1.

(a)

S e c tio n s in 1  g d m –3 IA A S e c tio n s in 1 0  g d m –3 IA A
In c re a s e s in le n g th I n c re a s e s in le n g th
F in a l le n g th / m m / m m % F in a l le n g th / m m / m m %
22 7 4 6 .7 25 10 6 6 .7

25 10 6 6 .7 28 13 8 6 .7

24 9 6 0 .0 26 11 7 3 .3

23 8 5 3 .3 27 12 8 0 .0

22 7 4 6 .7 25 10 6 6 .7

20 5 3 3 .3 26 11 7 3 .3

25 10 6 6 .7 29 14 9 3 .3

24 9 6 0 .0 24 9 6 0 .0

23 8 5 3 .3 26 11 7 3 .3

24 9 6 0 .0 23 8 5 3 .3

M e a n in c r e a s e 8 .2 5 4 .7 M e a n in c r e a s e 1 0 .9 7 2 .7

Neat table correctly formatted ; [shaded columns optional]

Correct rows and columns with labels and units ;
Increases in length correct ;
All means correct ; 4
(b) Correctly orientated and labelled axes ;
{Bar / histogram} format AND comparative data ;
Data plotted correctly accept simple bar chart of
means or class sizes if appropriate ; 3
(c) There is no difference in increase in lengths between the two concentrations ; 1
(d) Reject the null hypothesis / there is a difference in the lengths of sections in the two
concentrations ;
Calculated t value is greater than the tabulated value ;
At the 5% confidence limit / greater than 2.10 ; 3
[11]

475738075.doc 1
2. (a) 1. {Selection / standardisation} of {coppiced / non coppiced} e.g. same tree
species OR minimum of two abiotic factors ;
2. Investigate zones at same {time of day / season} / in same weather
conditions ;
3. {Suitable sized / identical} area(s) within zones in {m 2 / reference to
standard quadrat size} ;
4. Method of selection of sampling sites described e.g. by use of a random
numbers table ;
5. Suitable, named method of collection, e.g. pooter / sweep net / beating tray
/ pitfall trap ;
6. Standardisation of collecting method e.g. standard sweep / time for
beating etc ;
7. Number of samples within each zone (at least 10) ;
8. Sensible method of preventing escape ;
9. Method of identification e.g. use of key ;
10. Method of marking ;
11. Recaptured after specified period (minimum 24 hours) ;
12. Count number recaptured and number marked ;
13. Reference to return froghoppers to habitat at end / reference
to avoidance of paint on legs ; 8
Style Account is concise and well organised, there is good use of technical
vocabulary and almost no spelling errors. – 2 marks
There is some lack of organisation, limited vocabulary and a
number of spelling errors. – 1 mark
The account lacks organisation, there is little or no technical
vocabulary and many spelling errors. – 0 marks 2
(b) Table of raw data with suitably labelled rows and columns ;
Formula for determination of population size e.g. Lincoln index / formula
(accept here or in plan) / reference to calculation of means (accept from table) ;
Suitable graphical format matched to suggested data ;
Graphical presentation allows for comparison ;
Reference to suitable statistical test for suggested data / named statistical
test correct for suggested data (accept here or in plan) ;
Null hypothesis stated (accept here or in plan) ; 6
(c) Limitations
Difficult to control all {abiotic / biotic} factors ;
Not all froghoppers counted {because some fly away / reference to
froghopper mobility};
Froghoppers may not re-distribute themselves after marking ;
Froghoppers may {emigrate / immigrate / die / be killed} between the time
of release and capture ;
Further work
Investigate {populations / numbers} at different stages of coppicing cycle
(if not mentioned in method) ;
Investigate for different types of coppiced woodland ;
Investigate the effect of coppicing on other insect species /
other species of froghopper ;
Investigate froghopper populations at different {seasons / times of day} ; 5
[21]

475738075.doc 2