Introduction

How does the angle of seed planting for Phaseolus vulgaris seeds impact the total change in the angle of growth
for the plant’s roots?
This problem question is interesting to me because I love plants. In IB Biology, my favorite units have been
those about plant reproduction, response, and growth, so I knew I wanted to focus my project on plants. I have
always found it fascinating that plants seem to know which way is up and down, and how they grow in the direction
of gravity. In my grandma’s backyard, there is a large tree that had toppled at one point, but then started to grow
straight up, causing it to be “L” shaped. This phenomenon, and the many others like it, prompted me to investigate
this further in my project.
This internal assessment will investigate gravitropism in plants. Gravitropism is defined as “the directional
control of growth in response to gravity” (Nakamura). The degree of gravitropism will be measured through
observation of the plants’ direction of growth after a set period of time. Plants sense gravity using specialized cells.
Roots contain cells in the columella of the root cap that sense gravity (Suwarup), and shoots sense gravity via their
endodermal cells (Vandenbrink). These specialized cells detect a gravity vector by analyzing the location and
potential energy of amyloplasts, which settle at the bottom as a result of gravity, and transferring this energy to the
plasma membrane (Rahul). The gravitational vector is relayed to the rest of the plant via the plant hormone auxin,
and then an observable response is initiated (Nakamura). Response to gravity comes in the form of “differential
growth along a zone of elongation” (Vandenbrink), also known as gravitropic bending (Rahul). Roots show positive
gravitropism, meaning that they grow down, toward the gravitational vector (Vandenbrink). Shoots are the opposite,
displaying negative gravitropism and growing up and away from the gravitational vector (Vandenbrink).
The manipulated variable in this investigation will be the angle of seed planting. Planting the seeds at
different angles will allow me to manipulate the gravitational vector and study the impacts of this manipulation.
Gravitropism, my responding variable, relies on the plants’ ability to sense and respond to gravity (Vandenbrink). By
manipulating the gravitational vector, I will be able to observe whether or not the plant sensed the change, based on
the direction the root grows. This variable will be safely and ethically manipulated by planting the seeds at different
angles, while still ensuring that they have everything they need to grow, including water and light.
The responding variable will be the degree of gravitropism in Phaseolus vulgaris roots. I will measure this by
making observations of the plants’ direction of growth after a set period of time. After manipulating the gravitational
vector by planting seeds at different angles, my observations of the plant curvature will indicate whether the plant
has been able to sense the gravitational change and grow accordingly. I will ensure accurate, consistent results by
using the same type of plant, amount of light, and amount of water. I will be able to safely and ethically measure this
variable by germinating and growing my own bean seeds and studying them as they develop.
The nature of gravitropism has been studied extensively. It is already known that because of gravitropism
and auxin concentration, shoots will grow upward and roots will grow downward for any angle that the seed is
planted at (Vandenbrink). The angle of seed planting and the degree of gravitropism have a relationship because the
angle that a seed is planted at will determine the gravitational vector. With different seed angles, the amyloplasts
within the plant will always settle and concentrate on the lower side, causing the shoots to grow up and the roots to
grow down despite an initial angle difference (Suwarup). Given the research I have done, I expect to see the
Phaseolus vulgaris roots curve downward for all planting angles.
Experimental hypothesis: As the angle of seed planting, measured in degrees, increases, the total change in angle
of root growth after seven days will decrease, because plants with lower starting angles need to change their angle of
root growth more dramatically to grow toward Earth’s gravitational vector.
Methodology
Other methodologies to investigate the effect of seed planting on the degree of gravitropism use moist paper
towels to germinate the seeds, then put them in a clear container to observe growth. For example, in one experiment
in a YouTube video titled “Geotropism- Plants Defying Gravity,” the experimenter germinates the bean seeds in a
plastic bag, then places them vertically in a glass jar between the side of the jar and damp paper towels. All of the
beans are added at different angles. Then, the experimenter lets the bean roots and shoots grow for two weeks before
analyzing their growth patterns (“Geotropism- Plants Defying Gravity”). Another experiment from a YouTube video
titled “Geotropism Test with Corn Plants” germinated corn seeds in a petri dish filled with paper towels and cotton
balls, then let them grow for two weeks. In this experiment, the experimenter taped the petri dishes vertically onto
the inside of a cabinet, then shut the cabinet so the plants grew in the dark. This was done to prevent interference
from phototropism (“Geotropism Test with Corn Plants”). I plan on combining aspects of these two experiments. I
will germinate dry bean seeds in plastic bags, then allow them to grow in petri dishes filled with damp paper towels
and cotton balls, then tape the petri dishes vertically in a dark place and leave them for one week to grow. This
methodology will be effective because putting the seeds at different orientations and hanging them vertically will
allow me to effectively manipulate the gravitational vector, putting the seeds in clear containers will allow me to
observe changes, and placing them in a dark location will ensure that phototropism will not be a confounding
variable.
The following list includes all materials used in this experiment, and Figure A shows a picture of the materials:
 90 Phaseolus vulgaris (dry bean) seeds  210 mL of Walgreens 3% hydrogen peroxide solution
 30 plastic petri dishes (90mm in diameter, 15mm  1 roll of painter’s tape
deep)  1 roll of scotch tape
 63 Bounty paper towels (15.3cm by 27.9cm)  1 electronic gram scale
 15 one-gallon sized Ziploc bags  1 pair of scissors
 270 Kroger cotton balls  1 pencil
 1200 mL of tap water  1 protractor

Figure A: Materials used in the

experiment.

This experiment had 5 levels of the manipulated variable with 18 trials for each level, including six trials for
use in a pilot experiment. Due to limited space and materials, I only carried out six trials at a time, for a total of three
rounds of experimentation. I used the fist six trials as a pilot study to ensure that I was using the correct amount of
certain controlled variables, such as amount of water, germination time, and total growth time. I also used this pilot
study as an opportunity to identify any unexpected challenges. There was one major challenge that I faced, which
was rampant mold growth. During my pilot experiment, nearly all the beans grew mold after a few days and did not
grow. Without bean growth, I was unable to observe any change in the responding variable and knew that I needed
to adapt my experimental procedure to ensure that no mold grew for my next trials. To account for this, I decided to
soak the beans in hydrogen peroxide before germinating them, and to clean out the petri dishes with hydrogen
peroxide before putting the beans into them. The following procedure details my methodology for one round of
experimentation, which I completed twice for the twelve total trials that I used in my analysis.
My first step was to germinate the dry bean seeds. With five levels of the manipulated variable and six trials
at a time, I germinated thirty Phaseolus vulgaris seeds. First, to prevent the growth of mold, I soaked all 30 beans in
50mL of a 3% hydrogen peroxide solution. I soaked the seeds for five minutes, then removed them and soaked them
in 50mL of room temperature water for one minute. Since I did not have a graduated cylinder to measure the
amounts of water and hydrogen peroxide, I measured these values using an electronic gram scale, because 1mL is
equal to 1 gram. Cleaning the seeds with hydrogen peroxide killed any potential mold spores off of them and
prevented additional mold growth later in the experiment. I also used 20mL of the 3% hydrogen peroxide solution on
a paper towel to wipe down the petri dishes, again cleaning off any mold spores. After finished with the hydrogen
peroxide I disposed of it by pouring it down the drain, which was safe because of its low concentration. Next, to
germinate the seeds, I soaked five paper towels in 10mL of water each. Then, I placed six seeds on each paper towel
and folded the paper towels over to cover the bean seeds. Next, I placed one paper towel into each Ziploc bag, and
fill the bag with air from my breath before sealing. The end result was five plastic bags, each holding six seeds
wrapped in one damp paper towel and filled with air. Using air from my exhalation provided the seeds a warm
environment filled with CO2. I left the seeds in the Ziploc bags for two days to germinate. After this step was
completed, I disposed of the plastic bags and composted the paper towels.
The second step was to prepare the petri dishes, which took place after the two day germination period. I
removed all the seeds from the plastic bags, and the six beans from each bag were kept together and used for the
same level of the manipulated variable. There were thirty total petri dishes, consisting of six trials for each of the five
seed angles. Next, I added three cotton balls to each petri dish, which acted as a backing and provided stability when
the petri dish was taped vertically. The cotton balls also helped manage water levels by soaking up any excess. Then,
I cut out two circular pieces from each paper towel that were 90mm in diameter. This size aligns with the size of the
petri dishes that I used, and were measured by tracing the petri dish with a pencil before cutting. I placed one paper
towel circle in each petri dish on top of the cotton balls, and then placed one germinated bean seed on top of that.
Next, I poured 10mL of water in each of the petri dishes, soaking the paper towel and cotton balls. Then, I put the lid
on each petri dish, and sealed it with two strips of scotch tape. I labeled each petri dish with both a number (1-60)
and the angle that it was to be hung at. The result was thirty petri dishes that each contained one seed, one paper
towel circle, and three cotton balls, sealed with scotch tape and labeled with a number and angle.
The next step was to hang each petri dish. I used painter’s tape to hang each petri dish to the inside of a
closet, which I closed for the duration of the experiment. Keeping them in a dark environment allowed me to be sure
that phototropism was not a confounding variable. When hanging the petri dishes, I oriented the seeds at different
angles, with six plants at each of the five angles. To do this, I rotated the petri dishes so that the beginning root
sprout corresponded with the angle that it was designated to. The angles were measured in bearings, and were zero
degrees, forty-five degrees, ninety degrees, one hundred thirty five degrees, and one hundred eighty degrees. I chose
to use these angles because they will allow me to see the plant’s response to a wide range of gravitational vectors.
When hanging the petri dishes, I used a protractor to ensure that each petri dish was hung at precisely the correct
angle. The result was thirty prepared petri dishes taped vertically to the inside of a closet, with six seeds oriented to
each of the five angles. Below, Figure B shows the levels of the manipulated variable, and Figure C shows the
experimenter hanging the petri dishes on the wall.

Figure B: The manipulated variable, different starting angles for the Phaseolus vulgaris seeds. These
angles are measured in bearings, and there are five different starting angles: zero degrees, forty-five
degrees, ninety degrees, one hundred thirty-five degrees, and one hundred eighty degrees.
 Figure C: The experimenter measuring the starting
angle of the Phaseolus vulgaris seeds. A protractor was
used to measure the angle to ensure that each bean
started exactly at its designated angle. The bean seeds
were hung inside of a closet where they could grow
without light to ensure that phototropisms did not
interfere with the results of the experiment.

The final step was to wait and observe. I let the seeds hang on the wall and grow for seven days total. After
the growth period, I recorded observations, measured the bearings of the roots using a protractor, and took pictures
of root growth. I compared the starting angle of the seed with the final angle of the root to draw conclusions about
gravitropism. At the conclusion of the experiment, I composted the paper towels, cotton balls, and plant subjects, and
discarded the other disposable materials, such as the tape. Then, I cleaned out all the petri dishes and stored them for
later use. I repeated the whole experiment again to carry out six more trials for a total of twelve trials. Below is
Figure D, which displays the responding variable for the experiment.

Figure D: The responding variable, different angles of growth for Phaseolus vulgaris roots. The responding
variable was measured seven days after hanging the plants and was measured in degrees using bearings. A
protractor was used to make measurements.

In the experiment, I took many validity measures. I cleaned the seeds in the same amount and concentration
of hydrogen peroxide. When germinating, I used the same type and size of paper towels, soaked in the same amount
of water from the same source. When assembling the petri dishes, I used the same material and size petri dish, with
the same brand, size, and quantity of paper towels and cotton balls, soaked in the same amount of water from the
same source. When hanging the petri dishes, each seed was hung in a place with the same moisture level and same
amount of light. As I took observations and measured the bearings for each of the roots, I used the same protractor to
measure and did not manipulate the plants in any way, meaning that I did not touch or reposition them.
Inevitably, each time I ran the experiment, some bean seeds grew mold. The beans that grew mold did not
grow any roots or shoots, so I voided the results for those trials. In my data tables, these trials are highlighted in red
and do not show any data. Because of this, I do not have 12 true trials for each level of the manipulated variable, but
instead have 7-9 trials for each angle.
I acted safely in many ways. I did not use my hands to handle the seeds to ensure that we did not contaminate
each other with mold spores or other bacteria, keeping both myself and the plants safe. I also acted safely by washing
my hands before and after handling any materials. I acted ethically toward the plants by germinating them properly
and keeping them alive and healthy throughout the duration of the experiment. I gave them plenty of water and
regularly checked on them. I also disposed of them ethically by composting the plants at the conclusion of the
experiment. There are no extra ethical considerations with disposal of the plants because they are not toxic or
dangerous in any way. The only potentially hazardous material is the hydrogen peroxide solution, however, I used
such a low concentration that it was safe to simply pour it down the drain. Similarly, I needed to be careful when
disposing of the plants that had mold on them, however, mold can be composted, so this was not an issue. I
minimized waste by only using the number of disposable materials that I need to, and composting and reusing
materials where I could. For example, I composted the paper towels and cotton balls and utilized reusable petri
dishes for the experiment.
Raw Data
Table 1 shows the angle of root growth for the Phaseolus vulgaris roots after the seven-day growth period.
The trials whose plants developed mold and did not grow any roots or shoots do not have any data to report, so they
are labeled “MOLD” and highlighted red.

Next, Table 2 shows qualitative data for each plant. I made observations about the growth of each of the
sixty plants, which describes their paths to their final angle of root growth.
 Finally, Table 3 displays the various controlled variables in this experiment, along with their measurements,
which were kept the same for each trial.
Descriptive Statistics
Preliminary Calculations
For my investigation, I needed to calculate total change before completing any descriptive statistics analysis.
To do this, I subtracted the final angle of growth for each seed, found in Table 1, from its’ starting angle to find the
total change in angle of root growth. Below is a sample calculation for this, followed by Table 4, which displays the
total change in angle of root growth for each trial:
Total change = angle of root growth after seven days – starting angle
Total change = 155.5 – 0.0
Total change = 155.5

Skew
The next step was to measure the skew of the data sets. In general, skew is a measure of the symmetry of the
distribution of data in relation to its mean. As a data set becomes more skewed, the mean of the data set loses its
ability to provide an accurate measure of central tendency for the data it describes. In essence, a skewed data set tells
that the mean will not be an accurate descriptor.
I calculated the skew of the data set for each level of the manipulated variable. Below is a sample skew
calculation which shows the skew for each starting angle. In the equation, n is the number of data values, s is the
standard deviation of the sample, (𝑥 − 𝑥̅ ) is each data value’s deviation from the mean cubed, and ∑(𝑥 − 𝑥̅ ) is
the sum of these values. The skew for each starting angle can be found in Table 5.
Skew = ∑(𝑥 − 𝑥̅ ) ∗ ( )( )( )

Skew = −50874.1 ∗ ( )( )( . )

Skew ≈ −0.3
The forty-five degree, one hundred thirty-five degree, and one hundred eighty degree starting angles have a
negative skew. This indicates that the mean for these data sets is lower than if the data was normally distributed.
Opposite of this, the forty-five degree and ninety degree starting angles have a positive skew. This indicates that the
mean for these data sets is higher than if the data was normally distributed.
However, all the skews have an absolute value that is less than 0.5, indicating that the data sets are
approximately symmetrical. In terms of the descriptive analysis, this tells that the mean will be an accurate measure
of center for the data.
Measure of Central Tendency
Due to the approximate symmetry of the data sets, I used the arithmetic mean to measure the central
tendency of each data set. Generally, the mean is a model of the data set, and provides a measure of the center. The
mean is the best measure of central tendency for my data sets because they are approximately symmetrical. Below is
a sample mean calculation. In the equation, ∑ x indicates the sum of each data value, and n is the number of values
in the sample. The mean for each starting angle can be found in Table 5.
 ∑
𝑥̅ =
. . . . . . .
𝑥̅ =

𝑥̅ ≈ 175.7
Measure of Spread
The standard deviation is a measure of spread that generally tells how spread out the data is from the mean.
A high standard deviation indicates that the data is more spread out, and a low standard deviation indicates that the
data is clustered around the mean.
The standard deviation is the best measure of spread for my data sets because they are all approximately
symmetrical, meaning that the standard deviation will accurately reflect the data spread. Below is a sample standard
deviation calculation. In the equation, s is the standard deviation of the sample, ∑(𝑥 − 𝑥̅ ) is the sum of the
difference between each data value and the mean squared, and n is the number of values in the sample. The standard
deviation for each starting angle can be found in Table 5.

∑( ̅)
𝑠=

.
𝑠=

𝑠 ≈ 32.7 degrees
Descriptive Statistics Results
Below, Table 5 showcases all the calculated descriptive statistics for these samples.

Data Presentation
 A scatter plot with standard deviation bars is the best type of graph for visualizing my data because both the
manipulated and responding variables are quantitative. The points on the scatter plot successfully represent the
mean, my chosen measure of center, and the standard deviation bars highlight the measure of spread. The mean total
changes for each starting angle are very different from each other, and each get progressively smaller, creating a
trendline with a negative slope. Additionally, the standard deviation bars are relatively small, compared to the
distance between means, and do not overlap with each other, which indicates that this data is likely statistically
significant.
I selected a linear trendline to fit this data because the means decrease at a steady rate. As shown on Figure
E, the trendline has a negative slope, indicating that as the starting angle for each plant increases, the mean total
change in angle of root growth decreases. The trendline has a distinct slope, further supporting that there is a strong,
negative relationship between the manipulated and responding variables.
Inferential Statistics
Inferential statistics determine the significance of data. If the result is significant, then it is likely not due to
chance, and can be generalized over a broader population. If it is not statistically significant, then the result could be
due to chance, and cannot be generalized (von Bargen). For this experiment, I will test statistical significance using
Pearson’s Correlation at a 0.05 level of significance.
Null Hypothesis: There is no significant correlation between the starting angle of Phaseolus vulgaris seeds and the
total change in angle of root growth after seven days, therefore, the results of the experiment could be due to chance.
Alternative Hypothesis: There is a significant correlation between the starting angle of Phaseolus vulgaris seeds
and the total change in angle of root growth after seven days, therefore, the results of the experiment are likely not
due to chance.
Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient is a way to measure the strength of a linear relationship, R. R is a value between
negative one and one, where values close to zero have no correlation, values close to one have a strong positive
correlation, and values close to negative one have a strong negative correlation (von Bargen). Because the results of
the experiment have a linear trend, I used Pearson’s Correlation to test statistical significance:
∑( ̅ )( )
R=
∑( ̅ ) ∑( )

.
R=
( . )( . )

R ≈ -0.997
The calculated R value of -0.997 indicates that there is a very strong, negative correlation between the starting
angle of Phaseolus vulgaris seeds and the total change in angle of root growth after seven days.
Using an online calculator, I determined that the calculated R value has a P-value of 0.000197, which is
significant at a ninety five percent confidence level (“P Value from Pearson (R) Calculator”). This indicates that the
results of the experiment are statistically significant and are likely not due to chance.
 I used the Pearson’s Correlation statistical test to determine if the results were statistically significant. My
calculated Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient R-value was -0.997 and the calculated p-value was 0.000197. Because
the calculated p-value was lower than the critical value at a 0.05 significance level, I conclude that the results are
significant. Therefore, I reject the null hypothesis. Below, Table 6 displays a summary of the inferential statistics.

Conclusion
How does the angle of seed planting for Phaseolus vulgaris seeds impact the total change in the angle of growth for
the plants’ roots? As the angle of planting for Phaseolus vulgaris seeds increases, the total change in the angle of
root growth decreases.
The data collected in this experiment supports the experimental hypothesis. As the angle of seed planting,
measured in degrees, increased, the total change in angle of growth after a seven-day period decreased, because the
degree of gravitropism in plants with lower starting angles was higher, causing them to change their angle of root
growth more dramatically. In the experiment, I found that the total change in angle of root growth was drastically
higher for the seeds planted at smaller angles. The angle of seed planting that saw the most total change was the
zero-degree angle, and the angle of sed planting that saw the least total change was the one hundred eighty degree
angle. This indicates that the plants curved until they were oriented downward, toward the gravitational vector,
which required more change for the lower starting angles than the higher starting angles.
On average, the seeds planted at a zero-degree angle had a total change of approximately 175.7 degrees,
supporting that they curved until growing approximately straight down. As the starting angles increased, including
forty-five, ninety, one hundred thirty-five, and one hundred eighty-degree angles, the total change steadily decreased.
The roots from the seeds planted at a one hundred eighty-degree angle, the highest in this experiment, had a total
change of approximately negative twenty degrees, again indicating that the roots continued to grow straight down.
The results of the experiment were extremely statistically significant. The calculated Pearson’s correlation
coefficient for the data was -0.997, which indicates a strong, negative correlation. Additionally, this correlation
coefficient had a p-value of 0.000197, which indicates that it is extremely significant. In all, the results of the
experiment are likely not due to chance.
Scientific Explanation
The results of the experiment match the expected results, established in my background research. It is known
that plants are able to directionally control their growth in response to gravity, a phenomenon known as gravitropism
(Nakamura). In their roots, plants have specialized cells that detect a gravitational vector by analyzing the location
and potential energy of amyloplasts, which settle at the bottom of the cell due to gravity (Rahul). When they settle,
the amyloplasts transfer some of their potential energy to the cell’s plasma membrane, which triggers the release of
the plant hormone auxin and initiates the observable change (Nakamura). Roots experience positive gravitropism,
where auxin concentration inhibits growth in the lower side of the root, causing it to curve until it is fully oriented
down, toward the gravitational vector. This is known as gravitropic bending (Vandenbrink). Ultimately, plants are
able to analyze the way that amyloplasts settle in special root cells to determine which way is “down,” and alter the
directional growth of their roots to grow accordingly. My findings, that plants tend to orient their roots to grow
toward Earth’s gravitational vector, is applicable to the farming and agriculture industries. This information is
important to know when growing crops on land that is not level, and can allow farmers to plant their crops more
efficiently on shallow hillsides.
One experiment similar to mine was Regulation of Root Angle and Gravitropism, conducted by Toal et al. in
2018. In this experiment, the researchers analyzed the total change in angle of root growth for wild tomato plants
(Solanum pennellii) over time, after planting them at a ninety-degree angle. The study found that the angle of growth
for the plants’ roots increasingly changed as time passed. Over time, the roots of the plants experienced gravitropic
bending, and they grew downward, toward the gravitational vector. This is similar to how my Phaseolus vulgaris
plants experienced gravitropic bending, changing their angle of growth to grow straight down as the starting angle
increased. The setup of our experiments were very different, but both support the idea that the roots of plants grow at
angles that correspond to Earth’s gravitational vector. Toal’s experiment only tested the plants at a ninety-degree
angle of planting, whereas my experiment tested five different angles. However, both display instances of plants’
roots growing straight downward, toward the gravitational vector.
Errors and Limitations
One of the major limitations of the data I collected in my experiment was the ongoing appearance of mold on
the Phaseolus vulgaris plants. After a pilot study, I discovered that mold would be a confounding variable, and
implemented preventative steps in my procedure to combat this. While I was able to substantially reduce the number
of plants that grew mold by soaking the seeds in hydrogen peroxide, some of the plants still grew mold. For the
plants that observably had mold that inhibited plant growth, I voided the results. However, it was impossible to know
whether the plants without observable mold growth were impacted in any way. It is possible that the mold acted as a
confounding variable, changing the results of the data.
Another limitation of the experiment was the varying sample size for each level of the manipulated variable.
For each starting angle, I had twelve total trials, however, due to mold growth, I voided different numbers of trials
for each angle. I ended up with seven, eight, or nine trials for each angle. The varying number of trials could have
led to less accurate results for the angles with seven trials. Ultimately, the angles that had more trials, and thus a
larger sample size, had more accurate, reliable results than the angles with fewer trials, leading to a biased data set.
Two other important limitations to consider are experimenter fatigue and experimenter experience. First,
measuring the angle of growth for each of the sixty plants was a tedious process, and it is possible that my
concentration and accuracy decreased as I measured. Overall, this could have made the data much less precise.
Additionally, this was my first time independently conducting an experiment and my first time growing plants in a
lab setting. Due to my lack of experience, it is likely that I made random errors throughout the measurement process,
further limiting the precision and accuracy of the data I collected.
Suggestions and Improvements
Despite these limitations, my experiment also had some significant strengths. First, the protractor that I used
to measure the angles of root growth had an uncertainty of 0.5 degrees, which is very low terms of a 360-degree
total. This allowed me to carry out precise measurements, ultimately making my data more precise. Another strength
was the selection of levels of the manipulated variable. The five angles that I chose encompassed every direction and
gravitational vector that the plants could respond to, while being different enough to create an observable difference
in the results. A final strength in the experiment was the low standard deviations in the data sets, and the resulting
high confidence in the significance of the data. The calculated standard deviations were low, and none of them
overlapped with one another, indicating an increased likelihood of a significant difference between starting angles.
Further, the calculated correlation coefficient, -0.997, had a p-value of 0.000197, indicating that the results were
extremely statistically significant and likely not due to chance.
To correct the errors and limitations that I identified, I should take the following steps when repeating the
experiment. First, I should carry out the experiment in a sterile lab setting. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, I carried
out the experiment from my house, specifically out of a closet. This was not ideal, and I believe that the location of
the experiment is what led to the growth of mold on the Phaseolus vulgaris plants. Repeating the experiment in a lab
setting with sterile conditions will prevent mold from growing on the plants and will eliminate this confounding
variable. Completing the experiment in a lab setting and removing the threat of mold growth will also address the
second limitation I discussed, my varying sample sizes. The sample sizes for my levels of the manipulated variable
varied because I voided the results of the plants that grew mold. If I can prevent mold growth by working in a lab
setting, the starting angles will be able to have uniform sample sizes, eliminating this limitation. The final limitations
that I identified were experimenter fatigue and experimenter experience. Experimenter fatigue can be solved by
taking extra time while recording measurements and being cautious of experiencing this fatigue. When repeating the
experiment, I can act with the phenomenon of experimenter fatigue in mind and put extra effort into ensuring that I
remain concentrated throughout the measurement process. Further, in repeating the experiment multiple times, I will
be able to gain more experience measuring the plants, which will help to eliminate the risk of random errors that
occur when measuring.
 To strengthen the conclusions found through this experiment, additional data should be collected in the form
of additional manipulated variables and additional trials for additional plant species. First, in anther experiment,
researchers could use more starting angles to further strengthen the correlation between starting angle and total
change in angle of root growth. In my experiment, I studied five angles: zero, forty-five, ninety, one hundred thirty-
five, and one hundred eighty degrees. Another experiment could include ten starting angles in eighteen-degree
increments, which would strengthen the calculated correlation. Similarly, adding more trials to each starting angle
would strengthen the correlation and the conclusions drawn from the experiment. A larger sample size will provide
more accurate mean values, weaken the influence of outliers, and provide a smaller margin of error. Ultimately,
repeating the experiment with more levels of the manipulated variable and more trials for each level will strengthen
the conclusions found through this study. Additionally, I recommend that this experiment be repeated with various
types of plants. If similar results are found for a variety of plant species, the conclusions of the experiment can be
generalized the incorporate the entirety of the kingdom Plantae, not just the species Phaseolus vulgaris. The ability
to generalize the findings and conclusions will make them more applicable to scenarios like farming and gardening.
Ultimately, my recommended next steps are to repeat this experiment with more levels of the manipulated variable
and more trials for each level for various plant species.

Works Cited
“Geotropism- Plants Defying Gravity.” YouTube, uploaded by Science and Maths by Primrose Kitten, 6 September
2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57IXUG0CHSQ
“Geotropism Test With Corn Plants.” YouTube, uploaded by Michael Hayes, 11 November 2012,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kzk06EISvUs
Michio Kawasaki, Mitsutaka Taniguchi & Hiroshi Miyake (2008) Dynamics of Amyloplast Sedimentation in
Growing Yam Tubers and Its Possible Role in Graviperception, Plant Production Science, 11:3, 393-397,
DOI: 10.1626/pps.11.393
Nakamura Moritaka, Nishimura Takeshi, Morita Miyo Terao, (2019) Bridging the gap between amyloplasts and
directional auxin transport in plant gravitropism, Current Opinion on Plant Biology vol. 52, 54-60,
DOI=10.1016/j.pbi.2019.07.005
“P Value from Pearson (R) Calculator.” Social Science Statistics,
www.socscistatistics.com/pvalues/pearsondistribution.aspx.
Rahul Roy, Bassham Diane (2015) Gravitropism and lateral root emergence are dependent on the trans-Golgi
network protein TNO1, Frontiers in Plant Science vol. 6, 969, DOI=10.3389/fpls.2015.00969
Suwarup Ranjan, Bhosale Rahul, (2019) Developmental Roles of AUX1/LAX Auxin Influx Carriers in Plants,
Frontiers in Plant Science vol. 10, 1306, DOI=10.3389/fpls.2019.01306
Toal, Ted W et al. “Regulation of Root Angle and Gravitropism.” G3 (Bethesda, Md.) vol. 8,12 3841-3855. 10 Dec.
2018, doi:10.1534/g3.118.200540
Vandenbrink Joshua P., Kiss John Z., Herranz Raul, Medina F. Javier, (2014) Light and energy signals synergize in
modulating plant development, Frontiers in Plant Development vol. 5, 563, DOI=10.3389/fpls.2014.00563
von Bargen, Gretel. “Inferential Data Analysis.” (class notes, IB Biology, Skyline High School, January 2021).