A student set up a potometer in the laboratory and measured the rate of movement of water in the capillary. An average of four readings gave a rate of 50mm per minute. The apparatus was then taken outside, where there was a light breeze. Four more readings were taken without delay. The average of these readings was 130 mm per minute.

The student concluded that exposure of the shoot to rapid air movement had increased the rate of transpiration.

Criticise the design of the experiment and the student's conclusions.

By taking the second set of readings 'without delay', the student did not permit time for a new rate to become established. The student should either have waited for 5 minutes or, better, kept taking readings unless four of them were nearly the similar.

When the apparatus was taken outside, several variables were altered, e.g. light intensity, temperature, humidity and air movement. There is no way of knowing which of these was contributing to the enhanced transpiration rate. It would have been better to vary just one condition whereas remaining in the laboratory, e.g. moving the apparatus from shade to sunlight.