Based on the results of the lab practical, we have an F value of 16.835, a P value of 0.00023, and an F critical value of 3.47805. Since the F value (16.835) is significantly greater than the F critical value (3.47805), we can reject the null hypothesis (H0), which states that there is no significant difference in the antibacterial effectiveness of the plant-derived skincare products compared to the controls. The very low P value (0.00023), which is well below the typical significance threshold of 0.05, supports this decision. It indicates that the probability of observing such differences if the null hypothesis were true is extremely low. Therefore, we accept the alternative hypothesis (H1), which suggests that at least one of the plant-derived products has a significantly greater antibacterial effectiveness than the negative control and may be comparable to the positive control. The Honest Significant Difference (HSD) value of 0.04256 further supports our findings, indicating that the differences observed in antibacterial effectiveness between the products and the controls are statistically significant. In simple terms, our experiment showed that at least one of the plant-derived products worked much better than just using water and was at least as effective as the antibiotic Ceftriaxone.
Discuss the results Using the information given below with the results from the lab practical, Acknowledge when a hypothesis may be incorrect. Null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis which hypothesis is rejected and which is accepted and state why it rejected and why other accepted. State your explanation in detail in one paragraph in simple English terms.
F value. 16.835
P value. 0.00023
F critical 3.47805
With a Honest Significant Difference (HSD) 0.04256
Hypothesis
Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in the antibacterial effectiveness of the plant-derived skincare products (herbal extracts, gentel, and macadamia oil) compared to the negative control (water) and the positive control (Ceftriaxone) in inhibiting bacterial growth as measured by the zones of inhibition on agar plates.
Alternate Hypothesis (H1): At least one of the plant-derived skincare products (herbal extracts, gentel, or macadamia oil) demonstrates a significantly greater antibacterial effectiveness in inhibiting bacterial growth compared to the negative control (water) and shows comparable or superior effectiveness to the positive control (Ceftriaxone) as measured by the zones of inhibition on agar plates.
1 answer