Refer to the illustration above. Amy wants to test the hypothesis that the rate of photosynthesis is directly related to the light level to which plants are exposed. She has chosen the aquatic plant Elodea as her study organism. In her experimental design, she has four different tanks in which she will place Elodea plants. Each Elodea plant will be placed inside an inverted test tube. She plans to estimate the relative rate of photosynthesis by measuring the amount of oxygen produced by plants placed under different light levels. She plans on comparing the amount of oxygen gas that collects in the top of each of the test tubes. Her experimental set-up looks like this: Amy plans to place tank #3 next to a window in the classroom. She plans to place tank #2 ten feet away from the window. She plans to place tank #1 twenty feet away from the window. She plans to place tank #4 in the classroom's refrigerator, because it is the only place she can find that is dark. Write your answers to the following in the spaces below.
a. What is wrong with the design of Amy’s experiment?
b. What could Amy change in her experimental design to make it a better experiment?

Amy she wants to test the hypothesis that the rates of photosynthesis are directly related to the levels to which the plants are exposed.

Learn more bout the refer to the illustration above.

link.

a. Placing plants in the tank.

b. Avoid close container and use another type of plant for the experiment.

Explanation:

Placing plants in the tank is wrong with the design of Amy’s experiment because placing plants in a closed tank will not experience any type of light. Amy have to change the medium i. e. tank for the plants and place plants in other pot which is not closed or used another plant that can be planted in the soil not water will be better for her experimental design which make it a better experiment.

"1. it should be, it has been for about 20 years, and it's really not much different in the end than breeding animals to have particular traits. there are always concerns about genetically engineered animals/plants affecting the environment in unexpected negative ways, but i can't think of an example where the fears didn't turn out to be baseless.  

first, as you point out, it would be a great advance in pharmacology, to be able to tailor drugs and their doses to me. the pros involve better medical treatment. the cons involve privacy issues like insurance companies denying coverage to people with genetic risk factors. looking at dna markers wouldn't affect the frequency of genetic diseases, but it would allow detection of them earlier. and ok, actually i suppose that if people used this information to avoid having children with genetic diseases, some might decrease in frequency."