• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Laporan Praktikum Biologi Dasar - Lazzaro spallanzani experiment

Laporan Praktikum Biologi Dasar - Lazzaro spallanzani experiment






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Laporan Praktikum Biologi Dasar - Lazzaro spallanzani experiment Laporan Praktikum Biologi Dasar - Lazzaro spallanzani experiment Document Transcript

    • RATIFICATION PAGE Complete report of Basic Biology practicum with title “Lazzaro Spallanzani Experiment“, that arranged by: Name : Nur Pratiwi Registration Number : 1114040196 Group : III (three) Class : ICP Biology B After checked and consulted by Assistant and Assistant Coordinator, so this report was accepted. Makassar, November 2011 Assistant Coordinator, Assistant, Djumarirmanto, S.Pd Gunawan Rahmil NIM. 091404174
    • CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background Lazzaro Spallanzani was an Italian physiologist who extensively studied animal biology and reproduction. He is probably most famous for his experiments that helped to disprove the theory of spontaneous generation, which helped to pave the way for future research by Louis Pasteur (1822-1895). Spallanzani was a creative and endlessly inquisitive researcher who studied subjects in biology as varied as sexual reproduction, blood pressure and echolocation in bats. He is also well known for his forays into other areas of the physical sciences. For instance, he studied lava flows inside an active volcano. The theory of spontaneous generation asserted that living things could come into being without a living predecessor. Georges Buffon (1707-1788) and John Needham (1713-1781) largely championed these theories. They believed that all living things contain, in addition to inanimate matter, special "vital atoms" that are responsible for all physiological activities. After death, these "vital atoms" would escape into the soil and would be taken up by plants. The two men claimed that the small moving objects seen in pond water are not living organisms but merely "vital atoms" escaping from the organic material. Spallanzani designed elegant experiments that helped to support his theory that these were in fact small living microorganisms. In his most famous experiment, Spallanzani showed that a sealed container of boiled broth would not have any microorganisms present, while those that were left unsealed or at room temperature would have evidence of living creatures. He reasoned that if spontaneous generation really took place, then all flasks should have evidence of infestation. These experiments were also significant because they were the basic steps that Louis Pasteur initially followed in order to kill germs in milk without harming the liquid.
    • B. Purpose The purpose of this practicum, to give the chance for the students to follow the steps that had been done by the scientist to solve the biology problem. Especially to know where the life begins. C. Benefit Based on this practicum. The student will know and understand the theory about beginning of life. Beside of that, the university student will know how the steps scientist can be solve this biology problem.
    • CHAPTER II PREVIEW OF LITERATURE The question about “Where the life begins?“ had tried to answer with some theory and experiment. One of the theory and the experiment is Spallanzani which is not believe about Abiogenesis Theory or Generation Spontaneous theory that said by Aristoteles (Tim Pengajar, 2011). Started from the era of Aristoteles (300 SM) all the people believe that the life body was happened with spontaneously from the thing that didn’t life. This argument sometimes we can say the Abiogenesis theory (Generation Spontaneous theory). This argument was follow by John Needham (1745-1750). He make the experiment with some of rice and meat that had been boiled. And then, he make the conclusion from his experiment that said although the boiled water kept into the closing bottle but the microbe (microorganisms) can be show in that water. This argument was showed the development and improvement of biology science in that era. But there are some of biology scientist doesn’t agree and believe with Abiogenesis theory (Generation Spontaneous theory), and then all of them trying to make experiment and give an evidence to collapse the Abiogenesis theory or Generation Spontaneous Theory (Ristiati, 2000). In 1765 Spallanzani began publishing his numerous scientific works. Most of them are motivated by a philosophy of science which nowadays could be called reductionist, namely, a belief that most phenomena are reducible to physical and chemical explanation. In 1769 he accepted the chair of natural history at the University of Pavia, remaining at this post until his death on Feb. 11, 1799. Spallanzani is well known for one of his major works on microscopic observation that concerned the systems of spontaneous generation, and was an attempt to disprove J.T. Needham's and the Comte de Buffon's theory in support of spontaneous generation. Although his experimentation was exact, and he did prove that some organisms can live in a vacuum for many days (anaerobes), his theory was not
    • comprehensive enough. Thus Spallanzani did not succeed in establishing in a final way that the theory of spontaneous generation was wrong. He also did important work in embryology. He was an ovarian preformation, and through his experiments with artificial fertilization using filtered semen he pointed out the need for the physical contact between the spermatozoa and the ovule. He thus disproved the fertilizing power of the seminal fluid. Yet he did not fully understand the process, and in plants he described fertilization as being effected by the spermatic vapor of the pollen and not by any of the visible parts of it (Anonymous, 2011). The other scientist biology is Lazarro spallanzzani. Lazarro Spallanzani was born on January 12, 1729, in Scandiano, Italy. He attended the University of Bologna and began his studies in law. However, his cousin, Laura Bassi, a professor of physics and mathematics, introduced him to a broad range of scientific studies. Lazarro Spallanzani altered his educational course and, in 1754, he earned a Ph.D. in philosophy. He joined the priesthood to support himself while he studied natural phenomena, hoping to determine explanations for such events as a stone skipping on water, the regeneration of decapitated snail heads, and the electric discharge of torpedo fish. Over the course of his career, Lazarro Spallanzani would examine the pits of spitting volcanoes, the world of reproduction, the waters of eels, the dark depths of the bat's home, and the intricacies of the vascular system (Anonymous, 2011). Lazarro Spallanzani, meanwhile, set out in 1765 to prove that microorganisms existed because they were already present in some form in the solution, the container, or the air. He took solutions which he knew would "breed" organisms and boiled them for up to an hour. The flasks were hermetically sealed to keep out contaminated air. Nothing grew (Anonymous, 2011). Schultze (1836) to improve Spallanzani’s experiment with to flow the air that pass by the acid and base which is solid in to the tube which is fill by the liquid broth that had been boiled before. But the people who was supported the Abiognesis
    • (Generation Spontaneous) theory was said, the air that is pass by the acid and base had changed, so there is no microorganisms in the liquid broth (Ristiati, 2000). Schoeder and Theodore von Ducsh (1854) had been done the same experiment with Lazarro Spallanzani, but they were filtered the air that entered into the tube with sterile cotton, and the result is showing there is not growth in the meal water that had heated. Louis Pasteur take the conclusion from his experiment, its saying Omne vivum ex ovo, omne ovum ex vivo. Louis Pasteur conclusion supported by John Tyndall who found the method which is said Tyndalisation (Ristiati, 2000). But proponents of the spontaneous generation theory dismissed Spallanzani's experiments, saying only that the boiling process had destroyed elements vital to the propagation of the organisms. It was not until Louis Pasteur's experiments on bacteria a century later that Lazarro Spallanzani was proved right (Anonymous,2011) Lazarro Spallanzani, with his experiment try to show if the microorganisms didn’t come spontaneously with his experiment. He boiled the liquid broth and close it, so that the thing from outside cannot enter to the liquid broth. Louis Pasteur is a master of biochemistry and microbiology. In the 1865, he observed by boiling the broth in tube also, but the tubes check didn’t close properly, but in formed as likely letter of “S”, so its end still opened. The air could reach the inside part of this tube, but Louis Pasteur had an argument that any bacteria or microorganism which floated in the air would trapped in the long tube’s check. In fact, as commonly the broth was still sterile until it flowed the broth to the tube’s check, then it flowed back again. Through this observation, Louis Pasteur success collapsed the Abiogenesis (Generation Spontaneous) theory (Kimball, 1999).
    • CHAPTER III PRACTICUM METHOD A. Place and Date Day / date : Tuesday / November 1st 2011 Time : 10.50 am – 12.20 pm Place : Biology Laboratory at the second floor on west side FMIPA State Unifersity of Makassar. B. Tools and Materials 1. Tools a. 4 reaction tubes b. 1 tube reaction rack c. 2 cork covers d. 1 spiritus lamp e. 1 wood clem 2. Materials a. 40 mL liquid broth b. 1 candle c. Match d. Label C. Work Procedure 1. Filled the fourth reaction tube with liquid broth, each tube that filled with 10 ml and give it a label “Tube I” , “Tube II”, “Tube III”, and “Tube IV”. 2. Tube I is not simmered and let opened it. 3. Tube II is closed by cork closed and then droped the liquid candle between tube’s mouth and it’s cork cover. 4. Tube III is simmered on the spiritus lamp, then let opened it. 5. Tube IV is simmered on the spiritus lamp, and closed it by the cork cover. And then, drop the liquid candle between tube’s mouth and it’s cork cover.
    • 6. All of the reaction tube was putted into the rack and keep it save. 7. Did observation and made note to wrote down the data from your observation of liquid broth every day during 4 days.
    • CHAPTER IV RESULT A. Result of Practicum Table of Experiment Result N o Days Tube I II III IV c s f sm C s f sm c s f sm c s f sm 1 0 - - - - - - - - + - - - + - - - 2 1st ++ + + + + - - ++ + + - + - - - ++ 3 2nd ++ + + ++ + - - ++ + + - + - - - + 4 3th ++ ++ + ++ + + + ++ ++ + + + + - - ++ Notes: - = unchanged + = changed ++ = the changed rise up c = color f = foam s = sediment sm =smell Pictures: 10mL 10mL 10mL 10mL
    • Notes pictures: Tube I = unheated and opened Tube II = unheated and closed Tube III = heated and opened Tube IV = heated and closed = spiritus lamp = cork cover B. Discussed Based on the experiment during 3 days, in the broth appeared the following change : a. Tube I Tube I which was let open and without heating. On the 1st day, there is not change yet. On the 2nd -3rd day, its colour become turbid, smell, and there is sediment. Its caused by the broth already contamined with the bacteria at outside of the tube. Beside that, it’s caused by the microorganism which life in the broth, due to three is not heating at first. b. Tube II Tube II which was closed by using cork, and then between tube’s mouth and cork is dripped with liquid candle, but it doesn’t be heated on the 1st and 2nd day, there is not change that occurred yet. But on the 3rd day, its colour become turbid, there was sediment, but there was not smell. It is caused by the broth doesn’t be heated. So, the microorganism that life inside still alive, although there is not air which come into the tube.
    • c. Tube III Tube III which the broth was heated and it let to open (without cover), on the 1st day there was not a change yet. This condition occur until the 3rd day its colour change become turbid , smell, and there exist sediment. Its caused by the broth already contamined with the bacteria from the air, although it had been simmered before. d. Tube IV Tube IV which the broth was heated and closed by cork. Then, between tube’s mouth and cork is dripped a liquid candle. From the 1st -3rd day, there is not change occur to this broth. Its colour still transparent, there is no smell and sediment. It’s caused by the broth in the tube is isolated from external air, so it doesn’t contamined by external microorganism, more ever formerly it’s already heated, so the bacteria in the broth is already destroyed. This situation was fit Lazzaro Spallanzani experiment that the tube was not boiled and left open would bigger possibility contaminated because microorganism was coming from the air and also in stock and tube.
    • CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion From the result of observation we can conclude that: 1. Alive thing could not come from the stock because the microbes are coming from air or the place of stock/tube that unclearly. 2. In this practicum, we should be careful to do that. Because everything can influence the result of observation. B. Suggestion 1. Suggestion about laboratory tools. The tools which were available from laboratory had adequate supply. But it still should be improved in order that this practicum could be held well. 2. Suggestion for apprentice. Apprentice has to know the theory before beginning the practicum so that the apprentice can understand quickly and safely in practicum. 3. Suggestion for assistant It will be better if in this practicum, we used the time as well as. So, it could be held like what we hope. Besides that, the relation between the assistant and the practicants must improved.
    • BIBLIOGRAPHY Anonymous. 2011. Lazzaro Spalanzani. http://www.novelguide.com/a/discover/ewb. Accessed on November 7th 2011 in Makassar. Kimball, John. 1999. Biologi, edisi keiima. Jakarta: Erlangga. Ristiati, Putu. Pengantar Mikrobiologi Umum. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Tim Pengajar Biologi. 2011. Penuntun Praktikum Biologi Dasar. Makassar: Laboratorium FMIPA UNM.
    • ANSWER THE QUESTION 1. The causes of occur the change of broth is microorganism which life in the broth, it because of that broth doesn’t be simmered so it’s microba still exist. Beside that, the broth already contamined by microorganism which life in air, because the reaction tube doesn’t be closed. 2. The organism that cause the change of broth is from and life in the air, and then come into the tube. 3. The change of broth occur in the tube which does not be simmered / heated or it is let opened, and doesn’t be simmered and opened. That change occur due to that action causes the bacteria still exist and will still exist in broth. 4. The Tube III there is not change. This tube is simmered at first and then it’s closed properly. When the tube is simmered, the bacteria in the broth is lost and organism from the air can’t contamine the broth due to the tube is closed properly. 5. It’s imposible if in broth appear immediately the new organism, except the bacteria in both. 6. The observation result can be used as the strong evidence to deny the Generation of Spontaneous Theory, because in this experiment can be proved that the new organism can’t be appear in closed tube which has content the broth and it already heat formerly.