Republic of the Philippines

UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN PHILIPPINES

University town, Catarman Northern Samar

GRADUATE STUDIES

Biological Sciences 801 (Biostatistics)

First semester, S.Y 2024-2025

Romeo L. Irinco Jr.

Shaira Macalma
Elvin Petalbo
MsBioSci

Activity #1
Title: The Impact of different light condition on plant growth
Problem/ Research Question: Does growing plants under red light affect plant height compared to growing plants under blue light

Case 1
A. Hypothesis
Null (H0)- there is no significant differences of red light and blue light in condition of plants
Alternative (H1)- there is significant differences of red and blue in condition of plants
B. Variables
Dependent variable: Plant height
Independent variable: Light condition (red light and blue light)
C. Actual data

D. Data Analysis

Group Statistics

GROUP N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

SCORE BLUE LIGHT 10 472.4000 26.42053 8.35491

RED LIGHT 10 654.8000 36.16874 11.43756

E. Interpretation

The results indicate a notable difference in scores between the “Blue Light” and “Red Light” groups. The “Red Light” group has
a much higher mean score (654.8) compared to the “Blue Light” group (472.4), suggesting that participants exposed to red light
scored significantly better on average. Additionally, the standard deviation is slightly higher for the “Red Light” group (36.17) than
for the “Blue Light” group (26.42), showing that scores in the “Red Light” group are more spread out, with a bit more variability.
The standard error of the mean is also larger for the “Red Light” group (11.44) than for “Blue Light” (8.35), reflecting greater
uncertainty around the mean estimate for this group due to its higher score variability.

Wilcoxon Rank sum test

The Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test results indicate a significant difference between the scores in the “SCORE” and “GROUP”
conditions. All 20 cases showed positive ranks, meaning that the “SCORE” condition consistently had higher scores than the
“GROUP” condition, with an average rank of 10.50 and a sum of ranks totaling 210. No negative ranks or ties were observed. The
test statistic (Z) is -3.920, and the p-value is .000, which is below the standard significance level of 0.05. This leads us to reject the
null hypothesis, concluding that there is a statistically significant difference between the two conditions, with the “SCORE”
condition showing higher scores.
Case 2
Title: Investigating the impact of Novel Fertilizer on Rice yield cultivation
Problem research question: Does the application of the novel fertilizer significantly improve plant growth compared to the growth
observed before application.

A. Hypothesis:
Null (H0)- There is no significant difference of novel fertilizer on rice field cultivation compared to traditional fertilizers.
Alternative (H1): There is a significant difference of novel difference on rice field cultivation compared to traditional
fertilizers.
B. Variables :
Dependent- rice field
Independent- Novel Fertilizer
C. Actual Data
D. Data Analysis

The data analysis of the paired samples t-test reveals a significant improvement in scores from the “Without Treatment” to
the “With Treatment” condition. The mean difference of -268.75, with a highly significant p-value of .000, suggests that scores
were notably higher with the treatment. A high correlation (r = .896) between conditions indicates consistency in individual
improvements. Additionally, the 95% confidence interval (-291.59 to -245.92) excludes zero, reinforcing the significance of the
treatment effect.

E. Interpretation

The paired samples t-test results show a significant difference between scores “Without Treatment” and “With Treatment”
for 20 paired observations. The mean score without treatment is 150.50, while the mean score with treatment is 270.25, resulting
in a mean difference of -268.75. This suggests that scores were considerably higher when the treatment was applied. The test
yielded a p-value of .000, which is well below the conventional significance level of 0.05, indicating that this difference is
statistically significant. Additionally, the 95% confidence interval for the difference (-291.59 to -245.92) confirms that the effect of
the treatment is meaningful and unlikely to have occurred by chance. Overall, the treatment appears to have had a substantial
positive impact on the scores.

Wilcoxon signal rank test

 The test results indicate a significant difference between the scores with and without treatment. The mean score without
treatment is 150.50, while the mean score with treatment is -118.25. The large negative difference of -268.75 suggests that the
scores were considerably higher without treatment. The p-value of .000 is well below the conventional significance level of .05,
indicating that the observed difference is unlikely to have occurred by chance. Additionally, the 95% confidence interval for the
difference (-291.59 to -245.91) does not include zero, further supporting the conclusion that the treatment had a significant
impact. Overall, the results of the Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test suggest that the treatment had a negative effect on the scores.

Case 3:

A. Title
Investigating the effect of different light wavelengths on Rice growth

Research Problem/Question

Does the wavelengths of Light significantly affect the Right Growth?

B. Null Hypothesis ( HO)

There is no significant difference in plant growth under different wavelength

Alternative Hypothesis (H1):

There is a significant difference in plant growth under different wavelength

C. Variables

Dependent Variable: Rice Growth

Independent Variable: Wavelengths

D. Actual Data
D. Analysis

The results show a significant difference between the means of the three groups. The F-statistic of 10.818 and the p-value of
0.000 indicate that at least one group has a different mean compared to the others. To determine which specific groups differ
significantly, post-hoc tests would need to be examined.

E. Interpretation

The significant F-statistic and associated p-value suggest that there are significant differences among the means of the three
groups. However, the ANOVA test doesn’t specify which groups differ. To identify the specific differences, post-hoc tests are
necessary. These tests will help determine which pairs of groups have significantly different means.
Post hoc

The post-hoc tests results indicate significant differences between specific pairs of light conditions. For example, the mean
score under red light is significantly lower than under blue, green, and white light. Similarly, blue light scores are significantly
higher than white light scores. These findings suggest that different light conditions have varying effects on the measured variable
(SCORE). However, the exact nature of these effects would require further context and analysis.