It depends on the marking criteria.cccclaire said:no thats correct about the nitrogenous waste I think. It's just not really a major point, but it isn't incorrect.
i put blood loses o2, gains co2, and hormones from pituritary glandLordie said:Oh, the changing chemical structure of the blood question. What substances are removed from the brain? I said the oxygen level is less after passing through the brain, however what is removed, ie, what does the blood's chemical form change to whilst going through the brain?
I put sieve plate and companion cellfrogbutt said:i thought it was sieve plate and epidermis. WHAT DID OTHERS PUT!
they were just plain long cells in a layer next to the phloem weren't they?
what was with 'communication' option?! WEIRD. the insect knees. haha.
Yeah, this is what I was afraid of.It depends on the marking criteria.
If it was Ms Leibman marking, she wouldnt accept that because nitrogenous wastes are made in the liver where amino acids are deaminated.
I wrote that nitrogenous waste concentration increased in one of the past papers I did for her and it came back with a big cross and "NO" written next to it.
But then again, no one else marks as hard as her so who knows
i bases marks on 1 mark= 1 point, but if you explained well you could get more, plus was only a 3 mark questionvs2328 said:LOL for the small intestine i said the blood absorbs glucose and the nutrients from the digested food !!! and as the blood goes through the brain the level of oxygen decreases ..
IS THAT WRONGGG ????? LOL
and with the phloem theory -- did you's write about translocation, pressure flow mechanism and the sugar moving from source to sink??????
and with the accuracy of the blood sketches ....
i only mentioned the fact that wbc are twice as large as the rbc however the diagram shows the rbc was larger. i knew the scale wasnt write but i didnt know how to explain it without contradicting myself (which will kill you)
so what do u reckon my mark will be for only mentioning that one thing ?????
No thats rightvs2328 said:LOL for the small intestine i said the blood absorbs glucose and the nutrients from the digested food !!! and as the blood goes through the brain the level of oxygen decreases ..
IS THAT WRONGGG ????? LOL
Yesvs2328 said:and with the phloem theory -- did you's write about translocation, pressure flow mechanism and the sugar moving from source to sink??????
I dunno. At least 1 maybe 2 if youre lucky.vs2328 said:and with the accuracy of the blood sketches ....
i only mentioned the fact that wbc are twice as large as the rbc however the diagram shows the rbc was larger. i knew the scale wasnt write but i didnt know how to explain it without contradicting myself (which will kill you)
so what do u reckon my mark will be for only mentioning that one thing ?????
Even so, you'd probably only lose one mark.dolbinau said:Yeah, this is what I was afraid of.
dolbinau said:Yeah, this is what I was afraid of.
I showed like a some DNA with stickyends (unpaired bases) and a plasmid with sticky ends, and then drew arrows and showed them together with the unpaired bases joining. With a few descriptions of what was happeningDaline said:i bases marks on 1 mark= 1 point, but if you explained well you could get more, plus was only a 3 mark question
Did anyone do Genetics option, if so what did you do for d) draw and label a diagram of a method used to produce recombinant DNA? i did crossing over in meiosis cause could not think of a thing....
oh of course. the markers wont know ANYTHING about biology. we're all fine.cccclaire said:Don't worry, we have like the most ridiculously hard marker for biology at our school. I got a high distinction in the biology olympiad but have never scored more than 70% in one of her tests.
I think the answer's ok though because it pick up amino acids and stuff which then turn into nitrogenous waste. Also, I doubt the markers will know that much about nitrogenous waste anyway. i think the main things they're looking for are O2/CO2 and glucose concentration.
There was no question on ithenry08 said:Which practicing australian scientist did you write about?
frogbutt said:oh of course. the markers wont know ANYTHING about biology. we're all fine.
ah. okey, yeh that makes a tonne more sense than mine did, too bad i didnt think of it lolmidifile said:I showed like a some DNA with stickyends (unpaired bases) and a plasmid with sticky ends, and then drew arrows and showed them together with the unpaired bases joining. With a few descriptions of what was happening
My diagram was so prettyful.midifile said:I showed like a some DNA with stickyends (unpaired bases) and a plasmid with sticky ends, and then drew arrows and showed them together with the unpaired bases joining. With a few descriptions of what was happening