Ames test results

In our ames test we found that Azobenzene(+control) had a random spontaneous growth with about six colonies on the plate. The negative control seems to be random, although there is a slight resemblence of a ring around the chemical. We tested mountain dew and Excedrin as our two chemicals. Both of these chemicals had random spontaneous growth on the plate. These results could be skewed by contamination of either the broth or poor aseptic technique.
-Cody Kruckenberg, Brandon Wazgis, and Brice Buryanek

In our Ames test results we found that there was bacteria growth on both our positive and negative control plates along with our our substances which were astringent, Gatorade, and finger nail polish. In all five of our plates there seemed to be the same around the same amount of bacteria present. We don't know exactly where or what went wrong with our test. There were many possibilities for our plates to become contaminated.
—Brandi Burke, Shelby Pomerenke, Katie Lackey (BSK)

The following agents were tested using the Ames Test procedure: Soap scum remover, and red gatorade. We also used positive and negative controls to compare the results from the other two chemicals. Our positive control produced a very small zone of inhibition while the negative control had a slightly larger ring. The soap scum remover appeared to have spontanious mutants growing in various spots. The Gatorade also had the same results although it appeared as though more colonies grew closer to the gatorade. All of our plates had some type of growth.
-Alex Permann and Caleb Gradoville

Both our negative and positive control showed mutation around the disc, which could possibly show that we made a mistake in our procedure. We tested glass cleaner and kool-aid as our chemicals. Both the glass cleaner and kool aid did not cause mutation; there were random colonies throughout the plate.
-Danya Hangman, Trisha Douvia, Molly O'Neill

In the Ames test that we preformed, bacteria was found growing on all the positive and negative control plates along with our other two chemicals which were nail polish remover and a pain reliever (oxycodone) crushed up and diluted in water. All of our plates had around the same amount of growth with little differences. The cause of our bacteria growth could have been caused by our screw up, or by contamination of the plates or the original broth.
-Mackenzie Dorsett & Becky Lenhart

In our experiment, we deduced that most bacteria can make their own histidine. This is because induced mutants are all approximately the same distance from the chemical except for the positive control, meaning at a certain distance, mutations begin. Our positive control had bacteria colonies growing right up next ot our chemical in the center of the plate. The negative control, body spray, nail polish, and mouthwash plates all had a "ring" around the center chemical, meaning no bacteria grew in that area. This meant though that the bacteria did grow outside of the ring, approximately all the same distance from each other around the ring. As for the bacteria colonies outside of the ring, we saw a lot of randomness with the body spray in the upper right-hand corner of the streak plate. We think this could potentially be another strain of bacteria since the shape and coloration is slightly different. The mouthwash had the most colonies, but it also had the most distinct ring. We simply concluded that the mouthwash was very concentrated towards the center of the plate, making mutations impossible until further outside of the ring.
-Kelsey, Jamie, Briana
