Effect of High Concentration

Lachrymatory Agents on Red Worms

Sensory-Neural Synapse
Ayesha Quraishi
Niles North High School

Results

Quantitative:

Observational:
Control (water)

Control (100% Ethyl Alcohol)

The worms appear healthy and fat.

They are jumpy and pink.

Mace

Onion
25 g

50 g

75 g

5 mL

10 mL

15 mL

The worms
appear
normal like
the control

The worms
appear
normal like
the control,
but also look
a little dry

The worms
appear
normal like
the control,
but also look
a little dry

Worms
appear
sluggish

Worms
appear
sluggish,
skinny, and
darker
colored/not
very pink
(like purple)

Worms
appear
sluggish,
skinny, and
darker
colored/not
very pink
(like purple)

Data Analysis

Figure 8 shows an example of the wave output of a

worm from my 5 mL Mace sample on the Audacity
software. Each spike represents a signal, which is really
a tap on the anus of the worm.
The difference in channel 1 & 2 times were divided by
the distance between the worms anus and clitellum.

Figure 6

Figure 6 illustrates the mean conduction

velocities of the lachrymal chemicals in
comparison to each other and their
controls.

Nonivamide
.0025 M

.0050 M

.0075 M

Worms appear
skinnier, slower,
and sluggish
unlike the way
they looked before
being in the farm.

Worms
appear very
skinny, dark
colored, dry,
and
sluggish.

Worms
appear very
skinny,
dark
colored,
dry, and
sluggish.

Statistical
Analysis

Figure 8

The worms appear healthy, but are very

slow. They are a little dry, too.

A two-sample T-test comparing each

sample to its control indicated that every
sample is significant at the 5%
significance level. However, there must
be caution taken when understanding
this because of the very low sample sizes.
Finally, the nonivamide sample was
compared to the water control because
the 100% ethyl alcohol sample had too
many voided trials due to excess static
that disrupted the wave output.

Error Analysis

This project had two stages in which error couldve changed the results and conclusion of the experiment. The
bioamplifier would sometimes emit a lot of static, probably due to movement of the machine, and the wave
output in Audacity would be affected by that. Furthermore, the battery went out in the bioamplifier, so midtesting of my experimental Mace samples, the machine stopped working. Thus, I got a new battery and
everything was fine. Still, the lack of power the machine had couldve affected my results. Next, while the worms
were in their farms for 24 hours, the chemicals may have not reached to them. I mixed the soil best I could with a
scoopula before putting the worms in, but the large variance in conduction velocities may be due to the fact that
the worm may have not even felt the effects of the chemicals in their environments. In addition, because of
these complications, the wave output in the samples designated Audacity files had negative velocities, thus
voided trials in my data analysis. This issue must be taken into consideration when I say that my 2-sample T-test
must be observed with extreme caution because of the lack of ample sample size.