Article
Published: January 10, 2015
By: The Staff of Science 2.0
Evolution is typically thought of as an organism developing a useful trait, however a recent sudy with geckos shows that evolution can also downgrade and remove seemingly useful traits. When the adhesive system in gecko's feet was lost, there were in fact higher rates of evolution rather than lower rates. The absence of sticky feet allowed them to run faster and burrow into the ground. This means that the geckos can occupy a different niche, leading to diversification.
Although the lack of adhesive feet may seem like a disadvantage, geckos living in a terrestrial environment with sticky feet ran much slower than the ones without them. They could not escape from predators as quickly and they could not burrow for a hiding place, making them easy targets. Therefore, losing this trait of adhesive feet is actually beneficial and not harmful for to geckos since geckos without adhesive feet have higher mobility. Geckos without the trait experience higher levels of evolution related to morphology and locomotion.
This article relates to our study in class of evolution and adaptation. The gecko loses its adhesive system in order to adapt to terrestrial environments. The geckos with the trait soon are eaten or killed due to the process of natural selection, since the geckos without the trait can run faster and therefore escape predators. It loses and gains this trait many times throughout history, showing that the trait's appearance is relevant to the gecko's enivronment and current needs.
Saturday, January 10, 2015
Sequencing Testse fly genome reveals surprises that may save lives
URL: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/04/140424-tsetse-fly-genome-sequenced-sleeping-sickness-science/
Date Published: April 24, 2014
Source: National Geographic
The tsetse fly is a large, bloodsucking insect that resides in regions of Africa. They are extremely harmful and cause serious diseases to the human body and other livestock. A common disease is called sleeping sickness( or more scientifically known as, trypanosomias) and for animals a disease called nagana (animal trypanosomias).
**More information about sleeping sickness can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/sleeping-sickness/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier
A team of 146 scientists decoded the genome of this fly, and revealed that the sequence could allay the human losses caused by the trypanosomic parasite the fly spreads for sleeping sickness. They discovered that the tsetse are very mammal like, where the females nourish young with milk inside a womb. This new genome could potentially give new ways to prevent sleeping sickness and nagana. For example in humans, the tsetse sequence contained a single regulatory protein that conducts milk production in the fly. If scientists could target that protein with inhibitory chemicals, then it would reduce the amount of milk the fly produces, eventually leading to population control of the flies.
The tsetse genome consists of 366 million base pairs compared to the 300 billion in humans. It also has 12,308 protein encoding genes to 20,000 human encoding genes. Scientist, Sercep Aksoy, professor of Epidemiology at Yale University, noticed that the genome reflects the tsetse's feeding strategy- bloodsucking. Aksoy says that knowing the genes involved in color sensing, smell, taste and vision of these flies can lead to repellents "that capitalize on particular genes." She also hopes that vaccines can be given to livestock that would keep the flies from digesting their blood.
This discovery has been well renowned over this past year and is considered a "landmark in the molecular genetics of neglected tropical diseases." With this new genome sequence, better control options for the flies are possible.
This article relates to our past study of molecular genetics, specifically genome sequences and the function of proteins in the body. By sequencing the entire genome of the flies, scientists have determined ways to reduce the genes coding for specific functions in the fly. It is quite fascinating how an insect that is harmful to humans and animals, can actually benefit them as well.
Date Published: April 24, 2014
Source: National Geographic
The tsetse fly is a large, bloodsucking insect that resides in regions of Africa. They are extremely harmful and cause serious diseases to the human body and other livestock. A common disease is called sleeping sickness( or more scientifically known as, trypanosomias) and for animals a disease called nagana (animal trypanosomias).
**More information about sleeping sickness can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/sleeping-sickness/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier
A team of 146 scientists decoded the genome of this fly, and revealed that the sequence could allay the human losses caused by the trypanosomic parasite the fly spreads for sleeping sickness. They discovered that the tsetse are very mammal like, where the females nourish young with milk inside a womb. This new genome could potentially give new ways to prevent sleeping sickness and nagana. For example in humans, the tsetse sequence contained a single regulatory protein that conducts milk production in the fly. If scientists could target that protein with inhibitory chemicals, then it would reduce the amount of milk the fly produces, eventually leading to population control of the flies.
The tsetse genome consists of 366 million base pairs compared to the 300 billion in humans. It also has 12,308 protein encoding genes to 20,000 human encoding genes. Scientist, Sercep Aksoy, professor of Epidemiology at Yale University, noticed that the genome reflects the tsetse's feeding strategy- bloodsucking. Aksoy says that knowing the genes involved in color sensing, smell, taste and vision of these flies can lead to repellents "that capitalize on particular genes." She also hopes that vaccines can be given to livestock that would keep the flies from digesting their blood.
This discovery has been well renowned over this past year and is considered a "landmark in the molecular genetics of neglected tropical diseases." With this new genome sequence, better control options for the flies are possible.
This article relates to our past study of molecular genetics, specifically genome sequences and the function of proteins in the body. By sequencing the entire genome of the flies, scientists have determined ways to reduce the genes coding for specific functions in the fly. It is quite fascinating how an insect that is harmful to humans and animals, can actually benefit them as well.
Biologists Map Crocodilian Genomes
URL: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/12/141211141837.htm
Date Published: December 11, 2014
Source: Texas Tech University
Recently scientists have succeeded in mapping the entire genomes of an American alligator, a saltwater crocodile, and an Indian gharial. By using this new information, they were able to compare the DNA of each crocodilian species with each other, as well as with the DNA of other animals.
They found that crocodilians evolve extremely slowly. For example, an alligator and a crocodile share about 93% of the same genetic information. In comparison, that is the same percentage of identical DNA between a human and a macaque. However, the common ancestor between an alligator and a crocodile lived more than 90 million years ago, while the common ancestor between a human and a macaque is more recent, only 23 million years. This means that over the generations, crocodilians have evolved at 1/4 the speed of primates.
Now, scientists are trying to use this data to not only to understand more about crocodilians, but to reconstruct the genomes of their ancient relatives. By finding similarities in DNA between crocodilians and birds, their closet living relatives, they have been able to piece together almost half the genome of their common ancestor. Using this new information, scientists hope not only to learn more about crocodilians, but also about evolution and the connections between different species.
This article relates to our current unit about evolution. By sequencing the entire genome of three crocodilians, scientists have learned that they evolve relatively slowly, barely changing over many generations. This story also brings up the idea of a common ancestor, another aspect of evolution that we are studying in class. For example, it explains that birds are the closest living relative of crocodilians, meaning that starting long ago, crocodilians and birds both stemmed from the same species.
Friday, January 9, 2015
Vermont is the first state to pass a law to make labeling genetically modified foods required
Website:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/04/29/how-vermont-plans-to-defend-the-nations-first-gmo-law/
Author:
Vermont was the first state in the US to require the labeling of genetically engineered foods. Governer Peter Shumlin completed the law and said, “We believe we have a right to know what’s in the food we buy.” This is a victory for the people who advocate for the labeling of GM foods. However, the state was preparing for a likely lawsuit. Attorney General Bill Sorrell said he would be "very suprised" if the state wasn't sued. Other states have pursued similar ideas, but Vermont's is still the first. For example, Connecticut and Maine have passed laws that make labels required, but these requirements need other states to agree as well before the law takes effect.
Industry groups say that these laws are costly and bad for consumers. A report created by professors from the universities of California, Illinois, and Missouri, had no scientific reason for why GM food should be labeled. They argued that such requirements could cause trade problems--in other countries, many of the labeling requirements violate World Trade Organization agreements. Also, the professors said food prices could rise if companies decide to use non-GM foods instead of choosing to label GM foods. Prices would be less if they chose to sell and label GM foods since they generally cost less to produce.
On the other hand, people argue that labeling GM foods is beneficial since the science of GM foods is far from conclusive. They say that consumers should not take unnecessary risks without knowing what they are eating. These people think that if companies believe in the safety of GM foods, then they shouldn't worry about needing to label them.
People believed the food industry may fight back with certain arguments. First, the food industry could say that this law violates the right of commercial free speech under the First Amendment. In other words, this says the law violates the fact that the food industry can say what it wants to say-- it forces them to say that their product is a GM food if it is. The second argument is that this law might violate federal law. This argument is based on whether the federal law overpowers the state law, or the other way around. Finally, the last argument is that it interferes with interstate commerce, any work requiring the movement of people or things across states or from foreign countries. The Constitution’s Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate interstate commerce, but also allows the state to regulate it also. This means GM foods must be labeled if they are to be imported into Vermont. These are three arguments against the state, but the food industry is still likely to lose since the details favor the new GM food labeling law.
This relates to biology class since it is about GMOs, a topic we studied. It also describes the controversy of GMOs-- whether they are good or bad, which is similar to our debate in class.
Author:
Kristy Condon
Kristy Condon
Date of Publication: May 9, 2014
Kristy Condon
Vermont was the first state in the US to require the labeling of genetically engineered foods. Governer Peter Shumlin completed the law and said, “We believe we have a right to know what’s in the food we buy.” This is a victory for the people who advocate for the labeling of GM foods. However, the state was preparing for a likely lawsuit. Attorney General Bill Sorrell said he would be "very suprised" if the state wasn't sued. Other states have pursued similar ideas, but Vermont's is still the first. For example, Connecticut and Maine have passed laws that make labels required, but these requirements need other states to agree as well before the law takes effect.
Industry groups say that these laws are costly and bad for consumers. A report created by professors from the universities of California, Illinois, and Missouri, had no scientific reason for why GM food should be labeled. They argued that such requirements could cause trade problems--in other countries, many of the labeling requirements violate World Trade Organization agreements. Also, the professors said food prices could rise if companies decide to use non-GM foods instead of choosing to label GM foods. Prices would be less if they chose to sell and label GM foods since they generally cost less to produce.
On the other hand, people argue that labeling GM foods is beneficial since the science of GM foods is far from conclusive. They say that consumers should not take unnecessary risks without knowing what they are eating. These people think that if companies believe in the safety of GM foods, then they shouldn't worry about needing to label them.
People believed the food industry may fight back with certain arguments. First, the food industry could say that this law violates the right of commercial free speech under the First Amendment. In other words, this says the law violates the fact that the food industry can say what it wants to say-- it forces them to say that their product is a GM food if it is. The second argument is that this law might violate federal law. This argument is based on whether the federal law overpowers the state law, or the other way around. Finally, the last argument is that it interferes with interstate commerce, any work requiring the movement of people or things across states or from foreign countries. The Constitution’s Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate interstate commerce, but also allows the state to regulate it also. This means GM foods must be labeled if they are to be imported into Vermont. These are three arguments against the state, but the food industry is still likely to lose since the details favor the new GM food labeling law.
This relates to biology class since it is about GMOs, a topic we studied. It also describes the controversy of GMOs-- whether they are good or bad, which is similar to our debate in class.
eubrachyurans
Telamonocarcinus antiquus
avier Luquea
avier Luquea
avier Luque
avier Luque
The Genetics of Eusocial Insects
The Genetics of Society
Claire Asher and Seirian Sumner
1 January 2015
Link to Article: http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/41704/title/The-Genetics-of-Society/
Link to Eusocial Insects explained: http://es.rice.edu/projects/Bios321/eusocial.insect.html
Eusocial insects are recognized by three defining characteristics:
1) The mother conducts care of the young
2) Insects from sterile castes aid the reproducing organism
3) There are overlapping generations. This allows for older generations of offspring to help younger generations.
While Darwin was developing his theory of natural selection, he encountered altruistic insects. Darwin wondered how different behavioral traits were expressed through genes and why some insects were subordinate to others of the same species. He also wondered how a single ancestor led to the development of "social" castes in eusocial insects.
One hypothesis proposed was that a solitary insect lived as a single mother. This mother then laid eggs and foraged for food to feed her offspring. Upon reaching maturity, offspring would forage and reproduce on their own, resulting in the conventional non-eusocial insect. Eusociality developed when offspring remained at the nest with their mother past adulthood. When the mother reproduced again, the first generation of offspring would help their mother raise the newer generation. As the helper insects began to take on specific roles in the nest, the mother, not having to provide food for the new generation, would focus solely on reproduction while the other generations would forage for food and subsequently become workers. The newly evolved phenotype, "the queen", had the exclusive responsibility of reproduction while foraging and laborious behavior was taken on by workers. Thus, creating a eusocial insect society with social castes.
.
The hypothesis is supported by the recent discovery of shared genes between "queen" and "worker" insects across all species. These genes have been shown to code for behavioral traits which explains the shared eusocial behavior traits: queens reproduce while workers complete laborious tasks of the nest.
Shared genes are further expressed through phenotypic differences; for example, a queen ant is over 10 times the size of a leaf-cutter ant. Scientists believe that sometime during the evolution of eusocial insects, regulatory elements called microRNAs controlled the genotypes of organisms through gene regulation and protein production and from these genotypes, the ensuing phenotypes. Researchers have concluded that this phenomenon was not entirely a product of natural selection as there are many molecular level happenings that affect the regulation of genes and the production of proteins. However, one reason eusocial insects exist is because the division of labor results in a more efficient society. This is interesting because eusocial societies resemble primitive human societies with the basic division of labor and social hierarchy.
This article relates to both the last unit on molecular biology as well as the current unit on evolution. Through evolution, eusocial insects are prevalent because the micro-societies they created were more efficient than those of other insects. This development might have resulted in more offspring (higher fitness) and led to the social structure becoming widely seen. Additionally, the article relates to molecular biology because it addresses regulatory elements that control gene expression. This ultimately results in different insect social castes.
Snake Evolution happens to have another way
Snake evolution happens to have another way
January 5,2015
Previously, people thought that snakes have developed from snakes into a more simplified form. But, paleontologists Jason Head and David Polly found out that snakes didn't necessarily evolved from lizards. They have found new ways of how they developed through finding out that that there were distinctions in the snakes vertebral bones and the backbone of the four legged lizards. In the concept of hox genes which govern the boundaries of the neck, trunk, lumbar, sacral and tail regions of limbed animals, they were thought of disrupting the snakes body forms causing them to have no limbs and a simplified structure. But actually, if the hox genes which only control a small part of the gene or else the structures of the snake and lizard would be identical which is not true. Polly said, "It isn't that snakes have lost regions and Hox expression; it is that mammals and birds have independently gained distinct regions by augmenting the ordinary Hox expression shared by early amniotes." This means that it doesn't mean snakes are simplified, its that animals have gained more distinctness in their body which makes it more complex possibly for better adaptation to their environment like better maneuverability and prey catching. Additionally through combining snake vertebrae information with fossils, snake evolution was very unsimilar to what was concluded from developmental genetics alone. Through this study, the direction of how we thought of evoution is opposite of what we have thought as before.
This relates to our current unit in the sense of right now that we are learning about evolution and how many species evolved overtime. Scientists are now beginning to take in new perspectives of how reptiles have evolve based on this scientific study. Originally, it would be thought by us that snakes have evolved from lizards which makes some sense because they are part of the same reptile family. But what is unique is that snakes were discovered to be different from their lizard ancestors unlike birds and mammals which most of them have the same vestigial structures of their ancestors. It very likely could be for the snakes to take in better ability to catch prey or protect themselves from natural disasters or something similar to that. In short, this begins to gain scientists a new perspective on how reptiles and possibly many species evolved over time and why they might change some structures from their ancestors.
Thursday, January 8, 2015
Scientists Discover the First Protein That Can Edit Other Proteins
Links: http://www.wired.com/2015/01/grawk-proteins-making-proteins/
Scientists Discover the First Protein That Can Edit Other Proteins
Nick Stockton
1 January 2015
As we learned during our last unit, protein synthesis occurs in ribosomes and is coded for by mRNA. This, however, may not be the only way for proteins to be formed. Recently, scientists have discovered that some specific types of proteins can actually create new polypeptide sequences, without the use of mRNA. One such protein is Rqc2. Rqc2 is a protein involved in a recycling process that takes place when an error happens in translation. When such an error occurs, the ribosome essentially stalls and is unusable, until a group of proteins come in and break apart the ribsome, mRNA, and the partially made protein. Rqc2's role in this clean-up process is to attach a random sequence of the amino acids threonine and alanine to the partially made protein before it is recycled. This newly added sequence will not fix the ribosome, or complete the protein. It will instead act as a signal to other destructive proteins to take the faulty one apart. What is surprising about this process is that a protein, not mRNA, decides which amino acids will be added.
Diseases such as Alzheimer's, Huntington's, and Lou Gehrig's are caused by defective quality control proteins. Knowing the exact conditions that trigger Rqc2 could help lead to new treatments for such
conditions.
This article directly relates to our last unit on molecular biology. Although the article describes a different process than we discussed in class, it is still about protein synthesis, which was an important part of our last topic.
Scientists Discover the First Protein That Can Edit Other Proteins
Nick Stockton
1 January 2015
As we learned during our last unit, protein synthesis occurs in ribosomes and is coded for by mRNA. This, however, may not be the only way for proteins to be formed. Recently, scientists have discovered that some specific types of proteins can actually create new polypeptide sequences, without the use of mRNA. One such protein is Rqc2. Rqc2 is a protein involved in a recycling process that takes place when an error happens in translation. When such an error occurs, the ribosome essentially stalls and is unusable, until a group of proteins come in and break apart the ribsome, mRNA, and the partially made protein. Rqc2's role in this clean-up process is to attach a random sequence of the amino acids threonine and alanine to the partially made protein before it is recycled. This newly added sequence will not fix the ribosome, or complete the protein. It will instead act as a signal to other destructive proteins to take the faulty one apart. What is surprising about this process is that a protein, not mRNA, decides which amino acids will be added.
Diseases such as Alzheimer's, Huntington's, and Lou Gehrig's are caused by defective quality control proteins. Knowing the exact conditions that trigger Rqc2 could help lead to new treatments for such
conditions.
This article directly relates to our last unit on molecular biology. Although the article describes a different process than we discussed in class, it is still about protein synthesis, which was an important part of our last topic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)