Paper Bird Lab

7/30/2019 Paper Bird Lab

1/8

IB Biology Lab Report

The Effects of Mutations on Various

Types of Birds

Data Collection and Processing

Sean Wada

Tables Representing the DataCollected from Various

Types of

Generations


2/8

Generation 1 PerformanceTrial Horizontal

Displacement

(in m +- 0.001 m)

Angle ( in degrees + - 5

degrees)

Qualitative Data

1 5.03 70 flew into the right

wall

2 4.17 85 flew upwards and

crashed

3 3.30 112 flew upwards and

crashed

Average: 4.166666667 89


Displacement (in m +-

0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data

1 4.14 70 flew into right wall



Average: 4.436666667 70


Displacement (in m +-0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data

1 4.17 70 flies up and crashes

left


left

3 4.46 90 flew straight

Average: 4.34 76.66666667


3/8



0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data


right


right

3 4.81 110 crashed into the left

wall

Average: 4.696666667 88.33333333



0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data

1 4.19 80 went right hit the

wall

2 5.18 85 hit the ceiling

straight

3 5.75 75 went right and hit

the wall

Average: 5.04 80



0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data

1 5.13 80 hit the right wall


3 5.09 99 left, no hit

Average: 5.12 86.33333333


4/8

Generation 7 Performance (Died Out)Trial Horizontal


0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data




Average: 4.253333333 77.33333333



0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data

1 4.14 80 it went to the right

and up


and up


and up

Average: 4.126666667 80



0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data

1 5.48 100 hit the left wall



Average: 5.54 100


5/8



0.001 m)


degrees)

Qualitative Data



3 4.42 100 flew left

Average: 4.453333333 93.33333333

Tables Showing the Measurements ofthe Wings For Each Generation

Distance (in cm +- 0.1 cm)

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end

Length Width Distance to

the closest

end

Length Width

3 15 2 3 15 2

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end

Length Width Distance

to the

closest

end

Length Width

3 15 2 4 15 2


6/8

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end


to the

closest

end

Length Width

3 13 2 4 15 2

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end


to the

closest

end

Length Width

3 13 2 4 15 3

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end


to the

closest

end

Length Width

3 13 2 4 15 4

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end


to the

closest

end

Length Width

3 13 2 4 15 5

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end


to the

closest

end

Length Width


7/8

Wing 1 Wing 2

3 13 3 4 15 5

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end


to the

closest

end

Length Width

3 13 2 4 19 5

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end


to the

closest

end

Length Width

3 13 5 3 15 5

Wing 1 Wing 2

Distance

to the

closest

end


to the

closest

end

Length Width

3 13 5 3 19 5

Conclusion and Evaluation

From the results above, I concluded that generation 9 has a larger

chance of surviving in the future since it flew a longer distance while the

other generations flew less. At the beginning off the experiment, I

predicted that a bird with a slightly longer wing length than its other wing


8/8

would be the luckiest out of all the generations in case if one wing gets

tired, that specific type of bird could use its longer wing for flight as a

result. Unfortunately, it crashed after a few meters, but I assumed it

could survive as a result of flying longer distances. With this, there would

be a few advantages of flying longer distances, such as finding a newhabitat in case its gets cold and finding new sources of food. This would

be a great example of natural selection and the generation 9 bird would

become the parent of the next generation.

However, there were a few errors present in this experiment. One

would be the starting position, and we werent too sure if it was the right

height for the bird to be launched from. Second, would be the wing form.

Again, we couldnt make up our minds whether to use straws or

chopsticks. This experiment could have been more effective if I used

both straws and chopsticks as different types of wing structures. Finally,

the last error would be the type of the rubber band. Our group opted to

use a thicker type, but didnt consider the advantages of a thinner one.

This could have effected the overall speed of the paper bird, and it is still

unknown whether a thinner rubber band would have been more

effective.

As for improvements, if there were straws available along with

the chopsticks as wings, we couldve analysed measurements more

effectively, as we could compare the differences between using two

different types of wings. Possibly, the weight of the two forms might have

affected the overall distance of the paper birds. However, I do believe

using a thicker rubber band was a mistake, and since thinner rubber

bands are less elastic, I would have opted to use them instead.

Paper Bird Lab

Documents

Transcript of Paper Bird Lab