Chapter 5: Cellular Respiration and Fermentation
Specifications
Mitochondrial preparation from liver
1.
Blend 15 g liver with 35 mL of cold grinding solution (.5M sucrose , +.1M potassium phosphate, pH
7.3)
2.
Filter suspension and centrifuge filtrate at 500 x g for 10 minutes at +4’C
3.
Decant supernatant and centrifuge for 30 minutes at 5000 x g and 4’C
4.
Discard supernatant, suspend sediment in 10 mL suspension solution (.4M +sucrose, .02M potassium
phosphate, .005 M magnesium chloride and .02 M glucose.
5.
Freeze or use immediately.
Activity 1: Alcoholic Fermentation
Table 2
Tube#
Tube 1
Tube 2
Tube 3
Tube 4
Rate of fermentation
0
0
slower than Tube 4
faster than Tube 3
Activity 2: Cellular Respiration
Warning
Another expect result (case 2) is added. Note this has nothing to do with the “alternative hypothesis” in your lab
report . Both cases have their own null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis. Tough it can serve as the “alternative
explanation” you might use in the discussion part. -yichun
Table 4 (Absorption)
Depending on how many working mitochondria was in the chicken liver that was used, probably related to
how fresh the chicken liver was. The amount of succinate can be either in excess or not, giving two difference
cases:
Case 1
If the succinate in Tube 2 and Tube 3 are not in excess, the capacity of mitochondria is not reached:
Tube#
Tube 1
Tube 2
Tube 3
Trend of absorption
reading
nearly constant
decreasing slower than tube
3
descreasing faster than Tube
2
Case 2
This
preview
has intentionally blurred sections.
Sign up to view the full version.
(The following is the explanation written solely on my own behalf. -yichun)

This is the end of the preview.
Sign up
to
access the rest of the document.
- Spring '09
- MCCLURE
- Electrochemistry, Cellular Respiration, Redox, Electric Potential, Null hypothesis
-
Click to edit the document details