F215 - Revision thread 13th June 2011

I wrote some **** to do with making the numbers of ladybird into percentages as the number of ladybird were different from altitudes.

go on facebook and search for "F215 Ecology paper 13 may" page ..lets make some noise, this stupid examier has made our hard work go down the drain and ruined our university chances. i dont care if boundary goes down, this paper was s*** and they should know about it

I wrote some **** to do with making the numbers of ladybird into percentages as the number of ladybird were different from altitudes.

Pretty sure that's correct.

1 mark for saying it. 1 mark for explaining why it's an improvement. 1 mark for showing how.

I would +1rep you but I've run out - but i agree with you 100%

Yeah, that's what I put. Plus when you convert the results in the table to percentages, you can see that his 'conclusion' in the next part of the question is rubbish because all the altitudes have similar percentages.

But it told us how many red bugs there were. The red bugs are the bb phenotype and my text book says "q^2 is the frequency of genotype ff" (bb in this case).

That would make q the square root of 0.855 which is 0.92. "q represents the frequency of the allele f (b)"

I put tRNA and then chi-squared on a whim

What did everyone get for the % decrease? I think I got like 42.8% but seems a lot of people are saying 57.25%.

what did people put for the technizue to measure ladybirds up a hill? and why should they do it more times?

I wrote take percentages as reading numbers straight off without the same ladybirds at each altitude would be misleading.

Did you agree with his conclusion I didn't i remember reading in the book that 2 variables could be affected by another variable.

I put Amino Acid, my mind went blank and it was a very badly worded question, the fact we all have different answers shows that! Honestly this paper was horrific, where was the other 90% of the specification.

i put interupted belt trasect...im prob wrong tho

he question about eggs described how both hedgehogs and waders both eat the same eggs at shallow areas or something. At first I thought it said hedgehogs were eating waders eggs but then realised that weren't the case so started all over again.

The codes on the diagram, UUA, etc., were from the actual genetic code (i checked google images). If it was tRNA, they would be 'inverted' right?

i put interupted belt trasect...im prob wrong tho