +1.

These equations are interchangeable, meaning that the bicarbonate and proton ions can change back into carbonic acid
which can change back into just water and carbon dioxide.
How this helps measure carbon dioxide is that the change of Ph of the electrolyte solution can determine the
measurement of carbon dioxide. This is because there are more protons in the H+ ion, which according to the equation:
pH = -log (H+),
pH is the measurement of the hydrogen proton (H+) concentration therefore the more protons, the lower the pH and
the less protons, the higher the pH. This change in pH can be used to measure the level of carbon dioxide existent.

Note that this experiment should not be relied upon to be the official correct answer to the Earthworm dilemma, but
rather an experiment which supports one of the two theories, whether earthworms are increasing carbon dioxide
emissions or decreasing carbon dioxide emissions. Or is there no significant or obvious difference?

Hypothesis:
I predict that earthworms accelerate climate change because they burrow deep, creating airways in which carbon dioxide
stored in the soil can escape. Also, they can decompose dead organic matter to add to soil carbon pools, which after
much accumulation will slowly diffuse back into the atmosphere, as research suggests.

Risk Assessment:
Subject of Risk Potential Hazard from Risk
Earthworm/s The worm/s can climb around the
person’s arms (or any other body part),
resulting in itchiness, causing infection of
skin, whether it be red, irritated skin or
bumps and blisters, which are painful.
Also, a worm climbing on someone’s arm
may cause distress to the person,
resulting in screaming, as well as your
body flooding with hormone adrenaline,
skyrocketing your heart rate and blood
pressure. In serious cases when a person
does not calm down i.e. PSNS
(parasympathetic nervous system)
doesn’t kick in to lower your heart rate
Risk controls already in Further action required to
place control risk
What happens if the risk
occurs?
-Making sure the person If itchy skin occurs, soothe
handling the Earthworm with some anti-itch cream
is above 10 years of age and lotions. E.g. Camphor,
and is not scared of Menthol and Aloe Vera gel.
worms and will handle You can also use natural
them appropriately remedies like crushing
-Wearing gloves when peppermint leaves or fresh
handling the basil leaves and rubbing
earthworm/s directly onto your skin. You
-Make a habit to wash can also use oatmeal that is
hands after handling the cooked to a paste that can be
earthworm/s applied to the itchy areas.
-Keep food away from If the person contracts
the earthworm/s mental health disorders or
phobia of worms, he/she
 back to normal, it can cause futuristic -The environment which should consult with a trusted
anxiety and other mental health issues. the worms are kept in is adult or counsellor.
Also, if the person after handling the dark; pot is covered with If the person contracts food
earthworm and without any a black plastic bag poisoning, he/she should
cleaning/washing of hands, rubs his/her -A suitable amount of consult a trusted adult first
eye/handles food to be consumed, the water and food will be and if problem persists,
food can be contaminated, resulting in added each day, consult a doctor for
food poisoning for whoever eats the food according to earthworm treatment or medicine.
as well as irritated eyes. Food poisoning feeding guidelines If the person has irritated
result in diarrhoea, vomit, cramping, eyes, he/she should first
nausea, and possibly fever. wash it with water and let a
Earthworms can also be harmed by trusted adult know. Make
humans; from inappropriate handling, use of eye drops as well. If
such as person tossing the earthworm problem persists, consult a
carelessly around because he/she is chemist for prescription for
scared or just doing it deliberately, the further medicine or doctor
earthworm’s skin that has dried out, in serious cases.
environment that has too little water/too
much water/too much sunshine, which if
earthworms stay out in the sunlight for
too long, they will become paralysed, the
earthworm/s could also not have enough
food.
Soil The person who encounters the soil could -Making sure the soil is If soil is ingested whether
ingest the soil, from eating or breathing, kept out of reach from through eating or breathing
either accidentally or deliberately young children. and symptoms occur,
especially with young children. This can -Do not deliberately eat consult a trusted adult first
cause an issue for body parts especially soil and see a doctor. If young
gastrointestinal problems such as -Using gloves to cover children are existent when
constipation, abdominal pain, vomiting, hands before handling experiment is taking place
loss of appetite, and diarrhea. Also, if the the soil and washing with the soil, have an adult
soil is contaminated, from heavy metals hands thoroughly with supervise the child or take
or harmful bacteria and parasites and this soap after handling the the child away from the
can increase the person’s risk of all types soil. experimentation room and
of cancer if the soil is consumed in any -Avoid rubbing eyes and keep the soil contained.
way. keep face a suitable If irritation of eyes occur,
The soil could also irritate someone’s distance away from the wash eyes thoroughly with
eyes if he/she does not wash his/her soil; also to avoid clean water and make use of
hands before touching or rubbing his/her inhaling the soil eye drops as well as natural
eyes and any open wounds, maybe particles. remedies e.g. cucumber
infecting them even more. -Do not carelessly flick slices for relief, warm and
or throw the soil particles damp towel over eyes. If
around by moving too problem persists, consult
abruptly doctor.
-Wear safety goggles If open wounds are infected
whenever handling soil with soil, first clean the
wound thoroughly and put
on some soothing cream
such as Aloe Vera gel and
apply your bandage. If
problem persists or gets
worse, consult doctor.
Test for The liquid that has soil and the substance -Make sure the If the substance is ingested,
Acidity and to test for acidity mixed in it could be liquid/substance which immediately drink water
other Nutrients ingested, accidentally or deliberately by is used conduct the test is and tell a trusted adult.
(nitrogen, anyone who encounters the substance, out of reach of children. Consult a doctor if there are
potassium and especially young children. This can result -Do not deliberately any weird body symptoms.
phosphorus) in problems for internal body parts due to consume the substance
 hygienic soil mixed with some harmful -Wear gloves and safety If the substance is spilled
chemicals which are not meant to be goggles when working onto ground, immediately
consumed. with the substance wipe it off the ground.
The substance could also be spilled onto -Contain the substance in If substance is spilled onto
a person’s hands and could infect naked a test tube which can be naked hands, wash
skin. It could also be spilled onto the held firmly on a test tube immediately under clean
ground, presenting a slipping hazard. rack to stand upright and running water and notify a
Also, if the person who was handling the not spill trusted adult. Consult a
substance did not wash his/her hands, -Also don’t move doctor if skin gets irritated
he/she could touch other materials such abruptly from or develops a rash or maybe
as food contaminating them. This also carelessness when any other body symptoms.
includes irritation of eyes. handling the substance to If substance contacts eyes
avoid spilling and it irritates, immediately
-Wash hands after wash with some clean water
handling the substance, and make use of eye drops
even if the person did not as well as natural remedies.
come into direct contact Notify a trusted adult. If this
with the liquid. problem persists, consult a
-Keep face a particular doctor.
distance away from the
substance and do not
directly inhale from the
substance
-Keep food away from
the experimentation area
Pot The pot is going to be positioned low on -When managing the If there is no elevated area
the ground and the person taking the pot/soil or taking possible to be lifted to, work
measurements will have to bend down. samples of soil, move the with the pot on the ground
This can result in back, neck and leg pain pot to an elevated area, and stand for a short break
from squatting and bending down to higher than the ground. in between the management
manage the pot and the soil. procedure or taking samples
of soil procedure.
Experimental Variables:
Independent: The number of worms in each of the six pots. (In this case, three pots will have 40-50 worms in each of
them and the other three pots will have no worms).
Dependent: The carbon dioxide levels of the air which is near the soil as well as the soil quality: acidity (pH), and the
appearance of the soil and worms.
Controlled: Amount, source and type of soil, the type and amount (to calculate the average level of carbon dioxide and
soil quality) of pots, the amount and temperature of water added to the soil, length and type of each earthworm, the
environment which the experiment is conducted in; factors like sunlight and air and temperature, colour and type of
plastic bag, number of holes in the plastic bag, time intervals between observations, the soil analysis kit including the
scale (colour-based) to determine the levels of nutrients in the soil, the type and scale of the carbon dioxide measurement
meter.
‘Control’ in the Experiment: The pots with soil that did not have any earthworms in there.
‘Earthworm Variable’ in the Experiment: The pots with soil that did have earthworms in there.
Materials/Equipment List:
- 6 x 4000g soil (collected from Bunnings Warehouse–All Purpose Garden Soil Mix)
- 6 x 40 worms (collected from Bunnings Warehouse–Worms Organic Booster Box 500 approx.)
- Six 200mm plastic pots
- Soil pH test kit which includes indicator liquid and barium powder
- NeuLog CO2 logger sensor NUL-220 which includes a NeuLog CO2 sensor probe attached to the sensor's body
by a wire that is surrounded by rubber (for safety)
- Computer that is set to not turn off automatically
 - A power cord and available power socket (on the wall)
- Black plastic bags
- A pair of scissors
- Rubber bands
- Shovel
- Gloves
- Safety Goggles
- Tap-water
- Measuring cup (237mL)
- Measuring spoons (includes measurement capacity of half a teaspoon)
- Kitchen Scale (max. load capacity: at least 4000g=4kg)
- Masking tape
- Permanent Marker
- Paper towels
- Newspaper sheets
- Camera
Method:
Note: While doing this entire experiment, appropriate PPE should be worn at all times. This includes gloves, safety
goggles and mask. Hair should also be tied up throughout.
Soil Preparation:
1. Collect 6 x 4L or 6 x 4000g of dry potting soil and mix gently with glove-covered hands (refer to Note above)
within the packet.
2. Weigh 4000g of soil into a 200mm black plastic pot using a shovel and pour some tap water onto the soil so
that it is damp but not soaking wet. Note: Check to see if the soil is moist enough; it would be considered dry if
the soil does not form into a ball when squeezed in your hand.
3. Repeat step 2 for the other 5 pots.
4. Label 3 pots as ‘Control A,’ ‘Control B’ and ‘Control C’ (these pots will have no earthworms placed in the soil)
and the 3 remaining pots as ‘Earthworm Variable A,’ ‘Earthworm Variable B’ and ‘Earthworm Variable C’
(these pots will have earthworms placed in the soil).
Earthworm Preparation and Starting Experiment:
1. Open the box of earthworms (should be enclosed in soil that includes the worms, worm’s eggs, castings and food
fillers) and gently flip the soil over to look for some earthworms. Note: Make sure that no strong light is directed
straight at the earthworms.
2. Weigh 31g of earthworms (which is about 125 earthworms) and place into one of the pots labelled ‘Earthworm
Variable,” by first creating a shallow hole that is big enough to fit the 31g of earthworms into.
3. Repeat step 2 with the two other pots labelled ‘Earthworm Variable.’
4. Gently fold the earthworms in with the soil (not from the earthworms’ box) from all sides of the hole so that the
earthworms are covered.
5. Sprinkle 6 sheets of newspaper with some tap water to the point where it’s damp, not soaking wet and fold each
to fit into each of the six pots, including the three ‘Control’ without the worms.
6. Wrap each pot with a black plastic bag, securing it with a rubber band and poke eight small air holes with scissors
for each pot.
7. Leave these pots for a total of two weeks and check on each of the 6 pots every 2-3 days for the first week and
add around ¼ cup of water for each pot. Note: If it has been raining, no extra ¼ cup of water needs to be added.
After the first week, leave the pots with no food or water added.
Soil Analysis and Collection of Results:
1. Set up three earthworm-infested pots in the lab and take out the newspaper.
2. The first day, take individual readings for each of the pots and record*. Then for that entire day and overnight until
tomorrow, leave the probe running for Pot A.
3. After Pot A has been left for overnight, stop the recording and it should develop a table and graph for each
measurement of carbon dioxide at each minute (or according to the set measurement rate). Switch Pot A with Pot B and
record for the same duration and rate.
4. Repeat step 3 but switching Pot B for Pot C this time.
5. Repeat steps 1 to 4 for the pots which have the soil only or the pots labelled ‘Control’
6. Over the next period of 4 days, take readings of the soil Ph for each of the six pots daily; the ‘Earthworm Variable’
and ‘Control’. Follow the instructions found on the Soil Testing Kit** to determine the acidity (pH) levels of the soil.
*How to set up pots for recording (see diagram):
1. Connect the NUL -220 CO2 sensor to a computer through the attachable sensor body and make sure that the
computer is constantly plugged.
2. Set up the sensor probe on a retort stand.
3. To prepare the pots, cut a small hole for the pot about to get measured and fit the CO2 sensor probe into the hole
by moving the retort stand’s clamp up and down as needed.
4. Press the CO2 sensor body for 3 seconds to calibrate and make sure that the measurement is reset to atmospheric
carbon dioxide (which should be around 350ppm-380ppm).
5. Set the duration of the recording and the rate which it measures; so how many readings per second/minute/hour
etc. For this experiment, for individual recordings, set for a duration of 10 seconds and a rate of 10 readings per
second. For overnight recordings, set for a duration for a day (24 hours) and a rate of 1 reading per minute.
6. Press ‘Record’ and ‘Stop’ as needed. Note: Make sure that the carbon dioxide level stays at a certain level (it
may hover around a few numbers, but not continuously increasing), before recording since the carbon dioxide
absorber is recognising the amounts of carbon dioxide as it sets for a longer period. This number can be found
on the left side of the computer screen within the app (refer to enlarged photo of the NeuLuog Experiment set-
up app on computer).
7. After measuring the pot and when swapping with another one for measurement, make sure the hole is sealed
with a sticker (to ensure that the air does not escape to get an accurate reading of carbon dioxide).
**Instructions from the Manutec Soil pH Test Kit (as purchased from Bunnings):
1. Take a small sample (about half a teaspoon) of soil at 10cm deep into the pot (the required depth for plants in
pots and containers) and place on the testing plate provided.
2. Add a few drops of Indicator Liquid just enough to stir in to a thick paste.
3. Dust the white Barium powder from puffer bottle on to the moist paste.
4. The white powder dusted on the paste, changes colour within a minute.
5. Compare the colour developed on paste with the colour chart provided to the nearest colour and read the pH
value.
6. Wash both plate and mixing rod thoroughly after each test to avoid cross contamination.
Diagrams:
Diagram of set-up of pots (for the first two weeks for them to set):

Pots placed out in balcony for two weeks Black plastic bag wrapped on the
outside of the pots, tied with rubber
bands and 6 holes poked in each.

Newspaper underneath pots, layered

over each other

‘Earthworm Variable’ Pots

‘Control’ Pots

Earthworms enclosed in box with

worms, worm’s eggs, castings and food
Damp newspaper (folded 3 times to fillers soil,
make 6 layers)

Glove-covered hands

Plastic that hold the worms in

Earthworms Box

Layers of covering in pot

Soil (with worms in it; there are 3 other

which just have soil)
Diagram of set-up of pot (when taking results):
Computer with the NeuLog app
connected to a power cord charged into
the power socket on the wall Neulog CO2 sensor probe

Sensor’s body

Durable rubber-coated wire, connecting Pot with newspaper and a plastic bag
sensor probe and sensor body underneath, to keep it neat

Set-up of one of the six pots in the lab to take carbon dioxide results

Small hole cut in bag Sticker to seal the hole

Preparation of pot(s) before set-up with carbon Storage of pots when not measured/after measuring
dioxide measurement device

Record and Stop

Recording buttons

Experiment duration set-up

Reading of CO2 from the

probe at this moment Rate at which the probe is
taking readings

NeuLog experiment set-up app on computer (set to not turn off

automatically)
Diagram of testing of pH:
White barium powder

Box purchased from Information guide

Bunnings containing all
the chemicals

Indicator Liquid

Colour chart

Diagram of equipment needed for pH test.

Measuring spoons
Testing plate

Soil Sample
Results:
PHOTOS AT THE BEGINNING – Table 1.1
Group Pot A Pot B Pot C
Control

Earthworm
Variable

Earthworms
Soil pH
Earthworm
Variable

Soil pH
Control
PHOTOS AT THE END – Table 1.2
Group Pot A Pot B Pot C
Control

Earthworm
Variable

Earthworms

Soil pH
Earthworm
Variable
Soil pH
Control
Earthworm Variable A – Table 2.1 Control A – Table 2.2
Time Hours into Average Time Hours into Average
the Carbon the Carbon
Experiment dioxide Levels Experiment dioxide Levels
(ppm) 2 d.p. (ppm) 2 d.p.
about '0:0:0.0 395 about '0:0:0.0 388.42
15:30 15:30
16:30 '1:0:0.0 398 16:30 '1:0:0.0 356.66
17:30 '2:0:0.0 357.7 17:30 '2:0:0.0 350
18:30 '3:0:0.0 396.5 18:30 '3:0:0.0 350
19:30 '4:0:0.0 397 19:30 '4:0:0.0 350
20:30 '5:0:0.0 527.33 20:30 '5:0:0.0 350
21:30 '6:0:0.0 395 21:30 '6:0:0.0 350
22:30 '7:0:0.0 394.33 22:30 '7:0:0.0 350
23:30 '8:0:0.0 393 23:30 '8:0:0.0 350
0:30 '9:0:0.0 392.5 0:30 '9:0:0.0 350
1:30 '10:0:0.0 392.43 1:30 '10:0:0.0 350
2:30 '11:0:0.0 391 2:30 '11:0:0.0 350
3:30 '12:0:0.0 383.71 3:30 '12:0:0.0 350
4:30 '13:0:0.0 363.05 4:30 '13:0:0.0 350
5:30 '14:0:0.0 350 5:30 '14:0:0.0 350
6:30 '15:0:0.0 350 6:30 '15:0:0.0 350
7:30 '16:0:0.0 350 7:30 '16:0:0.0 350
8:30 '17:0:0.0 350 8:30 '17:0:0.0 350
9:30 '18:0:0.0 350 9:30 '18:0:0.0 350
10:30 '19:0:0.0 350 10:30 '19:0:0.0 350.45
11:30 '20:0:0.0 N/A 11:30 '20:0:0.0 N/A
Earthworm Variable B – Table 2.3 Control B – Table 2.4
Time Hours into Average Time Hours into Average
the Carbon the Carbon
Experiment dioxide Levels Experiment dioxide Levels
(ppm) 2 d.p. (ppm) d.p.
about '0:0:0.0 357.06 about '0:0:0.0 483.85
15:30 15:30
16:30 '1:0:0.0 350 16:30 '1:0:0.0 523.94
17:30 '2:0:0.0 350 17:30 '2:0:0.0 468.06
18:30 '3:0:0.0 350 18:30 '3:0:0.0 439.94
19:30 '4:0:0.0 350 19:30 '4:0:0.0 417.82
20:30 '5:0:0.0 350 20:30 '5:0:0.0 402.12
21:30 '6:0:0.0 350 21:30 '6:0:0.0 391.22
22:30 '7:0:0.0 350 22:30 '7:0:0.0 383.38
23:30 '8:0:0.0 350 23:30 '8:0:0.0 377.48
0:30 '9:0:0.0 350 0:30 '9:0:0.0 372.72
1:30 '10:0:0.0 350 1:30 '10:0:0.0 364.68
2:30 '11:0:0.0 350 2:30 '11:0:0.0 360.33
3:30 '12:0:0.0 350 3:30 '12:0:0.0 353.97
4:30 '13:0:0.0 350 4:30 '13:0:0.0 350
5:30 '14:0:0.0 350 5:30 '14:0:0.0 350
6:30 '15:0:0.0 350 6:30 '15:0:0.0 350
7:30 '16:0:0.0 350 7:30 '16:0:0.0 350
8:30 '17:0:0.0 350 8:30 '17:0:0.0 350
9:30 '18:0:0.0 350 9:30 '18:0:0.0 360.72
10:30 '19:0:0.0 350 10:30 '19:0:0.0 369
11:30 '20:0:0.0 N/A 11:30 '20:0:0.0 N/A
Earthworm Variable C – Table 2.5 Control C – Table 2.6
Time Hours into Average Time Hours into Average
the Carbon the Carbon
Experiment dioxide Levels Experiment dioxide Levels
(ppm) 2 d.p. (ppm) 2 d.p.
about '0:0:0.0 519.57 about '0:0:0.0 1170
15:30 15:30
16:30 '1:0:0.0 553.5 16:30 '1:0:0.0 989.32
17:30 '2:0:0.0 545.91 17:30 '2:0:0.0 892.19
18:30 '3:0:0.0 507.3 18:30 '3:0:0.0 822.87
19:30 '4:0:0.0 472.09 19:30 '4:0:0.0 749.98
20:30 '5:0:0.0 442.14 20:30 '5:0:0.0 698.87
21:30 '6:0:0.0 412.21 21:30 '6:0:0.0 662.27
22:30 '7:0:0.0 384.23 22:30 '7:0:0.0 619.47
23:30 '8:0:0.0 411.83 23:30 '8:0:0.0 579.55
0:30 '9:0:0.0 350 0:30 '9:0:0.0 551.55
1:30 '10:0:0.0 350 1:30 '10:0:0.0 529.78
2:30 '11:0:0.0 350 2:30 '11:0:0.0 511.41
3:30 '12:0:0.0 350 3:30 '12:0:0.0 505.32
4:30 '13:0:0.0 350 4:30 '13:0:0.0 484.08
5:30 '14:0:0.0 350 5:30 '14:0:0.0 469.54
6:30 '15:0:0.0 350 6:30 '15:0:0.0 508.17
7:30 '16:0:0.0 350 7:30 '16:0:0.0 641.33
8:30 '17:0:0.0 350 8:30 '17:0:0.0 767.44
9:30 '18:0:0.0 350 9:30 '18:0:0.0 753.97
10:30 '19:0:0.0 350 10:30 '19:0:0.0 736
11:30 '20:0:0.0 N/A 11:30 '20:0:0.0 N/A
Graph – Overall Comparison of Carbon Dioxide Levels

Overall Comparison of Carbon Dioxide Levels

1400

1200
Carbon Dioxide Levels (ppm)

1000

800

600

400

200

0
'1:0:0.0
'0:0:0.0
'0:30:0.0

'1:30:0.0
'2:0:0.0
'2:30:0.0
'3:0:0.0
'3:30:0.0
'4:0:0.0
'4:30:0.0
'5:0:0.0
'5:30:0.0
'6:0:0.0
'6:30:0.0
'7:0:0.0
'7:30:0.0
'8:0:0.0
'8:30:0.0
'9:0:0.0
'9:30:0.0
'10:0:0.0
'10:30:0.0
'11:0:0.0
'11:30:0.0
'12:0:0.0
'12:30:0.0
'13:0:0.0
'13:30:0.0
'14:0:0.0
'14:30:0.0
'15:0:0.0
'15:30:0.0
'16:0:0.0
'16:30:0.0
'17:0:0.0
'17:30:0.0
'18:0:0.0
'18:30:0.0
'19:0:0.0
'19:30:0.0
Hours into the Experiment

Earthworm Variable A Earthworm Variable B Earthworm Variable C

Control A Control B Control C

Average Carbon Dioxide Levels – Table 3

Note: Results are obtained from results collected above
Pot # Average Carbon Dioxide Levels (ppm, 2d.p.)

Control Earthworm Variable

Pot A 352.28 383.83

Pot B 390.96 350.35

Pot C 682.16 404.94

Average in 475.13 379.71

total

Average Percentage Increase or Decrease of Carbon Dioxide Levels – Table 4

Note: The values below are the percentage increase (+) or decrease (-) in carbon dioxide levels of the earthworms compared to
the controls
% (2d.p.) Earthworm Variable A Earthworm Variable B Earthworm Variable C
Control A +8.96 -0.55 +14.95
Control B -1.82 -10.38 +3.58
Control C -43.73 -46.64 -40.64
Average in Total (%) -20.08
Discussion:
The results of this experiment did not support my hypothesis, which was that the pot with earthworms would accelerate
climate change and increase the CO2 levels in reference to the control of just soil in the pot, since the earthworms overall
decreased the CO2 levels by 20.08% on average. This was also partly because of the unexpected carbon dioxide
fluctuations within the pot with just soil, going up to much higher levels than the pots with the earthworms; according
to table 2.6, there was the record of the highest level of CO2 within the first hour, which had an average of 1170ppm. If
looking at this according to the table of the Effect of Different Levels of CO2, the CO2 level of 1170ppm is in fact
tolerable indoor air quality, and if looking at the average CO2 level for all the Control pots, it is 475.13ppm, in
comparison to the average CO2 level for all the Earthworm Variable pots which is 379.71ppm; a decrease from Control
to Variable of 95.42ppm, equivalent to a decrease by 20.08% (2d.p.).
A trend which I found in my experiment for all of the pots was that there was a little increase at the beginning (or it
started off with a high value), then gradually starts dropping within the first hour (refer to graph).
There was a repeated pattern for each of the Earthworm pots which was that they all managed to decrease back down to
atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration at 350ppm by the end of the 20 hours. For the earthworm pots, the highest
CO2 level which was achieved among the three was at 553.5ppm, as found in table 5. In reference to the time at which
the measuring of results took place from 15:30 to 11:30 (Note: it was set for a total duration of 24 hours though each
pot was stopped at different times, therefore, only the 20 hours was included as official results for the fairness of the
test), the earthworm pots seemed to have higher carbon dioxide levels in the afternoon at 16:30 to around 19:30 to 20:30,
where the numbers started decreasing. This is particularly evident for tables 1 and 5, whereas for table 2.3 for Earthworm
Variable B, it started at 357.06, then dropped and maintained at 350 throughout the remaining 19 hours. The fact that
there were different results for Earthworm Variable B, according to table 3, may be the fairness of the test in terms of
the controlled variables of the amount of earthworms within the pot, not distributed evenly throughout the three pots
within the 31g of earthworms measured at the beginning, as well as the considered factor that there might not be as
much dead matter for them to decompose in the soil to be able to release the carbon dioxide and the little increase could
only be from their natural respiration. However, the most frequently occurring trend would be the two other pots that
had higher carbon dioxide levels in the afternoon to night-time, then gradually decreasing back down to 350ppm. What
this suggests is of inference to the activity of earthworms and the frequency of their activity and the possible
causes/factors of this, which include the temperature, sunlight penetration, soil moisture, everyday life cycle (when they
sleep, when they start working/what they do in the day), and time lapse (meaning that over periods of time, the carbon
dioxide is going to accumulate, or dissipate and the sensor would slowly capture that change). This data is drawing to
the theory that earthworms are more active in the afternoon to night until 20:30, which is 8:30, and during this time
period, there is not much sunlight available for them, since the sun has set which means lower temperature levels and
higher soil moisture. This would all coincide with the background research that earthworms like soil that is moist so that
their skin will not dry out, as it would if it stays out in the sunlight for too long or if the soil is too dry for them. This
would conclude with the earthworm’s daily life cycle, in reference to the times which they worked in the soil and started
to tunnel through the ground to aerate the soil and let out the CO2 in the afternoons when the atmospheric temperature
is more suited and after 20:30, the earthworms would stop aerating the soil and may be going to rest until in the early
morning most likely when the soil temperature regulates to its maximum at 25 degrees Celsius, which is when
decomposition rates peak and they only start to release this carbon dioxide from late afternoon when the atmospheric
conditions are more suited for them to appear to the surface, since they are tunnelling through the ground and the tunnels
(according to research) is what aerates the soil to allow carbon dioxide to increase.
There are however no significant changes in the appearance of the soil as well as the pH level, maintaining from the
beginning to the end of the experiment at an increasing alkalinity state at around 8½ to a slight decrease to 8 for
Earthworm Variable C only, according to the tables of photos. This pH level is slightly higher than the earthworm’s
preferred pH level in their soils, which is 4.1 to 6.7, since earthworms need a continuous supply of calcium and there
are major calcium nutrient deficiencies in acidic soil, which is lower than 4.1. This soil is found alkaline though the
earthworms are still alive and living in the soil though not at their preferred pH level, which could be another factor
consideration for the earthworm numbers and total activity. In terms of the earthworms comparing from their appearance
at the beginning and at the end, there is no obvious difference and part of this result is most likely because of insufficient
data I collected on the appearance of the earthworms, although not the focus of the experiment. I did find that when
taking the pictures for the earthworm photos at the end, the soil was moister (since it rained the day before) and so, as
predicted the earthworms were found more towards the surface, whereas for the photos at beginning, the soil seemed a
lot drier, and so, the earthworms were found deeper. In fact, for Earthworm Variable A, about ¾ of the soil in the pot
had to be emptied to find at least one earthworm. This supports the argument before this, regarding the everyday life
cycle of earthworms; that they liked the dark areas, thus lower temperature levels, thus higher levels of water (though
not too much), thus moist soil and coming more towards the surface in the dark when the temperatures are lower and
would be aerating the CO2 while doing so.
The repeated trend found in the Control pots was that the CO2 levels would start quite high, with an average starting
point of 680.76ppm (2d.p.) within the first hour. It would then decrease from 16:30 to around after 12 hours on average
so around 4:30, which is when it would start increasing a little bit and gradually, finishing off after 20 hours with the
levels still increasing, according to tables 2.2 and 2.4, while table 2.6 decreases slightly back down again.
What is quite odd about these results for the Control is that it is just soil, that has not been tampered with and no
earthworms are in it to include some activity, however, there are still fluctuations in the CO2 levels which draws to our
attention a factor that was not considered in the design of this experiment, which is what is changing the CO2 levels of
the controls. What was expected of this was that the carbon dioxide levels should be stationary since nothing is aerating
the soil or decomposing organic matter to release the carbon dioxide which the levels have skyrocketed to 1170ppm for
Control C, as per table 6. The cause of this may be that there are other organisms found in the soil such as the most
popular of arthropods, which include soil mites, springtails and various forms of insects including ants, termites, beetles
and flies. There are also microbes available in the soil such as bacteria, fungi and protozoa, which are microbes able to
decompose quickly to release CO2 straight into the atmosphere, since most microbes live in surface soils. Small soil
animals also add to net carbon dioxide emissions since they also decompose though it slowly diffuses to the soil surface
and into the atmosphere. Not to mention the fact of respiration by soil organisms, which includes microorganisms, which
respire CO2 which diffuses up into the atmosphere. This adds to the explanation for the trend above of the different
fluctuations at certain time periods, due to the activity of the soil fauna and microbes, which could be varying due to the
many animals and microbes and they all act at different times, especially for bacteria, where they don’t have a conscious
mind as to know when is night or day to sleep or play. The question which is raised up here now is the difference
between the carbon dioxide levels for the Earthworm Variable and the Controls and why do the earthworm’s CO2 levels
are on average lower than the controls, when earthworms are decomposers are also contribute to releasing CO2 through
decomposition.
According to table 3, you can see the obvious differences in average carbon dioxide levels for each of the six pots, and
have concluded to a decrease by 1/5 from the average total of the controls. Taking into consideration all the factors
including the carbon dioxide as produced from the respiration of the soil microbes, and soil arthropods as mentioned
earlier as well as the net decomposition process of all the animals, while earthworms were not included in the control,
it could be possible for the earthworms to be helping decompose most of the organic matter that would be equivalent to
the share of the soil animals in the control, and while decomposing it, converting it into their faecal material, which that
type of carbon is more resistant to decay, therefore trapping the carbon in the soil for a longer period of time. They could
however, be releasing some carbon dioxide as they are respiring though and that could be adding to the analysis before
of how their daily life cycle works (what they do in the day), when they tunnel through the ground and respiring while
doing so, thought the decomposition which happens is what traps all the other excessive carbon dioxide which resulted
in a decrease in carbon dioxide by a fifth or 20% (rounded to the nearest whole number).
A difficulty I encountered during this experiment was making sure that the time given for each pot to accumulate carbon
dioxide was the same, so that it was a fair test. Since there was only one carbon dioxide logger sensor probe to measure
the CO2 for each pot one at a time for overnight periods, that was a variable I could not control. Also, when the
earthworm variable pots were taken results of, the control pots were left to accumulate carbon dioxide which would be
unfair. Fortunately, I realised this and so I opened the pots to let out any carbon dioxide that could have accumulated
over the week, and left them open for 24 hours before closing them back again to accumulate back the carbon dioxide
which they have lost. Also, another difficulty which was a similar situation to this was that I couldn’t take any photos
in between so as not to let any carbon dioxide escape from the pots which have accumulated over a period of time. Since
some carbon dioxide has been let out and I am not able to get the full possible value of the CO2 levels, which could
affect my overall result to the experiment. To ensure that this did not happen after the first lot of photos, I decided to
wait until at the end of the experiment where I will then take results and compare them from the beginning to the end.
This was the same method used for measuring my soil pH.
Improvements that can be made to my experiment include planning ahead and setting the pots at times so that they get
the same amount of time to accumulate the carbon dioxide levels, such as setting the Earthworm Variables from the first
week then later set the Controls the next week, and take the results for the Earthworm Variables first, and wait for a
week after that before taking results for the Controls, so that the timing of the pots are set evenly. Also, it would be
much better if there was more than one carbon dioxide sensor logger probe, so that more than one pot could be recording
results at the same time for more repeats, for a more reliable result. Also, if the pots were set to run for more than 24
hours, it would have collected more data to see more trends, to confirm my conclusions from this experiment, that the
same trend for each of the pots was that they all decreased at the end, from their original starting point, particularly for
the earthworms, where they all finished at 350ppm. This is how I could investigate further, looking at maybe the
relationships between earthworm activity to do with temperature and what does that mean about their decomposition
rates. This would get more comprehensive results as a follow-up of this experiment. It would create interest in the
temperatures necessary for decomposition rates to peak and what about the earthworm’s activity according to the
temperature, aside from decomposition? When do they sleep and why?
The information gathered from my investigation can and should only be used as a support for the argument in the
earthworm dilemma that earthworms are the solution to global warming. It cannot be used as an official answer, but
rather one of the supporting experiments which gather this data to support this side of the debate. Based on this
information, more experiments and research can be carried in this area to validate and gather more information to further
inform more complex ideas within the topic; such as looking specifically at earthworms and other organisms’ respiration
and their rates and the levels of carbon dioxide they contribute to, or looking more at the activity of earthworms to see
what they do at each time of the day and what that means about net carbon dioxide emissions.
I believe that the results I found are quite reliable as I controlled as many variables as I could, including the carbon
dioxide accumulation and I also included repeats in the pots, such as preparing three pots all with the same conditions
applied; for the Controls, they all only had soil, while for the Earthworm Variables, each of them had 31g of earthworms
enclosed in the same soil used for the Controls. I also ensured that the results which are taken into account of, are all of
the same time length, therefore is fair when calculating the averages and the average increase/ decrease in carbon dioxide
levels. It could have been more reliable if I had conducted all the tests within the same day and if I had conducted them
over a longer time period, than just 20 hours for each pot. I could have also done some trial experiments to make sure
that everything has been thought about and that the experiment works so that all variables are controlled and the results
which I get are as accurate as possible.

Conclusion:
Earthworms do not increase net carbon dioxide emissions, but rather, they decrease and are seen from the results of this
experiment that they would be a solution to global warming as the soils with the earthworms had lower CO2 levels
compared to the soil with no earthworms.

Bibliography:
Vogel, C. Mueller, C. Höschen, C. Buegger, F. Heister, K. Schulz, S. Schloter, M. Kögel-Knabne, I. Submicron
structures provide preferential spots for carbon and nitrogen sequestration in soils. Nature Communications, 2014; 5
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms3947
Technische Universitaet Muenchen. (2014, January 8). Climate change: How does soil store carbon dioxide?.
ScienceDaily. Available: (on line) www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140108102441.htm Accessed: 24/3/17
Fang, J. (24 March 2010). Soils emitting more carbon dioxide. NatureNews. Available: (on line)
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100324/full/news.2010.147.html Accessed: 24/3/17
Parkin T.B., J.W. Doran, and E. Franco-Vizcaíno. 1996. Field and Laboratory Tests of Soil Respiration. In: Doran J.W.,
A.J. Jones, editors. Methods for assessing soil quality. Madison, WI. p 231-45.
Linsday, D. (2016). A bunch of carbon dioxide that's been trapped in the soil is starting to escape — and it’s bad news
for the planet. Available: (on line) http://www.businessinsider.com/hidden-carbon-dioxide-soil-will-worsen-climate-
change2016-11?IR=T Date Accessed: 24/3/17
Smith, M.A. Friend, D. (2017). The Science of Composting – Composting for the Homeowner. Available: (on line)
https://web.extension.illinois.edu/homecompost/science.cfm Date Accessed: 24/3/17
Clive A, E. (2017). THE LIVING SOIL: EARTHWORMS – Soil Biology. Available: (on line)
https://extension.illinois.edu/soil/SoilBiology/earthworms.htm Date Accessed: 24/3/17
Author Unknown. (Date Unknown). Organic matter decomposition and the soil food web. The Importance of Soil
Organic Matter. Chapter 2. Available: (on line) http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0100e/a0100e05.htm
Bilbrey, J. (1 November 2013). Earthworms Trap Carbon, But Do They Influence Climate Change? Inside Science.
Available: (on line) https://www.insidescience.org/news/earthworms-trap-carbon-do-they-influence-climate-change
Date Accessed: 24/3/17
Yirka, B. (16 October 2013). New study suggests earthworms sequester more CO2 than they release – Phys Org.
Available: (on line) https://phys.org/news/2013-10-earthworms-sequester-co2.html Date Accessed: 24/3/17

Acknowledgements:
I would like to acknowledge my science teacher and science department for guiding me in the right direction especially
when I was deciding on a new topic. They also allowed me to use the school’s carbon dioxide measurement meter for
my experiment. My science teacher, although very busy during the Singapore Science Trip could still read and approve
my risk assessment, as well as answer all my questions.
I would like to acknowledge my mum for driving me to Bunnings to buy necessary equipment for my experiment as
well as supporting me throughout my research, giving useful feedback. I would also like to acknowledge my dad for
helping me format my graphs in Excel as well as driving me to Officeworks to print out my report.
I would also like to acknowledge the sources that I took information and images for my background research and when
formulating my experiment, as well as guiding me along for my discussion.