** HL Ag Science Before/After **

yoppo

The only thing I was unsure about was what was the scientific reasoning over raising the cutting height of grass?

Oh and three ways of fostering! My book only has 2!!

weirdspider

YoungJustice wrote: »

Thank God I read that this morning! Ha, fair play man!

I'm not actually a boy >.< haha but you're welcome! Glad it helped some of you out!

weirdspider

yoppo wrote: »

The only thing I was unsure about was what was the scientific reasoning over raising the cutting height of grass?

Oh and three ways of fostering! My book only has 2!!

To lower the water table/absorb extra water/prevent waterlogging after harvesting. Is that right?

yoppo

weirdspider wrote: »

To lower the water table/absorb extra water/prevent waterlogging after harvesting. Is that right?

sounds scientific!

whateverusay

delighted with that paper, experiments were nice, q1 was nice and q9 was nice. soil question was dodgy enough though!!!

KJY

What did every one say for Q2 (a) with the 3 fields and 3 test results?

I said the dairy field will have lower potassium (Result A) as potassium reduces magnesium - lead to grass tetany

Ploughed in lay will be C as fertiliser will have been recently applied, equal amounts of each

And barley will be C, and the reason I gave (made up more so via process of elimination) was it took less Phosphorus

Any one agree/disagree?

KJY

yoppo wrote: »

The only thing I was unsure about was what was the scientific reasoning over raising the cutting height of grass?

Oh and three ways of fostering! My book only has 2!!

I didn't do that Q but perhaps it's because the grass will not flower as early due to weather, and should be left longer until 1/5 (?) of seed heads are showing? Or maybe to increase quantity as quality will be lower

200c200c

Was a graaand paper Didn't do Q.2 and Q.4 did everything else though Thrilled and now the Leaving in Finishhhhhed Wooohoo

whateverusay

KJY wrote: »

What did every one say for Q2 (a) with the 3 fields and 3 test results?

I said the dairy field will have lower potassium (Result A) as potassium reduces magnesium - lead to grass tetany

Ploughed in lay will be C as fertiliser will have been recently applied, equal amounts of each

And barley will be C, and the reason I gave (made up more so via process of elimination) was it took less Phosphorus

Any one agree/disagree?

ye thats what i said aswell but for the dairy one i said it would have high nitrogen and phosphorus because they are excreted in urea because the body cant store them

weirdspider

KJY wrote: »

What did every one say for Q2 (a) with the 3 fields and 3 test results?

I said the dairy field will have lower potassium (Result A) as potassium reduces magnesium - lead to grass tetany

Ploughed in lay will be C as fertiliser will have been recently applied, equal amounts of each

And barley will be C, and the reason I gave (made up more so via process of elimination) was it took less Phosphorus

Any one agree/disagree?

You can give so many different answers for this. They should accept any properly justified answer

Daniel7740

weirdspider wrote: »

To lower the water table/absorb extra water/prevent waterlogging after harvesting. Is that right?

Another way of fostering is cutting the skin and wool if a lamb that died at birth and isn't dead to long and putting it over another lamb like a coat and that will trick the ewe into thinking its hers

YoungJustice

Daniel7740 wrote: »

Another way of fostering is cutting the skin and wool if a lamb that died at birth and isn't dead to long and putting it over another lamb like a coat and that will trick the ewe into thinking its hers

Not gonna lie but your post worries me slightly... Do they really do that? Seems a bit extreme like? Crazy sheep farmers.

YoungJustice

weirdspider wrote: »

I'm not actually a boy >.< haha but you're welcome! Glad it helped some of you out!

Apologies! You know your stuff, that's impressive! For the height of grass question I literally had no idea so I said if the grass is longer more transpiration will occur therefore reduce amount of water?? :pac:

SEC were really trying to catch everyone out this year with badly phrased questions!!

weirdspider

YoungJustice wrote: »

Apologies! You know your stuff, that's impressive! For the height of grass question I literally had no idea so I said if the grass is longer more transpiration will occur therefore reduce amount of water?? :pac:

SEC were really trying to catch everyone out this year with badly phrased questions!!

No its ok! Everyone on Boards seems to think I'm a guy :pac: And that sounds perfect, its pretty much what I said just phrased slightly differently

Daniel7740

YoungJustice wrote: »

Not gonna lie but your post worries me slightly... Do they really do that? Seems a bit extreme like? Crazy sheep farmers.

Ino it would probably upset some people haha. Saw it done on a farming programme before

YoungJustice

Daniel7740 wrote: »

Ino it would probably upset some people haha. Saw it done on a farming programme before

Honestly thought you were messing haha ah yeah fair enough ya gotta do what ya gotta do and all that!

YoungJustice

Name one insect that undergoes each type of metamorphosis.

^^ For that question I was slightly confused, did it mean one insect that can go through both of the stages (if such an insect exists??) or one insect for each stage? (i.e leather jacket and grasshopper etc)

I mean it sounds simple but I always read too much into the question, especially since this year every subject had a hint of project maths in them (Biology for example:pac:)

Finally, any repeat students here?

randylonghorn

Daniel7740 wrote: »

Another way of fostering is cutting the skin and wool if a lamb that died at birth and isn't dead to long and putting it over another lamb like a coat and that will trick the ewe into thinking its hers

YoungJustice wrote: »

Not gonna lie but your post worries me slightly... Do they really do that? Seems a bit extreme like? Crazy sheep farmers.

Daniel7740 wrote: »

Ino it would probably upset some people haha. Saw it done on a farming programme before

They have been doing it for centuries, and it works extremely well.

Yes, it sounds horrible, and it's not something anyone enjoys having to do ... but if the result is a fostered / surviving lamb rather than a second dead one, isn't it justified?

YoungJustice

randylonghorn wrote: »

They have been doing it for centuries, and it works extremely well.

Yes, it sounds horrible, and it's not something anyone enjoys having to do ... but if the result is a fostered / surviving lamb rather than a second dead one, isn't it justified?

Ahh well I should clarify my first comment was kind of a joke, yano I was just being a bantersaurus I'm not shocked by that at all! I've seen a lot worse in my day....*smokes pipe*

Just too used to the ye old "tie the lamb's legs and dip in ewe's afterbirth technique"
But hey I'm learning something new even after the Ag science exam! :P

Daniel7740

randylonghorn wrote: »

They have been doing it for centuries, and it works extremely well.

Yes, it sounds horrible, and it's not something anyone enjoys having to do ... but if the result is a fostered / surviving lamb rather than a second dead one, isn't it justified?

It is very justified and it will be even more justified if they give me full marks!!

Typical of the ag science exam asking ya for 3 methods when there's only 2 methods in the book

Conor556

Wasnt a bad paper, Im going to take sum pleasure in unfollowing this whole forum and forgetting about the whole thing for a few months and enjoy myself!!!!

randylonghorn

Daniel7740 wrote: »

Typical of the ag science exam asking ya for 3 methods when there's only 2 methods in the book

Here's the thing people forget though ... textbooks are published by private companies in response to the curriculum with a view to selling them and making a profit (and normally, the textbooks are at least fit for purpose, and usually very much so), BUT ... the SEC (nor indeed the Department) are in no way responsible for what's in the textbooks, nor are they under any obligation to base exams around them or even look at them, their responsibility is to base the exam on the curriculum, which is normally stated in much broader penstrokes.

Daniel7740

randylonghorn wrote: »

Here's the thing people forget though ... textbooks are published by private companies in response to the curriculum with a view to selling them and making a profit (and normally, the textbooks are at least fit for purpose, and usually very much so), BUT ... the SEC (nor indeed the Department) are in no way responsible for what's in the textbooks, nor are they under any obligation to base exams around them or even look at them, their responsibility is to base the exam on the curriculum, which is normally stated in much broader penstrokes.

Was just saying haha. And aswell as that there was a question on agitating slurry which as far as i can remember wasnt mentionaed at all in our book. Makes it tough for students from a non farming backround.

Anyway It doesn't matter to me any more anyway cos I'm finished!

randylonghorn

Daniel7740 wrote: »

Was just saying haha. And aswell as that there was a question on agitating slurry which as far as i can remember wasnt mentionaed at all in our book. Makes it tough for students from a non farming backround.

Oh, I know.

Teachers usually have a good sense of what might have been left out of a text, and will add in bits in class, but of course they may not catch every one.

As a matter of interest, which textbook were you using?

Daniel7740

randylonghorn wrote: »

Oh, I know.

Teachers usually have a good sense of what might have been left out of a text, and will add in bits in class, but of course they may not catch every one.

As a matter of interest, which textbook were you using?

Think it was called breaking ground

'twas decent now imo

randylonghorn

Daniel7740 wrote: »

Think it was called breaking ground

'twas decent now imo

'Tis, I know the one, it's written by two AgSci teachers and 'tis a vast improvement on the old book (which in fairness was good in its day, but had become *seriously* out of date over the years).

Guess it just never occurred to them that the SEC would look for more than 2 ways of fostering lambs!! :pac:

Daniel7740

randylonghorn wrote: »

'Tis, I know the one, it's written by two AgSci teachers and 'tis a vast improvement on the old book (which in fairness was good in its day, but had become *seriously* out of date over the years).

Guess it just never occurred to them that the SEC would look for more than 2 ways of fostering lambs!! :pac:

True. Maybe they expected teachers to go into more detail themselves when teaching it