Mystery Molecule Project Part Ii 20 Points Totalbio1001 Fall 2020to ✓ Solved

MYSTERY MOLECULE PROJECT, PART II (20 points total) BIO1001 Fall 2020 To complete the remainder of this project and prepare for your presentation, follow the instructions below. Your presentation should include the answers to all questions indicated below. For your final presentation, you are expected to organize your research and present a rehearsed, 10-12 minute presentation using the rubric at the end of this document as a guideline for preparation. Learning Objectives At the conclusion of this phase of the mystery molecule project, students will be able to 1. Effectively navigate sequence databases of the NCBI website a.

BLAST DNA sequence against the human genome b. Analyze alignment data from genomic databases c. Identify an unknown gene based on DNA sequence 2. Use the scientific literature (primary and secondary resources) to analyze gene products, and research the cellular and molecular basis of a disease gene. 3.

Organize scientific content into a coherent presentation. 4. Communicate research results to a group of peers. Step 1: BLAST your DNA sequence 1. Go to: 2.

Click on BLAST (under “popular resources†at the right side of the screen) 3. Choose the nucleotide blast program (under “Web BLASTâ€) 4. In the “blastn†tab (on left) enter your DNA sequence into the “enter query sequence†box (obtain your mystery DNA sequences in the Mystery Molecule content area in D2L). a. In “choose search set†click the “genomic + transcript databases†b. From the drop down menu below, select “Human genomic + transcript (Human G + T)†c.

Under “program selection†in the next section down, optimize for highly similar sequences (megablast) 5. Submit query (click on “BLAST†at the bottom of the screen) and wait – this may take up to a few minutes. 6. A colorized map of sequence alignment scores will appear. Red indicates very good sequence alignment.

7. Scroll down to descriptions of sequences that produced statistically significant alignments. You should see options for genomic alignments and transcripts. An e-value close to zero, and maximum sequence identity close to 100% are optimal. 8.

Identify your mystery gene/transcript from the description, e-value, and % sequence identity. Step 2: Analysis of gene product Click on the reference number (left, in the column labeled, “Accessionâ€) for the mRNA transcript or genomic sequence of your mystery gene. Scroll down; you will see many references (titles, authors, years of publication) describing your gene. Clicking on any one of the PubMed reference numbers will link you directly to the original publication. You will need these publications to characterize your gene for your presentation.

Bookmark this page—all your references must be from primary or secondary sources (no google, wikipedia, textbooks, blogs, etc.). You must use a minimum of 7 references that can be found by searching NCBI/PubMed in the completion of your project-note that this may require you to utilize interlibrary loan, so plan ahead . From these references, the rest of NCBI’s resources (PubMed, genes and disease area of NCBI, etc.), and the knowledge you gained from Part I of this project, you should be able to determine answers to the following questions: About the Gene: What is the name of your gene? Where in the human genome is your gene located (i.e., on which chromosome)? About the Disease: What disease is caused by mutation(s) in your gene?

What are the symptoms and signs of the disease? How prevalent is the disease in the human population (how many people are affected; is it more likely to affect people based on gender/race/nationality; etc.)? What is the expected outcome for people with this disease? Is it deadly? If so, what is the mortality rate?

If not, what treatment is available to people affected by the disease? What specific mutation(s) destroys the function of the gene product (NOTE: there may be more than one)? About the Gene Product (RNA and protein): How long is the mRNA transcript (in bases or kilobases)? Is there a difference between the wild-type and mutant forms? How many exons are present in the transcript?

Is there a difference between the wild-type and mutant forms? How many amino acids are present in the final, wild-type protein product? What change(s) in amino acids is(are) present in the mutant allele of this gene? How many amino acids are present in the mutant protein product? About molecular mechanisms: How does mutation affect the structure of your protein?

How do these structural changes influence the function of your protein (i.e., does the mutation affect an enzyme’s active site or allosteric site? Or perhaps a transmembrane domain?) What cellular and molecular processes are affected by mutation(s) in your gene? (NOTE: you might want to think of this in terms of major cellular systems, like transport, metabolism, structural proteins, etc.) Step 3: Preparing an oral presentation Use the information from your research to prepare an oral presentation. In addition to answering all of the questions from Step 2 above, your presentation should: · Last from 10-12 minutes, including questions. · Make use of visual aids, such as through a Power Point presentation. · Be logically organized, clear, and engaging for the audience.

Additional details about the mechanics of the presentation are found in the evaluation rubric below. Rubric for oral presentation: 20 points total Content: Emerging (0.25 point) Developing (0.5 points) Proficient (1 point) Gene name Not named, or only an abbreviation provided Provides full name, alternate designations incomplete or name misspelled or name mispronounced Provides full name, including alternate designations, spelling and pronunciation correct Gene location Not given, or identifies only the chromosome Identifies the chromosome and arm (p or q) Identifies the locus specifically Disease associated with gene Not named, or only provides abbreviation Provides full name, alternate designations incomplete or name misspelled or name mispronounced Provides full name, including alternate designations, spelling and pronunciation correct Symptoms and signs More than two not listed, or more than two not described, or no distinction made between major/common and minor/rare ones One or two signs and symptoms not listed, or one or two not described, or incomplete distinction made between major/common and minor/rare ones Signs and symptoms listed and described, major/common signs and symptoms distinguished from minor/rare ones Prevalence Unclear presentation of number of people affected, or incomplete information on more than two demographic considerations Clear presentation of number of people affected, but incomplete information on one or two demographic considerations Clear presentation of number of people affected and demographic considerations (gender, race, nationality, geographic location, etc.) Patient outcomes Presentation of morbidity and/or mortality is underdeveloped or absent; discussion of standard of care absent Clear presentation of morbidity and/or mortality associated with the disease, but incomplete treatment of patient care presented Clear presentation of morbidity and/or mortality associated with the disease, as well as standard of care for those with the disease.

Specific mutations Identification of mutation(s) omits specific DNA bases affected and exons/introns affected; or if multiple mutations are associated with the disease there is no distinction made between prevalent and rare mutations Identification of mutation(s) omits specific DNA bases affected or exons/introns affected; or if multiple mutations are associated with the disease there is little distinction made between prevalent and rare mutations Mutation(s) and their locations are specifically identified (DNA bases affected, exons or introns affected); if multiple mutations are associated with disease, the focus is on the most prevalent mutation(s) or group(s) of mutation(s) mRNA transcript Length is not given, or is incorrect.

Length is given in bases or kilobases, but differences between wild-type and mutant transcripts are not identified Length is presented in bases or kilobases, any differences between the wild-type and mutant transcripts are identified Exons and introns The number of exons and introns is either not given or incorrect. The number of exons and introns is correctly presented, but their arrangement is unclear or differences between wild-type and mutant versions are not clearly presented The number and arrangement of exons and introns is clearly presented, and any differences between the wild-type and mutant versions are clearly presented. Protein product (wild-type) Information is not included in the presentation Number of amino acids in the wild-type protein is presented, but incorrect Number of amino acids in the wild-type protein is presented and correct Protein product (mutant) Amino acid changes are not described, or are incorrect Amino acid changes are described with less clarity (e.g., by noting only the mutant amino acid), or the severity of mutations isn’t ranked (if applicable) Amino acid changes are clearly described (e.g., by noting the original amino acid as well as the mutant), and severity of mutations is ranked (if applicable) Structure/Function relationships Does not present information on protein structure, or does not present information on protein function Presents only wild-type or mutant protein structure; or presents only wild-type protein function or the effect of the mutation Wild-type and mutant protein structures are clearly contrasted; wild-type protein function is clearly described; effect of mutation (loss of function, change of function, gain of function) is clearly described Disease mechanisms Explanation of the cellular basis for disease contains more than two errors, or does not connect the mutant protein to signs and symptoms of the disease Explanation of the cellular basis for disease that contains up to two errors, or incompletely links the mutant protein to the signs and symptoms of disease Thorough explanation of the cellular basis for disease that connects the aberrant function of the mutant protein to the signs and symptoms of the disease Presentation structure and effectiveness: 30% of grade Feature Emerging Developing Proficient Time Frame Less than 9 minutes, or more than 13 minutes Between 9-10 or 12-13 minutes Between 10 and 12 minutes Visual Aids Absent, may add little to the presentation, encourages “reading†of the presentation, too much information per slide Often but not always enhance presentation, clearly visible and easy-to-interpret Enhance presentation, with thoughts articulated, and keeps interest of the audience Professionalism of Presentation Thoughts not clearly articulated, poor posture and eye contact, does not engage audience; partners seem to be working independently of one another Presentation is organized, information is clearly presented, and some level of audience engagement is observed; partners work together but the presentation isn’t fully integrated Presentation is very well organized, given with energy, and the interest of the audience is maintained; clear partnership observed Organization and analysis Content is sometimes presented in a logical pattern, transitions are rough or absent, as is discussion.

Most content is presented in a logical pattern, transitions are less polished, some topics may lack discussion Content is presented in a logical pattern with clear transitions and discussion References Less than 5 peer-reviewed publications included as references 5 or 6 peer-reviewed publications included as references At least 7 peer-reviewed publications included as references __ Returning to the Office Sparks Anxiety and Dread for Some By Julie Creswell and Peter Eavis New York Times April 2, 2021 A year after the pandemic abruptly forced tens of millions of people to start working from home, disrupting family lives and derailing careers, employers are now getting ready to bring workers back to offices.

But for some people the prospect of returning to their desks is provoking anxiety, dread and even panic, rather than relief. Martin Jaakola, a software engineer in Minneapolis, never wants to go back to the office and is willing to quit if the medical device company he works for says he must. “I can’t honestly say that there’s anything about the office that I miss,†Mr. Jaakola, 29, said. People like Mr.

Jaakola say last year proves that people do not need to sit close together to be productive. Working at home is superior, they say, because they are not wasting hours in traffic or on crowded trains. Far better to spend that time with family or baking sourdough bread, nor do they have to worry about getting sick. Today, many companies are falling over themselves to appeal to office-reluctant workers. Salesforce says its work-from-anywhere approach would “unlock new growth opportunities†and “drive greater equality.†Spotify describes its flexible work policy as a “jewel in our Talent Attraction crown.†Target, Ford Motor Co. and PricewaterhouseCoopers say they are going to let office workers work remotely more frequently.

Even Wall Street banks where employees often while away hours at their desks to be seen by the boss are preaching the gospel of flexibility. JPMorgan Chase is telling some workers they can cycle in and out of the office. How long will employers remain flexible? When the pandemic loosens its grip, bosses could demand that people return to the office immediately. Some leaders, including Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York, have already called people back.

Amazon told employees on Wednesday that it expected “to return to an office-centric culture†Amy C. Edmondson, a Harvard Business School professor who studies human interaction, has been advising financial firms, consumer products businesses and universities. She said many executives are afraid that they’ll lose their best people if they are not flexible. But she said some managers might now be going too far. Teams need to get together to get stuff done.

But many employees said that the pandemic gave them free time they don’t want to give up. Several people said they felt less beat down because they were not spending time in cars and on trains or buses. “I’m not excited to go back to the office,†said Tracie Smith, who has an hour commute each way to her job as an analyst at California State University, Fullerton. For the first time in decades, Ms. Smith, 49, said she felt rested because she’s not getting up early to commute.

Over breaks or during lunch, she did her laundry or grocery shopping, rather than using up precious evening hours. While she has, at times, been lonely and is looking forward to socializing with colleagues and students, she doesn’t want life to return to its previous grind. “I feel like a whole person. I am living an actual life every single day, instead of trying to cram it into a day-and-a-half on the weekend,†Ms. Smith said.

“It’s definitely making me re-evaluate my work-life situation.†Plenty of people are eager to return to the office, especially younger workers who feel they have more to lose by being away. Sheeta Verma, 21, a recent graduate, was hired early last year before the pandemic shut down the offices of her tech firm Neurable, based in Boston. “Being the youngest in the office, I don’t get to connect with my colleagues and it’s important that I connect, to get to know them, understand their mind set, how they learn and how they grew their careers,†Ms. Verma said. Yet, even Ms.

Verma wants her employer, who hasn’t yet set a date for a broad return of employees to the office, to let her work from home some of the time, a hope shared by experienced workers like Deborah Paredes, who works at the Chamber of Commerce for Greater Philadelphia. Ms. Paredes commuted one hour each way from her home in Palmyra, N.J., to her desk before the pandemic. She is not interested in resuming that trek daily. Ms.

Paredes also believes she got a lot more done working at home. A self-described introvert who is easily distracted, she liked working at her own pace without standard office interruptions. “I can wake up, go for a jog and be working by 8:30 and sometimes I’ve worked until 10 at night and I don’t feel resentful about that because I’m on a roll,†she said. “But there’s no way I could have been in the office until 10 p.m. working.†The ability to focus on work without distractions from other employees is the main reason Mr. Jaakola, the Minneapolis software engineer, does not want to return to the office.

He admits he finds dealing with other people kind of “draining,†and hopes his company won’t force him to return to the office, even for a few days a week. “My sense is that my company will try to go back to how things were before and I think they’ll quickly realize there are a lot of remote possibilities out there for us,†he said. “If they try to force us to come in without a legitimate reason, I can get another job if I don’t want to come in.†1. Read the essay above. 2.

First, write a summary of the article. 3. Then in at least one paragraph, respond to the central theme of the article by answering the following question: Which do you believe is the best situation for learning, classroom study or distance study? Which do you prefer, classroom education or distance education? Make sure you give strong reasons to support your opinion. · Your summary has no required length.

It should be thorough, as we have studied. · Your response paragraph(s) should be at least 500 words. Provide the number of words of your response at the end of your composition (Do not include the number of words in the summary.) Make sure that you space your composition appropriately. Due Date: Tuesday, April 20

Paper for above instructions

Summary of the Article

In this New York Times article by Julie Creswell and Peter Eavis, the authors explore the feelings of anxiety and reluctance that some employees experience as they transition back to office work after an extended period of remote work due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The article highlights various perspectives of employees regarding returning to their physical workplaces, emphasizing the contrast between those who are eager to resume office life and those who have embraced the flexibility of working from home.
Some employees, like software engineer Martin Jaakola, express strong resistance to returning to the office, citing productivity increases, saved commuting time, and an improved work-life balance as advantages of remote work. These individuals argue that the pandemic demonstrated the feasibility of flexible work arrangements that allow employees to prioritize home life without sacrificing productivity. Companies such as Salesforce, Spotify, and others have taken note of the changing attitudes, adopting policies that promote remote work to retain talent.
Conversely, younger employees like Sheeta Verma, who recently graduated, express a desire for some level of in-person interaction to foster workplace relationships and mentorship opportunities. Nonetheless, she also favors a hybrid work model, valuing flexibility even as she appreciates the traditional office environment.
The article raises questions about the long-term implications of these evolving workplace dynamics, including potential resistance from management against remote work and the necessity of maintaining a balance between flexibility and collaboration among team members. Overall, the article delves into the changing landscape of work, addressing how the pandemic has reshaped employees' perceptions, preferences, and expectations going forward.
---

Response to the Central Theme

The discourse surrounding the effectiveness of classroom study versus distance education is inherently complex, best approached through an understanding that each modality possesses unique strengths and challenges. Given the current advancements in technology and changing expectations of the workforce, I firmly believe that a hybrid approach, which encompasses aspects of both classroom study and distance education, is the most effective strategy for learning.
Let’s begin by examining the strengths of traditional classroom education. One pivotal advantage of the classroom environment lies in the direct interactions between students and instructors, which can substantially enhance the learning experience. Face-to-face communication fosters a sense of community and allows for immediate feedback, ultimately facilitating deeper understanding (Moore, 2013). In-group settings, students can collaboratively engage in discussions, clarify doubts promptly, and explore diverse opinions in real-time. This immediacy can foster critical thinking and creativity, which are fundamental to robust learning (Quick, 2018).
Furthermore, classroom education often provides a structured environment that can be conducive to learning for many students. The routine of attending classes in designated physical spaces can aid in minimizing distractions, thereby allowing students to concentrate fully on their education. As underscored by research, the physical presence of an educator in a learning space provides a psychological cue that contributes to increased attention and engagement (Zhang et al., 2020).
Conversely, distance education has emerged as a pragmatic solution, particularly highlighted during the global pandemic. The convenience inherent in online learning allows students to access materials and participate in classes from any location. This flexibility permits personalized pacing, accommodating diverse learning styles and schedules (Benson, 2021). Learners can rewatch lectures, engage in diverse multimedia resources, and delve into areas of interest at their own speed, thus maximizing retention and comprehension. This adaptability is especially crucial for non-traditional students who may balance work or family commitments alongside their academic pursuits (Bernard et al., 2009).
Moreover, as we navigate a world increasingly reliant on digital communication, distance education effectively prepares students for contemporary work environments, which often embrace remote collaboration. Innovative technology fosters the development of digital literacy skills that are imperative in today's job market (Pérez-Mateo et al., 2020). However, the success of online education is contingent upon the learner's level of self-discipline and motivation, attributes that can be fostered but aren’t always inherent.
Despite the distinct advantages of each educational approach, I personally lean towards distance education as my preferred learning method. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has changed my perspective on education significantly. I have found that remote learning offers unique opportunities that enrich the educational experience. For instance, distance education allows students to create a personalized learning environment that optimizes comfort and accessibility (Jaggars & Bailey, 2010). By studying in spaces that align with their personal learning preferences, students can effectively enhance their academic performance.
Additionally, the ability to access an array of online resources and educational tools fosters a dynamic learning atmosphere, making education more comprehensive than ever before (Simonson et al., 2020). Distance learning has also removed geographical barriers, enabling students from diverse backgrounds to participate in courses that were previously inaccessible, thus enriching the academic community as a whole (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2020).
While both classroom and distance education hold inherent merits, embracing a hybrid learning model that incorporates both modalities allows for the best educational outcomes. Through a thoughtful balance of in-person interaction and online flexibility, students can benefit from the strengths of each approach, facilitating a richer and more productive learning experience that prepares them for future innovations in educational practices and the workforce at large.
In conclusion, the ongoing dialogue surrounding the effectiveness of classroom versus distance education is punctuated by varying factors that shape individual learning preferences and outcomes. While I personally favor distance education for its adaptability and resource accessibility, I recognize the substantial value of classroom education in nurturing interpersonal skills and immediate feedback. An ideal educational landscape in the future will embrace a hybrid framework that harmonizes the strengths of both approaches, ultimately cultivating a generation of adept learners equipped for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
Word Count: 682