Stark 1

Britton Stark
Mrs. Reifke
AP Biology, Period 1
19 April 2016
The Examination of Transpiration Rates in Different Controlled Environments
Introduction: The purpose of the first procedure in this lab was to compare the different
stomatal densities of different plant species to see how they have evolved to their individual
climates and environments. The purpose of the second procedure in this lab was to examine the
different transpiration rates of plant samples from the same plant but in different conditions to
examine the impact that the environment has on the transpiration rate of plants. Transpiration is
the process of water being moved throughout the plant from the roots to small pores called
stomata on the plants leaves. Not all parts of plants transpire because not all parts of the plant
have stomata. Stomata are usually localized in the leaves of plants. Only vascular plants have
stomata and therefore transpire. The greater the number of stomata, the greater opportunity that
plant has to lose water. Depending on the environment that the plant has evolved to, the plant
will have different numbers of stomata. A plant in a very hot, dry climate will have less stomata
in order to prevent water loss. The number of stomata and surface area of leaves is related by the
amount of photosynthesis the plant undergoes. As the size of leaves and plants are reduced, the
rate of transpiration is expected to decrease as the plant has less stomata to release water vapor
from. If an environment does not supply the needed water or minerals, the plant may evolve to
grow less leaves and more roots in order to store needed nutrients. Many factors contribute to the
rate of transpiration in plants. Some of these factors include the following: air pressure;
humidity; local light level; temperature. The structural features of plants that help with the loss of
water through transpiration are the guard cells that surround stomata. These guard cells swell and
contract regulate the opening and closing of stomata. Plants maintain their water level by only
opening their stomata in environments that promote as little water loss as possible, such as the
cool temperature of night.
Hypothesis: For procedure two we believed that the Hypericum perforatum sample with
the lowest rate of transpiration would be that in the dark, followed by misted, then wind, then
light without heat, then control, and then the plant with the highest rate of transpiration would be
the plant exposed to more light and heat combined.
Materials/Methods:
Materials:
Procedure 1:
Plant Samples (Leaves)
Clear Nail Polish
Millimeter Ruler
Microscope
Tape

Stark 2
Microscope Slide
Procedure 2:
Hypericum perforatum Samples
Tubing
Pipet
Plumbers Tape
Syringe
Water
Book (for support)
Graph Paper
Pencil
Procedure:
Procedure 1:
1. Take single leaf from plant sample and coat the top side of the leaf with a single
layer of the clear nail polish.
2. While nail polish is drying, measure the diameter of the microscope slides view
with a millimeter ruler on low power.
3. Take a piece of tape and place on coated side of leaf sample. Remove tape from
leaf to remove a clear mold of the leafs stomata.
4. Place tape on microscope slide and use the microscope to examine the stomata on
a single field on high power.
5. After recording the number of stomata in a single field, move the slide and count
again for another two fields of view.
6. Add all three counts and divide by three to determine the mean number of stomata
per field of view.
7. Determine the area of each field of view by dividing the diameter recorded earlier
by 10 and then again by 2 to determine radius. Square the value and multiply by pi to
determine the area.
8. Divide the mean stomata by the area to determine the mean stomata per square
millimeter.
Procedure 2:
1. Take sample of St Johns Wort and pinch off top of plant shoot.
2. With pencil, trace the leaves on the 1 cm graph paper for surface area calculation.
3. Set up your potometer as in the picture below. Note that we will not use a valve
or a ruler.

Stark 3
4. Fill your potometer under water and shake/flick out the bubbles to avoid
inaccurate readings from air bubbles.
5. Plug the syringe while its submerged. Depress the plug just enough so it wont
fall out, but so that theres enough water in the reservoir for the plant to transpire.
6. Carry the potometer with both ends level. Otherwise, water will leak out of one
end.
7. Tape potometer to a book for support.
8. Set the potometer to zero on the pipet before placing the plant in the potometer.
9. Stem must be submerged in water.
10. Seal stem with plumbers tape.
11. Start recording data as soon as possible after placing the plant in the potometer
and once the potometer is in the given experimental environment (light, dark, mist, etc.).
12. While data is being collected, calculate surface area of all traced leaves to the
nearest tenth of a centimeter and record.
13. Record change in water level every three minutes for a total of twenty-one
minutes.
14. After complete time period has elapsed, divide the total change by twenty-one to
determine the change in water level in terms of milliliters per minute.
15. Divide this milliliters per minute by the total surface area of the samples leaves to
determine the milliliters per minute per square centimeter.
Results:
Qualitative Observations: The leaves of the St Johns Wort has two leaves per level that
are across from each other. The dark environment that our sample was restricted to was not a
perfect darkness.
Data Tables:
Table 1: Stomatal Density of Various Plant Species per Square Millimeter
Genus

Stomata/Field

Stomata/Field

Stomata/Field

Mean
Stomata/Field

Mean
Stomata/mm2

Hedera
(thin ivy)

15

18

22

18.3

103.5

Hedera
(wide ivy)

35

31

33

33

168.4

Basil
(duh)

11

11

10

62.89

Narcissus
(daffodil)

24

31

28

27.7

141.15

Cornus
(dogwood)

47

32

43

40.3

205.61

Arctostaphylos

14

15

12.3

76.87

Stark 4
(manzanita)

Table 2: Transpiration Rate for Hypericum perforatum Samples in Different Environments

Treatment

Time (min.)

12

Leaf
Surface
Area
(cm2)
15

18

Transpiration
Rate
(mL/min./cm2)

21

Water Lost (mL)

control

0 .03

.04

.04 .04

.05

.06

.06

89.05

wind

0 .02

.03

.04 .045

.05

.06

.06

90.5

3.15x10-5

mist

0 .01

.01

.01 .015

.015

.015

.016

47

1.62x10-5

dark

0 .03

.04

.05 .05

.05

.06

.07

93.01

3.58x10-5

light (no
heat)

0 .02

.03

.04 .04

.05

.06

.06

84.7

3.37x10-5

light (with
heat)

0 .01

.02

.03 .04

.05

.06

.07

90.6

3.68x10-5

3.20x10-5

Calculations:
Procedure 1:
Mean Stomata per Field of View = (Count of Fields 1 + 2 + 3)/3
(24 + 31 + 28) = 83/3 = 27.7
Radius of microscope field = [Measurement/10 (to account for change in power)]/2 (to
get radius)
5/10 = 0.5/2 = 0.25
Area of circle = r2
0.25 x 0.25 = 0.0625 x 3.14 = 0.19625
Mean Stomata per square millimeter = Mean stomata/Area of Field of View
27.7/0.19625 = 141.15
Procedure 2:
Total Surface Area = Sum of Individual Surface Area
10.25 + 9.21 + 11.9 + 11.4 + 11.25 + 10.0 + 9.65 + 8.5 + 6.1 + 4.75 = 93.01
Transpiration Rate of Sample = Total Change of water/time elapsed/total surface area
0.07/21 = 0.003/93.01 = 0.0000358384 or 3.58 x 10-5
Graphs:

Stark 5

Figure 1: Stomata per Square Millimeter of Different Plant Species

Figure 2: Rate of Water Loss of Similar Plant Samples in Different Environments Over Time
Discussion: For procedure two we believed that the plant sample with the lowest rate of
transpiration would be that in the dark, followed by misted, then wind, then light without heat,
then control, and then the plant with the highest rate of transpiration would be the plant exposed
to more light and heat combined. Our hypothesis was proven wrong after the transpiration rates

Stark 6
ranked from highest to lowest revealed that the sample exposed to both light and heat did indeed
have the highest rate of transpiration, but was followed by dark, then light without heat, then the
control, then the plant subjected to wind, and the lowest rate of transpiration was the plant that
was misted. This is shown in table 2 which shows that the rates of transpiration of the samples
were ranked in this order. In this lab the controlled variable for procedure 2 was the type of plant
that each group used. All groups used a sample of St Johns Wort in the investigation of
transpiration rates. The manipulated variable was he environment that each sample was subjected
to during the course of the experiment. The environment that each plant was in during the
experiment was the independent variable because it caused the change in the transpiration rate
which was the dependent variable. The first possible error that could have been made during this
experiment was that our plant sample was not in complete darkness due to the structure blocking
out light was flawed. The second possible error is that our measurements were rushed because
we had to cover the plant up again to restrict light coming in. The last possible error is that we
had to let light in while we took our measurements which may have changed the true rate of
transpiration for our sample. During the first procedure, our groups discovered the stomatal
densities of different plant samples. The results in table 1 show that some plants had very dense
stomatal densities while others were very scarce. This shows the fact that plants evolve to their
different environments. The plant with the highest stomatal density was the dogwood. This plant
can retain water well in its large woody structure. The plant with the lowest was the basil which
is prone to drying out because of its very weak structure that cannot retain water well. The
species studied in procedure 2 of this lab was St Johns Wort or Hypericum perforatum. The
different treatments of this plant showed that the environment plays a large role in the rate of
transpiration for plants. The plant that underwent the most stress had the highest rate of
transpiration as shown in figure 2. Based on what was observed in procedure 1 of this lab, it is
likely that the Hypericum perforatum would have a similar stomatal density to that of the wide
ivy because of their similar morphologies. The similar structure could indicate a similar stomatal
density.