Wolfson et al 2023a - Revision history

Tomamil: Tomamil moved page Review 774548006290 to Wolfson et al 2023a

2023-11-15T14:26:18Z

Tomamil moved page Review 774548006290 to Wolfson et al 2023a

AlanaWolfson at 17:06, 13 November 2023

2023-11-13T17:06:47Z

AlanaWolfson at 14:58, 13 November 2023

2023-11-13T14:58:02Z

AlanaWolfson at 14:55, 13 November 2023

2023-11-13T14:55:30Z

AlanaWolfson at 14:40, 12 November 2023

2023-11-12T14:40:33Z

AlanaWolfson at 19:29, 3 October 2023

2023-10-03T19:29:28Z

AlanaWolfson at 13:53, 2 October 2023

2023-10-02T13:53:10Z

AlanaWolfson at 20:30, 1 October 2023

2023-10-01T20:30:21Z

AlanaWolfson at 20:10, 1 October 2023

2023-10-01T20:10:33Z

Show changes

AlanaWolfson: AlanaWolfson moved page Draft Wolfson 219083906 to Review 774548006290

2023-08-29T15:51:46Z

AlanaWolfson moved page Draft Wolfson 219083906 to Review 774548006290

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:06, 13 November 2023
Line 426:		Line 426:

	We would like to deeply thank as well as acknowledge Dr. D. Marmor, Mrs. N. Jaipershad, Dr. L. Wang, Dr. J. Cohen, Dr. X. Lin, Mr. Z. Liang, Ms. R. DePietro, Ms. J. Zhu, Ms. A. Khemlani and the Francis Lewis High School Science Department for providing us the support to complete this project.		We would like to deeply thank as well as acknowledge Dr. D. Marmor, Mrs. N. Jaipershad, Dr. L. Wang, Dr. J. Cohen, Dr. X. Lin, Mr. Z. Liang, Ms. R. DePietro, Ms. J. Zhu, Ms. A. Khemlani and the Francis Lewis High School Science Department for providing us the support to complete this project.
		+
		+	== Funding ==
		+	This research received no external funding.
		+
		+	== Institutional Review Board Statement ==
		+	Not applicable.
		+
		+	== Informed Consent Statement ==
		+	Not applicable.
		+
		+	== Data Availability Statement ==
		+	Data are contained within the article.
		+
		+	== Conflicts of Interest ==
		+	The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

	==References<!--[1] Author, A. and Author, B. (Year) Title of the article. Title of the Publication. Article code. Available: http://www.scipedia.com/ucode. [2] Author, A. and Author, B. (Year) Title of the article. Title of the Publication. Volume number, first page-last page. [3] Author, C. (Year). Title of work: Subtitle (edition.). Volume(s). Place of publication: Publisher. [4] Author of Part, D. (Year). Title of chapter or part. In A. Editor & B. Editor (Eds.), Title: Subtitle of book (edition, inclusive page numbers). Place of publication: Publisher. [5] Author, E. (Year, Month date). Title of the article. In A. Editor, B. Editor, and C. Editor. Title of published proceedings. Paper presented at title of conference, Volume number, first page-last page. Place of publication. [6] Institution or author. Title of the document. Year. [Online] (Date consulted: day, month and year). Available: http://www.scipedia.com/document.pdf. -->==		==References<!--[1] Author, A. and Author, B. (Year) Title of the article. Title of the Publication. Article code. Available: http://www.scipedia.com/ucode. [2] Author, A. and Author, B. (Year) Title of the article. Title of the Publication. Volume number, first page-last page. [3] Author, C. (Year). Title of work: Subtitle (edition.). Volume(s). Place of publication: Publisher. [4] Author of Part, D. (Year). Title of chapter or part. In A. Editor & B. Editor (Eds.), Title: Subtitle of book (edition, inclusive page numbers). Place of publication: Publisher. [5] Author, E. (Year, Month date). Title of the article. In A. Editor, B. Editor, and C. Editor. Title of published proceedings. Paper presented at title of conference, Volume number, first page-last page. Place of publication. [6] Institution or author. Title of the document. Year. [Online] (Date consulted: day, month and year). Available: http://www.scipedia.com/document.pdf. -->==

@@ Line 244: / Line 244: @@
 -2022 Experiment, Immersion vs. Epicutaneous Treatment
-There was no significant difference amongst the different concentrations of clove oil immersion treatment (Figure 1.). Nevertheless, the specimen treated with 1% epicutaneous adminstration had a longer response time as compared to the control (p-value<0.05). Earthworm treated with epicutaneous microneedling as compared to both immersion and 0.5% concentration, responded to toothpick probe at a slower rate (Figure 2. and Figure 3.). The mobility of the earthworms treated with 1% concentration of clove oil was limited under an average of 40 movements throughout the whole-time interval. Additionally, 1% treated earthworms tended to have less movement within the first 20 min of the interval as compared to both the control and 0.5% treated group (SD bars did not overlap) (Figure 4.). No significance or trend was found between the mobility of epicutaneous treated earthworms (Figure 5.). In addition to the movement, the number of convulsions for all treated earthworms remained under an average of 4 movements per ten minutes. This shows that the earthworms were not displaying any behavioral signs of stress (Figure 6., Figure 7., Figure 8.,). There were no observable trends on the regeneration lengths and mass between all of the treated specimen. Specifically, clove oil did not inhibit or promote the growth of the earthworms' tail during regeneration.
+There was no significant difference amongst the different concentrations of clove oil immersion treatment (Figure 1.). Nevertheless, the specimen treated with 1% epicutaneous adminstration had a longer response time as compared to the control (p-value<0.05). Earthworm treated with epicutaneous microneedling as compared to both immersion and 0.5% concentration, responded to toothpick probe at a slower rate (Figure 2. and Figure 3.). The mobility of the earthworms treated with 1% concentration of clove oil was limited under an average of 40 movements throughout the whole-time interval. Additionally, 1% treated earthworms tended to have less movement within the first 20 min of the interval as compared to both the control and 0.5% treated group (SD bars did not overlap) (Figure 4.). No significance or trend was found between the mobility of epicutaneous treated earthworms (Figure 5.). In addition to the movement, the number of convulsions for all treated earthworms remained under an average of 4 movements per ten minutes. This shows that the earthworms were not displaying any behavioral signs of stress (Figure 6., Figure 7., Figure 8.,). There were no observable trends on the regeneration lengths and mass between all of the treated specimen. Specifically, clove oil did not inhibit or promote the growth of the earthworms' tail during regeneration (Figure 9., Figure 10., Figure 11., Figure 12.).
 -2023 Experiment, Immersion vs. Nanoemulgel Treatment

@@ Line 248: / Line 248: @@
 -2023 Experiment, Immersion vs. Nanoemulgel Treatment
-The stimuli response of the earthworms treated with 1% and 2% immersion was significantly longer as compared to the control (P value<0.05) (Trial 1, Figure 13.). Moreover 2% concentration of clove oil in gel had a longer response time as compared to both the immersion groups and other gel concentrations (p value<0.01) (Figure 14., Figure 15., Trial 1). This further implies that a higher concentration of clove oil in gel form is the most efficient in sedating at a faster rate. In addition to response time, earthworms treated with 1% and 2% concentration of clove oil tended to have fewer regular movements throughout an hour time span (Figure 16., Trial 1). On the other hand, earthworms treated with gel concentrations of 1% and 2% concentration tended to have more movement, hence indicating that they were not sedated throughout the hour timespan (Figure 17., Trial 1). Moreover, all forms of clove oil treatment did not induce over 8 convulsive movements throughout the entire hour time span. Typically, the 1% and 2% treated group tended to have the least number of convulsions as compared to the control in every five-minute time interval (Figure 18. and Figure 19., Trial 1). The regeneration (mass and length) of the earthworms remained relatively the same regardless of the concentration and treatment method (Figure 20., Figure 21., Figure 22., Figure 23., Trial 1). Similarly, as demonstrated in Trial 2, the response time of the earthworms treated with 1% of both gel and immersion tended to have a longer response time (Figure 24., Figure 25., Figure 26. Trial 2). The 2% immersion treatment had the least amount of normal movements as compared to the other treatments in Trial 2, but and Trial 3. (Figure 27. Figure 28 Trial 2, Figure 33. Trial 3.). There was no significance amongst the earthworms treated with the varying concentrations of gel treatment. Lastly, all convulsive movements were under 4 within the hour timespan, hence indicating limited behavioral impacts (Figure 29., Trial 2, Figure 35. Trial 3).
+The stimuli response of the earthworms treated with 1% and 2% immersion was significantly longer as compared to the control (P value<0.05) (Trial 1, Figure 13.). Moreover 2% concentration of clove oil in gel had a longer response time as compared to both the immersion groups and other gel concentrations (p value<0.01) (Figure 14., Figure 15., Trial 1). This further implies that a higher concentration of clove oil in gel form is the most efficient in sedating at a faster rate. In addition to response time, earthworms treated with 1% and 2% concentration of clove oil tended to have fewer regular movements throughout an hour time span (Figure 16., Trial 1). On the other hand, earthworms treated with gel concentrations of 1% and 2% concentration tended to have more movement, hence indicating that they were not sedated throughout the hour timespan (Figure 17., Trial 1). Moreover, all forms of clove oil treatment did not induce over 8 convulsive movements throughout the entire hour time span. Typically, the 1% and 2% treated group tended to have the least number of convulsions as compared to the control in every five-minute time interval (Figure 18. and Figure 19., Trial 1). The regeneration (mass and length) of the earthworms remained relatively the same regardless of the concentration and treatment method (Figure 20., Figure 21., Figure 22., Figure 23., Trial 1).
 -2022

@@ Line 248: / Line 248: @@
 -2023 Experiment, Immersion vs. Nanoemulgel Treatment
-The stimuli response of the earthworms treated with 1% and 2% immersion was significantly longer as compared to the control (P value<0.05) (Trial 1, Figure 13.). Moreover 2% concentration of clove oil in gel had a longer response time as compared to both the immersion groups and other gel concentrations (p value<0.01) (Figure 14., Figure 15., Trial 1). This further implies that a higher concentration of clove oil in gel form is the most efficient in sedating at a faster rate. In addition to response time, earthworms treated with 1% and 2% concentration of clove oil tended to have fewer regular movements throughout an hour time span (Figure 16., Trial 1). On the other hand, earthworms treated with gel concentrations of 1% and 2% concentration tended to have more movement, hence indicating that they were not sedated throughout the hour timespan (Figure 17., Trial 1). Moreover, all forms of clove oil treatment did not induce over 8 convulsive movements throughout the entire hour time span. Typically, the 1% and 2% treated group tended to have the least number of convulsions as compared to the control in every five-minute time interval (Figure 18. and Figure 19., Trial 1). The regeneration (mass and length) of the earthworms remained relatively the same regardless of the concentration and treatment method (Figure 20., Figure 21., Figure 22., Figure 23., Trial 1). Similarly, as demonstrated in Trial 2, the response time of the earthworms treated with 1% of both gel and immersion tended to have a longer response time (Figure 24., Figure 25., Trial 2).
+The stimuli response of the earthworms treated with 1% and 2% immersion was significantly longer as compared to the control (P value<0.05) (Trial 1, Figure 13.). Moreover 2% concentration of clove oil in gel had a longer response time as compared to both the immersion groups and other gel concentrations (p value<0.01) (Figure 14., Figure 15., Trial 1). This further implies that a higher concentration of clove oil in gel form is the most efficient in sedating at a faster rate. In addition to response time, earthworms treated with 1% and 2% concentration of clove oil tended to have fewer regular movements throughout an hour time span (Figure 16., Trial 1). On the other hand, earthworms treated with gel concentrations of 1% and 2% concentration tended to have more movement, hence indicating that they were not sedated throughout the hour timespan (Figure 17., Trial 1). Moreover, all forms of clove oil treatment did not induce over 8 convulsive movements throughout the entire hour time span. Typically, the 1% and 2% treated group tended to have the least number of convulsions as compared to the control in every five-minute time interval (Figure 18. and Figure 19., Trial 1). The regeneration (mass and length) of the earthworms remained relatively the same regardless of the concentration and treatment method (Figure 20., Figure 21., Figure 22., Figure 23., Trial 1). Similarly, as demonstrated in Trial 2, the response time of the earthworms treated with 1% of both gel and immersion tended to have a longer response time (Figure 24., Figure 25., Figure 26. Trial 2). The 2% immersion treatment had the least amount of normal movements as compared to the other treatments in Trial 2, but and Trial 3. (Figure 27. Figure 28 Trial 2, Figure 33. Trial 3.). There was no significance amongst the earthworms treated with the varying concentrations of gel treatment. Lastly, all convulsive movements were under 4 within the hour timespan, hence indicating limited behavioral impacts (Figure 29., Trial 2, Figure 35. Trial 3).
 -2022
@@ Line 398: / Line 398: @@
 [[File:Figure 36 sci.png|frameless]]
-'''Figure 36. Number of Convulsive Movements vs. Time (Gel) (Trial 3).''' 15 earthworms in groups of 5 were treated with gel in concentrations of clove oil treatment ranging from 0%, 1%, to 2%. The average number of convulsive movements for all three concentrations did not go over 3 movements throughout a 60-minute time duration. Error bars represent ±SD.
+'''Figure 35. Number of Convulsive Movements vs. Time (Gel) (Trial 3).''' 15 earthworms in groups of 5 were treated with gel in concentrations of clove oil treatment ranging from 0%, 1%, to 2%. The average number of convulsive movements for all three concentrations did not go over 3 movements throughout a 60-minute time duration. Error bars represent ±SD.
 == Discussion ==
@@ Line 411: / Line 411: @@
 Due to time restraints, regeneration in length as well as mass was only evaluated in Trial 1 of the experiment for both the gel and immersion applications. Nevertheless, the clove oil gel and immersion did not have any significant impact on the regeneration rate of the earthworms.
-The complications that arose throughout the three experimentations consist of the fact that the petri dishes of the mobility portion of the experiment were not sealed efficiently. As an example, the 0.5% epicutaneous and immersion treated groups were simultaneously recorded together, and during the 10-minute time interval, two earthworms of opposing groups switched petri dishes. No data was recorded for those two earthworms. To prevent earthworms from traveling, petri dishes will be partially taped down. This would prevent instances of earthworms escaping during observation, and missing data.
+The complications that arose throughout the three experimentations consist of the fact that the petri dishes of the mobility portion of the experiment were not sealed efficiently. As an example, the 0.5% epicutaneous and immersion treated groups were simultaneously recorded together, and during the 10-minute time interval, two earthworms of opposing groups switched petri dishes. No data was recorded for those two earthworms. To prevent earthworms from traveling, petri dishes will be partially taped down. This would prevent instances of earthworms escaping during observation, and missing data. Additionally, due to time constraints in the 2022-2023 experiment, the number of convulsive movements and normal movements within the immersion treated groups were not evaluated for Trial 2 and Trial 3.
 == Conclusion ==

@@ Line 248: / Line 248: @@
 -2023 Experiment, Immersion vs. Nanoemulgel Treatment
-The stimuli response of the earthworms treated with 1% and 2% immersion was significantly longer as compared to the control (P value<0.05) (Trial 1, Figure 13.). Moreover 2% concentration of clove oil in gel had a longer response time as compared to both the immersion groups and other gel concentrations (p value<0.01) (Figure 14., Figure 15.).
+The stimuli response of the earthworms treated with 1% and 2% immersion was significantly longer as compared to the control (P value<0.05) (Trial 1, Figure 13.). Moreover 2% concentration of clove oil in gel had a longer response time as compared to both the immersion groups and other gel concentrations (p value<0.01) (Figure 14., Figure 15., Trial 1). This further implies that a higher concentration of clove oil in gel form is the most efficient in sedating at a faster rate. In addition to response time, earthworms treated with 1% and 2% concentration of clove oil tended to have fewer regular movements throughout an hour time span (Figure 16., Trial 1). On the other hand, earthworms treated with gel concentrations of 1% and 2% concentration tended to have more movement, hence indicating that they were not sedated throughout the hour timespan (Figure 17., Trial 1). Moreover, all forms of clove oil treatment did not induce over 8 convulsive movements throughout the entire hour time span. Typically, the 1% and 2% treated group tended to have the least number of convulsions as compared to the control in every five-minute time interval (Figure 18. and Figure 19., Trial 1). The regeneration (mass and length) of the earthworms remained relatively the same regardless of the concentration and treatment method (Figure 20., Figure 21., Figure 22., Figure 23., Trial 1). Similarly, as demonstrated in Trial 2, the response time of the earthworms treated with 1% of both gel and immersion tended to have a longer response time (Figure 24., Figure 25., Trial 2).
 -2022

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:26, 15 November 2023
(No difference)

@@ Line 244: / Line 244: @@
 -2022 Experiment, Immersion vs. Epicutaneous Treatment
 There was no significant difference amongst the different concentrations of clove oil immersion treatment (Figure 1.). Nevertheless, the specimen treated with 1% epicutaneous adminstration had a longer response time as compared to the control (p-value<0.05). Earthworm treated with epicutaneous microneedling as compared to both immersion and 0.5% concentration, responded to toothpick probe at a slower rate (Figure 2. and Figure 3.). The mobility of the earthworms treated with 1% concentration of clove oil was limited under an average of 40 movements throughout the whole-time interval. Additionally, 1% treated earthworms tended to have less movement within the first 20 min of the interval as compared to both the control and 0.5% treated group (SD bars did not overlap) (Figure 4.). No significance or trend was found between the mobility of epicutaneous treated earthworms (Figure 5.). In addition to the movement, the number of convulsions for all treated earthworms remained under an average of 4 movements per ten minutes. This shows that the earthworms were not displaying any behavioral signs of stress (Figure 6., Figure 7., Figure 8.,). There were no observable trends on the regeneration lengths and mass between all of the treated specimen. Specifically, clove oil did not inhibit or promote the growth of the earthworms' tail during regeneration.
 -2022
@@ Line 302: / Line 306: @@
 [[File:Figure 14 hs.png|frameless|249x249px]]
-'''Figure 13.''' '''Immersion Concentration vs. Stimuli Response (Trial 1).''' 15 earthworms in groups of 5 were imeeersed in concentrations of clove oil treatment ranging from 0%, 1%, to 2%. The 1% concentration of clove oil immersion was the most effective in sedating at a fast rate. Based on ANOVA following a Tukey HSD test, the 1% treated group is significant.compared to the control group with a *p-value. 0.05. Error bars represent ±SD.
+'''Figure 13.''' '''Immersion Concentration vs. Stimuli Response (Trial 1).''' 15 earthworms in groups of 5 were immersed in concentrations of clove oil treatment ranging from 0%, 1%, to 2%. The 1% concentration of clove oil immersion was the most effective in sedating at a fast rate. Based on ANOVA following a Tukey HSD test, the 1% treated group is significant compared to the control group with a *p-value. 0.05. Error bars represent ±SD.
 [[File:Figure 15 hs.png|frameless|240x240px]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:30, 1 October 2023
Line 242:		Line 242:

	== Results ==		== Results ==
		+	2021-2022 Experiment, Immersion vs. Epicutaneous Treatment
		+
		+	There was no significant difference amongst the different concentrations of clove oil immersion treatment (Figure 1.). Nevertheless, the specimen treated with 1% epicutaneous adminstration had a longer response time as compared to the control (p-value<0.05). Earthworm treated with epicutaneous microneedling as compared to both immersion and 0.5% concentration, responded to toothpick probe at a slower rate (Figure 2. and Figure 3.). The mobility of the earthworms treated with 1% concentration of clove oil was limited under an average of 40 movements throughout the whole-time interval. Additionally, 1% treated earthworms tended to have less movement within the first 20 min of the interval as compared to both the control and 0.5% treated group (SD bars did not overlap) (Figure 4.). No significance or trend was found between the mobility of epicutaneous treated earthworms (Figure 5.). In addition to the movement, the number of convulsions for all treated earthworms remained under an average of 4 movements per ten minutes. This shows that the earthworms were not displaying any behavioral signs of stress (Figure 6., Figure 7., Figure 8.,). There were no observable trends on the regeneration lengths and mass between all of the treated specimen. Specifically, clove oil did not inhibit or promote the growth of the earthworms' tail during regeneration.
		+
	2021-2022		2021-2022

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:51, 29 August 2023
(No difference)