Can of Worms

Overview

Objectives/Goals I wanted to see if it mattered where a nightcrawler (earthworm) was cut in order for it to regenerate. Methods/Materials I cut the nightcrawlers at: 1.27cm posterior (bin 1), 2.54cm posterior (bin 2), 1.27cm anterior (bin 3), 2.54cm anterior (bin 4), approx. in half (bin 5), and a control group (bin 6). Results In bin 1, 78% regenerated and 22% did not. In bin 2, 33% regenerated, 44% partially regenerated, and 22% died. In bin 3, 40% healed and 60% died. In bin 4, 100% died. In bin 5, 38% of heads healed, 15% of tails healed, 62% of heads died, 85% of tails died. All worms in bin 6 were healthy. Conclusions/Discussion My hypothesis was incorrrect. I thought that it would matter that the shorter length would matter when what really mattered was the anterior/posterior cuts. The earthworms with their posterior cut regenerated or partially regenerated. The earthworms with their anterior cut did not regenerate. This might be because they cannot regenerate a "head" or I might have cut through their hearts.

Competition history

• CSEF 2004 Zoology · Entry S1904

Resources

• CSEF project summary ↗

Related projects

Closest projects by meaning, across every fair and year in the corpus.

Browse more like this

• All Animal Sciences projects
• CSEF Animal Sciences projects
• Every CSEF 2004 project