Photosynthesis Vs Cellular Respiration!! HELP!!!

Discussion of all aspects of cellular structure, physiology and communication.

Moderators: honeev, Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

Post Reply
ntpt
Garter
Garter
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 3:50 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Photosynthesis Vs Cellular Respiration!! HELP!!!

Post by ntpt » Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:06 am

What conclusions can you reach about the rate of photosynthesis compared to the rate of respiration:

a) if there is a net production of Carbon Dioxide
b) if there is a net use of carbon dioxide
c) the amount of carbon dioxide remains the same

User avatar
mith
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5345
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Post by mith » Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:21 am

1.we'd all die
2.we live...then later we die
3.we live
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
~Niebuhr

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:51 am

correction:
3- We are already dead....

Come on, use your brai and do your homework. What do you think? At least suggest that so that we can help you, not just give you the answers.
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

ntpt
Garter
Garter
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 3:50 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by ntpt » Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:11 am

Ok this is wat i got, but im not sure:

a) rate of photosynthesis increases, rate of respiraion decreases
b) Rate of photosynthesis decreases, rate of respiration increases
c) both rates stays the same?

Can someone please correct this for me?

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:33 pm

You have the idea, but you should say:
but what you are asked is not what will happen, but how both rate compares. Then for a) the answer would be:
rate of photosynthesis is greater than rate of respiration.

The other should be easy now.
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

User avatar
mith
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5345
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Post by mith » Tue Mar 21, 2006 10:08 pm

Canalon wrote:correction:
3- We are already dead....


Yea, could be tricky depending on the questoin
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
~Niebuhr

ntpt
Garter
Garter
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 3:50 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by ntpt » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:14 am

umm...if the amount of Carbon dioxide stays the same, then does the rate of photosynthesis equal the rate of respiration???

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:24 am

ntpt wrote:umm...if the amount of Carbon dioxide stays the same, then does the rate of photosynthesis equal the rate of respiration???


Of course that is the general conclusion (death is just aparticular case where Respiration=Photosynthesis=0).

But this was obviously a homework question, rather obvious, and mithril made fun of the post. If the poster had used his or her brain (s)he would have found that already, as well as the answer to a) and b). But we are not going to tell :twisted:
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)
Contact:

Post by MrMistery » Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:13 pm

Hate to break this to you Patrick, but ntpt is the poster
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:17 pm

Ooops. Anyway He found the answer now. Goal reached.
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests