October 2010 - Biology E/M

Test Preparation SAT Subject Test Preparation
241

<p>@TrueBlu
The Official SAT Subject Test book is the most realistic, because it has real tests with real scales. On that, the test was easier than this, M scale was 2 wrong 800, E scale was also 2 wrong 800, but gave you more for 790 and 780</p>

<p>@xxblair
dermal, ground, vascular
<a href=“Prentice Hall Retirement – PHSchool – PHSchool.com – Savvas”>Prentice Hall Retirement – PHSchool – PHSchool.com – Savvas;

<p>regarding guinea pig question:
Definitely dominance.</p>

<p>regarding score choice:
You are allowed to change the recipient schools until October 18th, after the test.</p>

<p>@jubilant
Hardwood forest burns down question: fire results in secondary succession, so there are no “pioneer organisms” (which are only for primary succession). Therefore, things grow back many times faster. The answer is more likely to be weeds, my friend even went as far as to say shrubs.</p>

<p>regarding Archaea/Eukarya question:
My Campbell/Reece textbook says introns for Eukarya are “present”, for Archaea are “present in some genes”, and in Bacteria are “rare”. But at the same time, it notes that the initiator amino acid for archaea and eukarya are “methionine” and for bacteria is “formylmethionine”
… is it just me, or do both “introns” and “amino acid sequence” seem valid?</p>

242

<p>@wanderyonder, I strongly disagree about the pioneer organisms. The first to grow back after a forest fire are always lichens and mosses.</p>

243

<p>^That’s wrong. Lichens and mosses come when there aren’t soil, which constitutes primary succession. In this case, I believe Wanderyonder is saying that it’s secondary succession; hence, it should be weeds and grasses.</p>

244

<p>so are you saying that after a fire, there is still good soil? I am okay with being wrong, but I need to see some concrete information.</p>

245

<p>ahh, nvm then, you, sir, are correct.</p>

246

<p>well if what you are saying is right… with the curve how much is -20 raw score?</p>

247

<p>^690-710 (10char)</p>

248

<p>Judging by My Barron Book, a raw score of 60 for E is 690 while for M, it is the same: 690.
Unless I misunderstood what you’re asking, maybe you could clarify a bit more?</p>

249

<p>you understood perfectly.</p>

250

<p>I’m a bit confused. If someone could help clarify about the curve:
is that the same as the conversion table or is it something extra?</p>

251

<p>sometimes the curve is adjusted slightly based on the difficulty of the test.</p>

252

<p>^My friend crammed for one day and got a 780</p>

253

<p>any ideas if it will be easier/harder?</p>

254

<p>now i could be wrong (but for my own answer sake. i hope not… lol)
but a was looking at this hypothesis nad research and all of a person who was looking for lichens in burned vs. unburned area and here was the data:</p>

<p>Lichen was more abundant in the burned area, and greater lichen diversity overall
was found in the unburned area</p>

<p>so it just adds to the argument lol… but the great wikipedia says that after a forest fire "shrub " grow back quickly… (it doesnt say which comes first) so i dont know…</p>

255

<p>UGHH i hate all this ambiguity!</p>

256

<p>ummm the bio curve is generally pretty meh!
but depending on how hard the test is 9and how those who were taking BIO E switched to BIO M) i would say the curve might be pretty harsh this time around, maybe a -7 RAW would give 700? (but it would be cooler if it gave a 800 right!)</p>

<p>but honestly my guess is a -3 => -5? would be a 800</p>

257

<p>-7 raw would def. would be more then 700… prolly 750 even if the curve is very harsh.</p>

258

<p>well, we’ll find out in 19 days, won’t we?</p>

259

<p>^I think the curve is exactly like the one in the bluebook, but it really depends on how well ppl did on the test in OCt</p>

260

<p>DancinggBear
yay! thats even better!</p>

<p>boomshakalaka
yeah i agree…</p>