Hand Sanitizer Lab Report

Mold is a member of the fungi family. Since mold is part of the fungi family, it cannot use the sun to obtain energy. This means that mold has to use other plants or animals to grow. Even though they cannot see them, there are millions of mold spores in the air. These spores settle down and start to multiply which can be done rapidly or slowly as long as it has a food source. Mold usually grows best in warm environments, but it can still grow in cold environments also. Mold can cause illness such as vomiting or feeling nauseated when it is eaten or when it smells bad.
Bacteria are single celled microbes. Bacteria reproduce by binary fission. In this process, the bacterium, which is a single cell, divides into two identical daughter cells. Binary

fission begins when the bacterium splits into two. They are neither plants nor animals, so they have their own group. Not all bacteria are bad because the body depends on microorganisms to digest food and they hold some responsibility for getting rid of waste in the world. Bacteria can be found almost everywhere because some have adapted to live in extreme conditions.
Hand sanitizer is alcohol based, so it is the second best item to use if there are no soap and water to access to kill the microorganisms.

As long as the hand sanitizer contains at least 60 percent alcohol and is used correctly, then it does not matter which form of hand sanitizer is used. Hand sanitizers kill most, but not all of the bacteria and viruses on contact, but it does not work well when there is grime from cooking or gardening because the grime makes a barrier.

B. Purpose/ Objective
To see which name brand of hand sanitizer will work the best in disinfecting bacteria and mold. This experiment will show people which hand sanitizer works best to stay disinfected when there is no access to soap and water when needed.

C. Hypothesis
The Germ-X name brand of hand sanitizer will work best in disinfecting the micro-organisms.

D. Parts of the Experiment
1. independent variable – Purell, Germ-X, Generic Name Brand (Walgreens)
2. dependent variable – amount of bacteria/mold there was (the colonies)
3. control – The section that was swabbed but has none of the hand sanitizers
4. factors held constant – the door knob that was swabbed, time amount, petri dish, lighting, temperature

II. Materials
• 1 petri dish
• 1 cotton swab
• Germ-X
• Purell
• Generic Name Brand (Walgreens)
• Coffee

filter
• A pair of scissors
• Transparent tape
• Paper (or something to write down observations)
• Writing Utensil
• Camera (or anything that can take pictures)

III. Procedure
1. Divide the petri dish into 5 sections
2. In each section, write the following: 1 (Germ-X), 2 (Purell), 3 (Generic), C (Clear), and B (Bacteria)
3. Use the swab to swab the door nob
4. Use the same swab and swab all the sections except C
5. Take one coffee filter and cut out 3 pieces at the size of 2 centimeters long and wide; the pieces should be able to fit into each section
6. Take one piece of coffee filter and place one dot of Germ-X and wipe excess by using the excess coffee filter paper
7. Place it in Section 1
8. Take another piece of the cut up coffee filter and place one dot of Purell and wipe excess off
9. Place it in Section 2
10. Take the last piece of the cut up coffee filter and put one drop of the Generic hand sanitizer and wipe off the excess
11. Place it in Section 3
12. Close lid and use transparent tape and put one on the left and the right of petri dish
13. Place petri dish in a cabinet and let it sit for a minimum of 5 days in order for the micro-organisms to develop.
14. Every day take out the petri dish from the cabinet and record the number of colonies, the color of each, and the size and take pictures
IV. Data
A. Observations
Day 1 (22 September 2015):
• Start
• No growth
Day 2 (23 September 2015):
• No growth
Day 3 (24 September 2015):
• Nothing has grown

Day 4 (25 September 2015):
• Section B
o 1 small, yellow dot
• Section 3
o 1 bigger, yellow dot
26-27 September 2015 – over the weekend
Day 5 (28 September 2015):
• Section B – 1 Yellow dot has grown
• Section 1
o Yellow in little areas
o 1 white spot
• Section 2
o 1 Green spot
o 1 large white, fluffy circle
o 1 smaller white circle
o Yellow area around the smaller white circle
• Section 3
o 3 white, fluffy circles
o 1 yellow spot
o 1 green spot
o Light brown in some areas around the white circles
Day 6 (29 September 2015):
• Last day
• Section B
o Only a small speckle of yellow
o No sign of fuzz
• Section 1
o Yellow spot is still there
o White spot is now more prominent
• Section 2
o Green spot has not changed
o Yellow area has grown
o Larger white circle has no change
o Smaller white, fluffy circle is slightly bigger
• Section 3
o Yellow dot is more prominent and had grown
o Light brown area around the white circles has grown
o Green spot is now a brown color

B. Data Tables
Drawn out on separate sheet of paper

C. Graphs
Drawn out on separate sheet of paper

V. Analysis
The bacteria and mold were able to be seen until day four. From day one to day three, there were no signs of distinguished microorganisms. This is because some bacteria take longer to grow and be able to distinguish. The placement of the petri dish may have had an effect because the environment was not always warm and moist which allows the bacteria and fungus to grow faster. One of the first bacteria to grow was in sections B and 3. The bacteria might have been staphylococcus epidermidis which is the white pigmented ones or staphylococcus aureus which is the yellow pigmented ones on the petri dish.
The problem with mold is that it is not simple to identify by taking one look at them. So the mold that grew in sections 2 and 3 looked like alternaria, but it is not fully positive. There was only one bacterial colony in section B. It came out like this because this section had the microorganisms that were on the door, but there should have been more than one bacterial colony. The reason why sections 1, 2, and 3 had more colonies than section B because the filters were touched by hands that were not clean.

VI. Conclusion
From the results of this experiment, the coffee filter paper with Germ-X on it had the least amount of bacteria and mold while the filter paper with Walgreen’s hand sanitizer had the most amount of bacteria and mold. The uncertainty of the experiment was in section B when only 1 dot grew. The result of this experiment supported the hypothesis because the least amount of bacteria and mold growth was in section 1 which was Germ-X which was the hypothesis. The problem is that it is not clear if the growth of the bacteria and mold came from the germs on the door knob, the germs from the table it was laying on, or the germs on the hand it touched while making the experiment. The purpose of this experiment was achieved because it showed that Germ-X was able to disinfect the most bacteria and mold between Purell’s and Walgreen’s hand sanitizer.
There were a few incidents that went wrong in this experiment.

Inconsistencies in this lab could have caused variations in data collecting. Collecting data from one petri dish was challenging because something could have been different on other petri dishes if this experiment was tested on several petri dishes. This could have been different because the other petri dishes could have had more micro-organisms in Section 2 instead of Section 1, or no bacteria could have grown at all in every section of the petri dish.- Second, nothing grew in section B even though there were no disinfectants in that section. The reason why the bacteria and mold might have grown in sections 1, 2, and 3 was because in the process of making the experiment, the coffee filter papers were touched with glove free hands and were not clean. If this lab was run again, some changes would be to wear rubber gloves, do not pour the hand sanitizers on the coffee filter paper but just pour one pump straight into the petri dish, have more than one petri dish to collect data off of, and check when the last time someone cleaned the door knob

was.