Pathogenesis Lab Report
Our main goal was to test organisms’ resistance and susceptibility to bacteria, and whether the cell wall of bacteria exposed the membrane to pathogen or protect it from pathogens. I thought P. aeruginosa was gram-positive and therefore it would be susceptible. That was my hypothesis.We divided antiseptic agar plate into quadrants and divided antibiotics agar plate into six areas. We wrote the organisms’ name, date, and the temperature on the bottom of the agar plates. For antiseptic, our group used one color code for each quadrant. We streaked the swab in three directions on the agar plate and used sterilize forceps to remove filter paper discs from the container, and dipped it into solution. For antibiotic, we wrote numbers that correspond
…show more content…
Some organisms were too large to measure. Antibiotics were susceptible to bacteria and had less growth, whereas antiseptics were resistant to bacteria, and had more growth. Antiseptic of S. epidermidis had more growth than antibiotic of S. epidermidis. Antiseptics of S. epidermidis were most effective and Mr. clean had more growth all over the agar. S. epidermis of antibiotic were the most effective because it was susceptible and Chloramphenicol and tetracycline had a little bit of growth. I believe this was different depending on the bacteria because Chloramphenicol and tetracycline were the only organisms with growth on antibiotics agar. Yes, S. epidermis of antibiotics had all the six species effective. The difference between the gram-staining reaction microorganisms was lipopolysaccharide. S. epidermis had a gram-positive with a thick cell wall and E. coli had a gram-negative with a thin cell wall. E.coli had susceptibility to penicillin because the double outer membrane kept pathogens from entering the cell. S. epidermis had no membrane and exposed infection and pathogen to bacteria. Yes, I think ethanol had small colonies growing in the zone around the antibiotic disc because the organism was contaminated. Antibiotics are chemical that destroyed the growth of pathogenic microorganisms whereas disinfectant kill vegetative forms of
Some organisms were too large to measure. Antibiotics were susceptible to bacteria and had less growth, whereas antiseptics were resistant to bacteria, and had more growth. Antiseptic of S. epidermidis had more growth than antibiotic of S. epidermidis. Antiseptics of S. epidermidis were most effective and Mr. clean had more growth all over the agar. S. epidermis of antibiotic were the most effective because it was susceptible and Chloramphenicol and tetracycline had a little bit of growth. I believe this was different depending on the bacteria because Chloramphenicol and tetracycline were the only organisms with growth on antibiotics agar. Yes, S. epidermis of antibiotics had all the six species effective. The difference between the gram-staining reaction microorganisms was lipopolysaccharide. S. epidermis had a gram-positive with a thick cell wall and E. coli had a gram-negative with a thin cell wall. E.coli had susceptibility to penicillin because the double outer membrane kept pathogens from entering the cell. S. epidermis had no membrane and exposed infection and pathogen to bacteria. Yes, I think ethanol had small colonies growing in the zone around the antibiotic disc because the organism was contaminated. Antibiotics are chemical that destroyed the growth of pathogenic microorganisms whereas disinfectant kill vegetative forms of